Are Snowflakes Stupid Enough To Pay $1200 A Ticket?

[my2¢]

I hear Hillary's rendition of Cher's Gypsies, Tramps and Thieves will surely be worth the price of admission.

 

[Conservative65]

I hear Hillary's rendition of Cher's Gypsies, Tramps and Thieves will surely be worth the price of admission.

Hillary's rendition is talking about her supporters, Bill, and Chelsea.

The one that married Chelsea took one for the team.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Who would pay 12 cents to hear that old hen cackle in that icicle-stabbing-my-brain voice??

A whole lot of Super delegates, lol.

They bought all her other bullshit.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Some people like low lifes like him, I cannot explain voting for a cheating, lying thief, but Trump did win. He beat real candidates like Graham, et. al. because Pubbies love dirt(.)

I dont know about all that, but I do like Trumps belicocity, crudeness and flare for trolling the opposition.

He sounds like a real person.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If you're going to argue using popular vote totals, you don't have a point. That's like arguing professional wrestling isn't staged.

BS. While it has little or no impact on the final result it does give an indication of the mood of the country and who they want in charge. As I said, an antiquated system. An EC vote in Alaska or New Hampshire is worth more than one in California. I've explained this before on more than one occasion.

An EC vote in Alaska or New Hampshire is worth more than one in California.

No. All EC votes are equal.

Each elector gets one vote.

Liberals are bad at math.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Of course I know the Electoral College decides who becomes President, it was designed to reflect the popular vote in times when casting ballots was difficult due to lack of transportation.

Um that is not the only reason there, Miss Peach.

It also operates as a bulwark from corrupt states manufacturing enough votes to corrupt the results.

 

[Conservative65]

If you're going to argue using popular vote totals, you don't have a point. That's like arguing professional wrestling isn't staged.

BS. While it has little or no impact on the final result it does give an indication of the mood of the country and who they want in charge. As I said, an antiquated system. An EC vote in Alaska or New Hampshire is worth more than one in California. I've explained this before on more than one occasion.

An EC vote in Alaska or New Hampshire is worth more than one in California.

No. All EC votes are equal.

Each elector gets one vote.

Liberals are bad at math.

Dr Grump said he had explained what he meant before. I've read his explanation. Just more proof he doesn't understand how the system works or why it was put in place.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The witch greedines knows no bounds.

It keeps on and on and on....a real nightmare.

Hey, alcoholism is expensive, ya know?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If you're going to argue using popular vote totals, you don't have a point. That's like arguing professional wrestling isn't staged.

BS. While it has little or no impact on the final result it does give an indication of the mood of the country and who they want in charge. As I said, an antiquated system. An EC vote in Alaska or New Hampshire is worth more than one in California. I've explained this before on more than one occasion.

An EC vote in Alaska or New Hampshire is worth more than one in California.

No. All EC votes are equal.

Each elector gets one vote.

Liberals are bad at math.

Dr Grump said he had explained what he meant before. I've read his explanation. Just more proof he doesn't understand how the system works or why it was put in place.

Maybe he'll link it here?
I'd like to see more of his errors.

 

[Conservative65]

We don't use nationwide popular vote to elect a President. You don't have a clue how or why the system is what it is. Both FACTS.

The system is basic to understand. My point is obviously beyond you.

If you talk about a type vote that doesn't determine the winner you can't make a point.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I love when bed wetters throw money into an insatiable gaping gash that produces nothing in return.

What are you talking about?

The only chance the Democrats have of winning in 2020 is to again nominate Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton!

Do it Democrats, do it!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The witch greedines knows no bounds.

It keeps on and on and on....a real nightmare.

Hey, alcoholism is expensive, ya know?

She seems like the cheap vodka type.
When Bill was governor, they had to live cheaply.

 

[JimBowie1958]

In answer to your question........
Is the Pope Catholic?

There are many who are with holding a conclusion on that one.

 

[Conservative65]

BS. While it has little or no impact on the final result it does give an indication of the mood of the country and who they want in charge. As I said, an antiquated system. An EC vote in Alaska or New Hampshire is worth more than one in California. I've explained this before on more than one occasion.

