monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

The main problem with the Electoral College is the winner-take-all aspect.

What is your objection to winner-take-all?

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Nope. What is it to you, phony American?

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

What is it to you, phony American?

You could have stopped at phony.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Was that a joke? The Girl was born and raised there.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Just more evidence that you're full of poop.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

The Girl was born and raised there.

I know

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

That is an amazingly broad statement. Do you actually know any of these people? I do and they don't fit your description. Are you sure you were a Navy Nuc? I worked with a lot of government folks in my Navy days and certainly didn't come off with that opinion.

3 Replies

Quote:

Trump doubles Obama's 2012 vote total in New Hampshire, signaling fired up base

Kind of like the snowball rolling down the hill getting bigger and bigger we have all seen in cartoons. Remember it always hit someone at the end. In this case it will be Democrats. NH could go red in 2020.

Quote:

President Trump didn't have a serious challenger in the New Hampshire primary, but he still turned out enough voters to more than double former President Barack Obama's 2012 vote total in the state, indicating that the Republican base is all-in on Trump as he prepares to face the eventual Democratic nominee in a reelection battle this November.

With 87 percent of precincts reporting, Trump secured more than 120,000 votes in the Granite State. In 2012, Obama managed just 49,080 total votes in New Hampshire. The gap between the two presidents is likely to increase as more precincts report their totals Wednesday.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-doubles-obamas-2012-vote-total-in-new-hampshire-signaling-fired-up-base

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Yeah, that figures.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

You're trying to pick a fight?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Is that a statement or a question?

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

Okay. I guess the real question is: why?

0 Replies

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

That is an amazingly broad statement. Do you actually know any of these people? I do and they don't fit your description. Are you sure you were a Navy Nuc? I worked with a lot of government folks in my Navy days and certainly didn't come off with that opinion.

The Navy Nuclear program under Hyman Rickover was a very vivid exception to the usual rule. My experiences ( extensive) with the Dept. of Energy, EPA, State Department , and USAID (agency for international development) were that they were all self-serving bureaucracies as I described them

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

I have to agree there george. They had one of the largest "non military" armies (the DOE) made up of mostly arrogant bastids, with
SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT..

HOWEVER, as these mining regs and environmental regs are being wasted, Ive been getting calls for "Helping develop claims and estimates of resource studies".
Ive taken a stand that Im totally against the other sidee which is gonna , once again, rape and ruin our natural world.
My state has 84K miles of streams and about 30% are trashed from AMD and PMD. we have streams in beautiful backcountries that run deep orange from iron and sulfitic water. I dont want to go to my grave and my last thought is "I further helped **** up this country's environment because I was following Trump's edicts.

We had two hiatuses in the Anthropocene or the "Proloscene" as geology calls it. The irst was the GORSUCH Hiatus in the Reagan years and now this. Im certain we shall live this out cause we dont really NEED coal at all. Other stuff, like gold mining and stuff like copper waste and trona and other genic salts, we will have to deal with using some technologies we dont have yet.

0 Replies

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

That is an amazingly broad statement. Do you actually know any of these people? I do and they don't fit your description. Are you sure you were a Navy Nuc? I worked with a lot of government folks in my Navy days and certainly didn't come off with that opinion.

My wife is an employee of the Fed Gov. The stories she tells me puts George's statement right on the money.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

You are thoroughly confused. The Great Compromise had nothing to do with the Electoral College. Likewise, the Three-Fifths Compromise, which you had muddled with the Electoral College, with which it also had nothing to do, was concerning legislative representation and taxing issues. The thread that I had written, to which you decided to bloviate, was precisely about, not a "chief magistrate," but an "Executive Magistrate," and the issue of the manner of his appointment, as James Madison wrote in his notes regarding the Federal Convention.

2 Replies

@InfraBlue,

I've no idea how much slavery did or didn't have to do with the Electoral College. My questions are what is the problem with the Electoral College today? And what is the problem with winner-take-all?

I see the Electoral College as a very good thing, and I strongly oppose abolishing it.

If the minor disparity in voting weight between large and small states is truly a problem, that can be fixed without doing away with the Electoral College.

I'm ambivalent about winner-take-all, but I've not seen any good arguments for changing it.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

The shooter shouldn't have had a gun in the first place, but you guys make it super easy for potential church shooters to get those guns. It's on your head.

What's on my head? The bad guy was dead a few seconds after he started shooting.

This event shows why it is important for people to be allowed to carry guns in church.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

The problem with the Electoral College is that it has disenfranchised large numbers of voters for the sake of the interests of small states. Changing the policy of winner-take-all might counter the effect of Electoral College disenfranchisement. The arguments are largely about the rescindment of Article Two, Section 1, and also the 12th Amendment of the US Constitution because many people don't know that winner-takes-all is a policy adopted by most states that isn't prescribed in the Constitution.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

There are stories in any workplace of people not pulling their weight, but denying a cost of living pay raise to the entire federal workforce to pay for a tiny fraction of the tax cut is absurd. I'm sure you wouldn't describe your wife, an employee of the federal government that way.

2 Replies

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know