Progressives (Liberals)

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

it wouldn't apply to just NY and CA

NY and CA are the other two states that want to divide the electoral college votes proportionately (Maine and Nebraska already do, kinda). Not really smart on their part, but.....

1 Reply

@layman,

Each State devises its own rules as to how to allocate electoral votes. It's not determined on a nationwide basis.

But analysis shows that even if every state in the union had allocated its electoral votes strictly on the basis of the popular vote in that state, Trump still would have beaten Clinton in 2016. It would have been closer, but, still....

The fact that she won the popular vote "nationwide" is meaningless.

2 Replies

@layman,

For what it's worth, Trump won an electoral vote is Maine which he would NOT have won if it was winner take all there, as it is in 48 states.

If votes were apportioned by district (each district has one vote) with the popular vote winner taking the vote in that district, Romney would have beat Obama in 2012.

The Dems shouldn't be so quick to insist on proportionate allocation based on popular vote. They just like to think they would win that way.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

On the other hand, the National Popular Vote Compact avoided those problems entirely. 48 od the 50 states already mandate by law that their electors must cast their votes for the winner of that state's popular vote which already ties electors to the popular vote. Simply making the minor change that electors have to vote for the national popular votewhen they're already constrained to vote for the winner of their states opular vote would get us back to democracy.

1 Reply

@layman,

layman wrote:

The fact that she won the popular vote "nationwide" is meaningless.

It's like a team that loses a world series by a 4 to 1 margin, even though they won 1 game by a score of 10-2, but lost the other 4 games by a total of 7 runs.

Sure, they scored more runs in the series OVERALL. But they still lost 4-1.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

...would get us back to democracy.

Get us "back?" Fraid not. The country never was, and was never intended to be, based on "pure democracy."

You're simply advocating something "brand new" which was explicitly rejected by the founders of this country. And by every other reasonable person on the planet, I might add.

3 Replies

@layman,

What the **** is a "district"? where does that appear in anything? How do you determine Romney won in an imaginary concept?The popular vte refor black americans, endless wars we were lied intopresents the will of the people and it's got a pretty good record. The elkectoralk college gave us a genocidalk slave trader, segregation and a brutal century for blavk americans, 2endless wars we were lied into and the crash of the world's economy which would have lprobably have led to a worldwide depression except for Obama, and by general consent the worst, most corrupt president we've ever had. The outcomes show the founding fathers got this one wrong.

1 Reply

@layman,

It's not about an imaginary "pure" democracy. It's about the constitutional representative democracy we in large part had before trump trashed it.

1 Reply

@layman,

The EU has demonstrated how badly things go when its members have no degree of sovereignty. Only commies and other totalitarians want all power to reside in a central authority.

A line from a popular movie ("The Patriot"): It's better to have 1 dictator, three thousand miles away than 300 dictators one mile away. (Something like that). Unrestrained democracy is as totalitarian as it gets.

1 Reply

@layman,

Lincoln's "government of the people, by the people, for the people" is often taken as a definition of democracy. You trashing Lincoln now? Calling him a liar? I'm not surprised.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

It's about the constitutional representative democracy we in large part had before trump trashed it.

Exactly what has he done to trash it? There are still representatives. We have the House and the Senate not to mention state legislatures. How has he trashed representation? This should be interesting. Spitting out rhetoric is not working for you.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

What the **** is a "district"? where does that appear in anything? ... an imaginary concept.

Best take yourself a third grade civics course. eh? Every member of the House of Representatives represents a "district." The number of districts a given state has is determined by its population. Each state is allocated one electoral vote for each district it has. Maine has only two districts, and apportions the electoral votes it awards based popular vote in a district on (one for each, which is why Trump won one, even though he lost the statewide popular vote). California has 53 districts, so it gets many more votes than a small state like Maine.

These are elementary things which 6 year old kids learn on Sesame Street.

0 Replies

@layman,

You did notice trump claims he has total power, I trust. By your claims, that makes him a commie and a totalitarian.

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

You did notice he's claiming he has total power to do whatever he wants and no one can stop him.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

You did notice he's claiming he has total power to do whatever he wants and no one can stop him.

What I noticed is that you misrepresent what he said, out of context, as cheese-eaters always do.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

You did notice trump claims he has total power

He said he has the power of the president, any president. The president does make the final decision. Trump has that power given to him by the Constitution. Also he can be challenged legally, but that would be after the decision was made. Oh well Mr. Green

2 Replies

@layman,

Rally. So tell me what that meant in context except that he claims he has total power because he's president.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Rally. So tell me what that meant in context except that he claims he has total power because he's president.

Give a cite which gives the verbatim statement and the context to what you are claiming he said. No one cares what you say he said. The question is, what did he actually say?

0 Replies

@coldjoint,

The president's final decision is constrained by the 10th amendment, and trump's claims about the power of the president are his alone, without constitutional basis. He's trying another one of his illicit power grabs. which is why he must be voted out.

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

coldjoint wrote:

He said he has the power of the president, any president. The president does make the final decision. Trump has that power given to him by the Constitution. Also he can be challenged legally, but that would be after the decision was made. Oh well

Exactly, CJ. Like that fascist, Harry Truman, said: "The buck stops here."

1 Reply

Progressives (Liberals)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know