zeddd
Well-Known Member
What premise, that you’re a pedo apologist?
National Popular Vote because it's the President of the United States...
- Thread starter Fogdog
- Start date
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
No, the premise embodied in the post where you so adroitly nitpicked my error in choice of words, which of course did nothing to refute the premise.
In other words, put down your correction ink and tell me why the intended message is inaccurate or rest on your grammar Nazi "victory" as the consolation prize.
Also the word "involuntary" can be used in the context I used it in. I just wanted you to feel important. Still winning.
Last edited:
zeddd
Well-Known Member
Yes in reference to euthanasia, have you tried it?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
That's the dumbest thing I've heard since...
your last post.
Woman and people of color didn't use to be allowed to vote at one time, did you know that?
We like to change things from time to time. We'll be changing the race based 18th century rules the MAGA assholes so cherish sooner that you think.
Just to watch you cry.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
The states have always had the power to set terms for how their Electoral College votes were cast.
The Republican Party has abandoned the concept of majority rule. Why do you support that?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
hey chumlee
from december 1 through december 25th, the market lost 4,000 points. on december 26th, it went back up 1000 points and you said it was because people had so many extra "shekels" to spend. retail spending is at its lowest since right before the great recession of 2008.
how retarded are you? and which one is you?
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Lmao and you wonder why no one respects your opinions.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I keep asking. You keep misusing the word Progressive and refuse to give me an explanation. From Bernie's support for brutal dictators and anti-democratic authoritarians, it is clear that when you say "Progressive" you are talking about people who support brutal rulers and fascists. Republicans fit that definition pretty well. Kim Jong Un, and Maduro fit your usage of the word "Progressive" very well too.
Cult of Sanders are very anti-democratic and authoritarian. They are, as you say, "Progressive".
Last edited:
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Voluntaryism means privatized totalitarianism.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Your definition is incomplete and misleading.
Voluntaryism doesn't care if you and your friends want to be Communists, it just suggests that you don't have a right to impose Communistic totalitarianism on other people.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Resurrection of an earlier thread.
Trump's strategy to overturn this election might have had a chance if the votes in a few states were closer. All because the Electoral College gives wannabe dictators like Trump the ability to divide and conquer. If the president were selected by the majority vote of eligible US voters, this mess he's creating would never have happened. It's time to revisit eliminating this risk to our democracy.
The National Popular Vote agreement between the states is already very close to ending minority presidents. Each state that enters in this agreement has passed a law allocating that states electors to the candidate who gets the most votes nationally. Done. No amendment, no debate in Congress, no signoff by a president, it follows exactly the instructions laid out in the Constitution and the Supreme Court ruled unanimously on this very subject:
Supreme Court Unanimously Rules that States May Require Presidential Electors to be Faithful
July 6, 2020
The Court strongly reaffirmed the power of the states over their electoral votes.
Justice Kagan wrote an opinion joined by 8 justices (including Justice Gorsuch). This opinion relied heavily of Article II, section 1, and included the following points:
The map below shows the status of this agreement between the states. Thus far, states with 196 EC votes have signed on. 54 more EC votes are needed and the EC as Trump knows it would cease to exist.
Looking at the map, all four states in which Trump is trying to disenfranchise its voters, Michigan, Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania have held hearings or have passed the bill in one of their legislative houses. Those four states account for 63 votes.
People who post here live in those states. Trump is trying to take away your vote by gaming the system through the EC. What are you going to do about it going forward? Are you ready to at least consider sending a message to your state legislators that you want this measure passed into law in your state?
Trump is showing the country how dangerous the Electoral College is to our democracy. We don't need to go through another election like this one ever again.
Trump's strategy to overturn this election might have had a chance if the votes in a few states were closer. All because the Electoral College gives wannabe dictators like Trump the ability to divide and conquer. If the president were selected by the majority vote of eligible US voters, this mess he's creating would never have happened. It's time to revisit eliminating this risk to our democracy.