An EC vote in Alaska or New Hampshire is worth more than one in California.

No. All EC votes are equal.

Each elector gets one vote.

Liberals are bad at math.

Dr Grump said he had explained what he meant before. I've read his explanation. Just more proof he doesn't understand how the system works or why it was put in place.

Maybe he'll link it here?
I'd like to see more of his errors.

His argument, if I remember correctly, centers around the 2 electoral votes each state gets representing their Senators regardless of whether they're the least populated state or the most populated. He claims it gives a unfair favor to the small states because they are less populated. His argument would make sense except he ignores what those 2 votes were designed to represent. He wants to make it appear as if those 2 EV represent the people when they actually represent the State. That's why each STATE gets 2. It's even across the board just like the EV representing House members is even in a matter of proportions because they actually represent the body that represents the people. There's a reason each House district has as much of the same population as possible.

 

[JimBowie1958]

A man walks into a bar and asks the bar tender if he would like to hear a Dumb Democrat joke.

The bar tender looks at him and says, "You see that person to your right? He is the Chief of Police and is a life long Democrat."

The man looks at the Chief who gives him a snarling glance and he recoils.

The bartender continued, "You see the person to your left? She is a black belt in five forms of martial arts and she is also a life long Democrat."

The man looks at her and she slaps her fist then takes a drink of her Apple Teeny.

The bartender then says "And I am a life long Democrat and the person making your drink."

He leans over and stared deeply into his customers eyes; "Now, you sure you want to tell me that Dumb Democrat joke?"

The man sighs and his shoulders fall and he says "No, I guess I dont. I dont have time to explain it three hundred million gawd damned times."

 

[Dr Grump]

More people voted against her than for her. Same thing happened to Bill, twice.

I have already explained why it matters. Um, no, more people voted for her, fact. He received more EC votes. EC votes are not people.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

More people voted against her than for her. Same thing happened to Bill, twice.

I have already explained why it matters. Um, no, more people voted for her, fact. He received more EC votes. EC votes are not people.

More people voted against her than for her.

Um, no, more people voted for her, fact.

 

[Dr Grump]

His argument, if I remember correctly, centers around the 2 electoral votes each state gets representing their Senators regardless of whether they're the least populated state or the most populated. He claims it gives a unfair favor to the small states because they are less populated. His argument would make sense except he ignores what those 2 votes were designed to represent. He wants to make it appear as if those 2 EV represent the people when they actually represent the State. That's why each STATE gets 2. It's even across the board just like the EV representing House members is even in a matter of proportions because they actually represent the body that represents the people. There's a reason each House district has as much of the same population as possible.

No, I'm talking overall EC votes per state. Currently Alaska has 3 votes for its 600,000 people. California has 55 for its 40 million people. So there is one vote for every 200,000 Alaskans. There is one EC vote for every 727,000 Californians. As the EC is used to elect presidents the weight of the Alaskan vote is three times that of the Californian. Fact. That is intrinsically unfair. My point has NOTHING to do with the 2 for the senators.

 

[Conservative65]

More people voted against her than for her. Same thing happened to Bill, twice.

I have already explained why it matters. Um, no, more people voted for her, fact. He received more EC votes. EC votes are not people.

I've already explained that if we don't use overall popular vote to elect a President, referencing overall popular vote doesn't matter.

More people voted against her than for her unless you're going to tell me her 48% popular vote count is greater than the 52% that voted for someone else.

Electoral votes do represent the people in the manner we count popular votes. Someone doesn't win electoral votes within a state without winning the most popular votes within that state. We count overall popular votes on a state by state basis (Nebraska and Maine being exceptions) with each state's popular votes having nothing to do with the popular votes of any other state. If you actually knew how the system worked, that would make sense to you. You're arguing from the standpoint that a student's Biology grade is determined by the individual assignment grades in his/her History class.

 

[Conservative65]

More people voted against her than for her. Same thing happened to Bill, twice.

I have already explained why it matters. Um, no, more people voted for her, fact. He received more EC votes. EC votes are not people.

More people voted against her than for her.

Um, no, more people voted for her, fact.

View attachment 146733

Last time I looked, 51.8% > 48.2%.