The National Popular Vote agreement between the states is already very close to ending minority presidents. Each state that enters in this agreement has passed a law allocating that states electors to the candidate who gets the most votes nationally. Done. No amendment, no debate in Congress, no signoff by a president, it follows exactly the instructions laid out in the Constitution and the Supreme Court ruled unanimously on this very subject:
Supreme Court Unanimously Rules that States May Require Presidential Electors to be Faithful
July 6, 2020
The Court strongly reaffirmed the power of the states over their electoral votes.
Justice Kagan wrote an opinion joined by 8 justices (including Justice Gorsuch). This opinion relied heavily of Article II, section 1, and included the following points:
- "Article II, section 1’s appointments power gives the States far-reaching authority over presidential electors, absent some other constitutional constraint. As [the Constitution says], each State may appoint electors 'in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.' ... This Court has described that clause as 'conveying the broadest power of determination' over who becomes an elector." [Emphasis added]
The map below shows the status of this agreement between the states. Thus far, states with 196 EC votes have signed on. 54 more EC votes are needed and the EC as Trump knows it would cease to exist.
Looking at the map, all four states in which Trump is trying to disenfranchise its voters, Michigan, Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania have held hearings or have passed the bill in one of their legislative houses. Those four states account for 63 votes.
People who post here live in those states. Trump is trying to take away your vote by gaming the system through the EC. What are you going to do about it going forward? Are you ready to at least consider sending a message to your state legislators that you want this measure passed into law in your state?
Trump is showing the country how dangerous the Electoral College is to our democracy. We don't need to go through another election like this one ever again.
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
I really think it would just open up other ways to cheat the system to win the presidency.
I would rather concentrate on ending voter suppression and make it easy for citizens to vote in all the states. That will clean up almost all of the EC/popular voting nonsense would be my guess. Looking at states like Texas, Florida, etc and what happened in Georgia this year vs the past, you can see what stopping the voter suppression can do.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
How this would open up ways to cheat the system?
This has noting to do with ending voter suppression. That's important too. We can do both.
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
Focus on the big population cities and promise them everything while telling the small population area's citizens to go fuck themselves.
As for what laws would they find to cheat the system, it would have to actually do the work to figure out all the loopholes of it and then just figure out how to get around them. There are always loopholes, it is just planning.
Fix the fixable, voter suppression is the real problem, the EC fixes when that gets fixed and is proportional to the population. I understand better now the +2 EC points for the senators, but that is still balanced out across all the states and is not something I can think of that is a real mathematical advantage to smaller population states (again because it is offset by the larger states having those same 2 extra votes.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Do you think the relatively close election results in large southern states, will moderate their politics towards the center? Or make them even more polarized?
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
In my opinion, the people who are radical Trump supporters will die before they moderate their politics to the center. The southern states, will moderate toward the center due to demographic shifts because those Trump radicals are dying off due to disease, alcoholism, drug addiction and old age. Also suicide by the guns they love. Also low fertility rates.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Election promises aren't anything like the anti-democratic bias that the Electoral College presents.
80% of this country live in urban areas. Aren't promises and policies to make their lives better what democracy is all about? Also, the Senate will still be biased toward smaller populated states, so, no, this isn't a loophole, it's just politics and the smaller states will still have a larger say in which legislation gets passed.
Trump is showing us the risks that are inherent in the EC. Recall that most analysts begin their summary of Trump's situation with the statement that the election was too lopsided for his strategy to work. A closer election would have presented a Trump with a better opportunity. What changes to the EC would you propose to prevent the next wannabe tyrant from defeating the result of an election?
Voter suppression is a separate issue. The math doesn't change with the removal of barriers to vote. In the EC, a voter in a smaller state has much more say in who becomes president than a voter in a larger state. One person, one vote is the principle that I've always been led to believe is the goal. So, yeah, remove barriers to people's vote and make all votes equal.
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
I think you knee cap me by asking me to come up with changes to make, but not being able to use voter suppression changes as the fix, which is where I believe the biggest problems (along with Gerrymandering) lie (both can be ballot initiatives in states to fix).
Trump IMO is showing us the risks that are inherent with allowing a foreign government root around in our democracy and having a criminal running for POTUS.
To fix the EC, I would start with the census.