I have a few questions...

[Wyatt earp]

Just because the electoral vote screws some of the population, doesn't mean it should be thrown out entirely. AGAIN, changed or amended YES. Tossed, NO

Things get thrown out all the time. The "Three Fifths Compromise" was thrown out. The excepting of women from the electoral process was thrown out. Alcohol was thrown out by one Amendment, and then that Amendment was thrown out by a subsequent one.

However I think there's still a law on the books in Tennessee or somewhere that requires if a woman is driving a car she has to be preceded by a man waving a red flag to warn people.

But hey we can't throw things out.

In order to keep something and NOT throw it out, its existence has to be justified. If it can be justified --- it stays.

Here, tell ya what.....just talk to the hand But I'll be nice enough to just agree to disagree, and then invoke my ignore feature. Congratulations!

See what I mean? Can't be justified. If it could you'd have a response more intelligent than the Finger. But I understand your purpose the entire time you've been on this site has been to resist anything I say even when you don't have an argument. That's your problem, not mine. By the way are we married yet?

With all due respect we're straying from your topic and there's already a thread on the EC and its effects (which is here), where nobody has come up with a justification there either -- although I'm not sure anyone has made the The Finger argument. But to your original point, the way in which the individual states pick their elecors, and how they execute it, is up to each individual state according to the Constitution as I posted yesterday and Montrovant went into as well. So it would seem that within the structure we have at present, the avenue for change is through each individual state Legislature. For all 57 states.

If you really understand why it's there, you would acknowledge it is fine as it is.

None of this has jack squat to do with any "Hillary", Dumbass. It's current buzz for the same reason it's buzz every four years--- BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN IT'S IN PLAY. Holy SHIT use your head.

Translation …smoking crack again Pogo? Crack is wack give it up girl

 

[JustAnotherNut]

I have always been a leader and a teacher when it came to machinery

I just wished to god there was more of me out there..

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/...ycling-workers-death-ruled-accident/93637576/

It wasn't an accident.. The 31year old kid died because he didn't follow lock out tag out and wasn't trained right..
That kid died a horrible death..

If you don't put safety and quality first.. Fuck production just shut the place down and go home

I agree it's horrible, and yes ultimately someone is responsible. Whether directly or indirectly. Hopefully they will put more stringent safety measures in place so this doesn't happen again.

 

[Pogo]

don't argue that it needs changing, but I do acknowledge the fact that the Founding Fathers had put it in place for a reason. To ensure against 'mob rule' that would happen if just left to the popular vote only. Yes, both come down to the same end......but both are still necessary.

Well no, it wasn't put there for that purpose ---- that's a whitewash slogan that's been banded about over and over, yet no one can explain why it equates to "mob rule". It's exactly the same way any state elects its Governor. Out of all 57 states I can't name a single one that finds it necessary to filter their county votes through an electoral college (or in that case electoral high school) in order to circumvent "mob rule". There is no "mob rule". Elections of Senators, Congresscritters, Mayors, everything down to Commissioner of Paper Clips, all elected by direct popular vote, and nobody ever cries "mob rule".

The EC was in fact put there to shore up slave states and Slave Power as I've already laid out. The slave states had enough population to dominate, but ONLY if they counted their slaves, who had no vote. Thus Virginia, a slave state that gave us six of our first seven Presidents who were ALL slaveowners, became the dominant force in Presidential elections -- a dominance ("Old Dominion") it would not have had ----- if not for the Electoral College.

Sorry if that doesn't sync with what we were taught in school but that's exactly why we weren't taught it. It's whitewashed history.

There was also the element of regionality, that one candidate shouldn't run up the score by amassing a big vote in a limited region. But that's clearly out the window by now; just have a look at the red and blue maps we're all familiar with and you've got a checkerboard of concentrated regions so it clearly doesn't work to do that. In fact the EC is the only reason that red and blue map, and the polarization it presents, EXISTS.

Again, it's constantly dividing people. We shouldn't live in a "red" state or a "blue" state --- we should live in a state, period. A state that has mountains or beaches or a certain cuisine or a certain music --- not one that starts classing people into binary colors to pit against each other like some giant four-year football game. That's entirely the fault of the EC. With a direct PV, how a given state votes is an arcane trivia question. As we just noted, that's a regional issue, not a state one.

It is the EC that has bestowed on us destructive terms like "blue wall" and "flyover country". And it seasons that negativity with the blanket psychological suggestion that "the entire South votes red (unanimously) and "The Pacific Coast votes blue (unanimously)". Neither are true, and it makes those alternative views invisible under that blanket. That only serves to perpetuate the same divisions.

As a Washingtonian you're one of those people, and you should not be considered a freak. "Red" votes in the west coast should not be trivialized any more than "blue" votes in the South should. And that also presents a certain peer pressure within each color-region.

How many not-very-interested voters in Kentucky or Rhode Island vote red or blue just because that's what their neighbors are doing? Voilà, there is your "mob rule".

Will you quit trying to put race into it.. That was the only way the south was going to become part of the UNITED STATES the southern smaller population states would of never entered into the fucking union with out the electoral college..

Again I would still live in the Chicago area if all states were the same.. I moved to South Carolina because they held my values..the Chicago area changed .. And I still get to be part of the United States.

.

Ummmmm..... the South was already part of the original Thirteen, Goober. It didn't need to "become part of the United States" --- it was part of the creation of it. And an influential part at that, since it got to count black people as three-fifths of a person while completely skipping out on the responsibility of allowing them to vote for their own representation. And via the EC it stacked the deck enough to, again, get its people into six of the first seven Presidents.

That there's history, Hunior, and there's nothing you can do to change it.

 

[EverCurious]

If two or three big cities are going to rule the entire country then I'll through my monetary weight into breaking up the USA as it no longer represents the interests of the states.

 

[Wyatt earp]

don't argue that it needs changing, but I do acknowledge the fact that the Founding Fathers had put it in place for a reason. To ensure against 'mob rule' that would happen if just left to the popular vote only. Yes, both come down to the same end......but both are still necessary.

Well no, it wasn't put there for that purpose ---- that's a whitewash slogan that's been banded about over and over, yet no one can explain why it equates to "mob rule". It's exactly the same way any state elects its Governor. Out of all 57 states I can't name a single one that finds it necessary to filter their county votes through an electoral college (or in that case electoral high school) in order to circumvent "mob rule". There is no "mob rule". Elections of Senators, Congresscritters, Mayors, everything down to Commissioner of Paper Clips, all elected by direct popular vote, and nobody ever cries "mob rule".

The EC was in fact put there to shore up slave states and Slave Power as I've already laid out. The slave states had enough population to dominate, but ONLY if they counted their slaves, who had no vote. Thus Virginia, a slave state that gave us six of our first seven Presidents who were ALL slaveowners, became the dominant force in Presidential elections -- a dominance ("Old Dominion") it would not have had ----- if not for the Electoral College.

Sorry if that doesn't sync with what we were taught in school but that's exactly why we weren't taught it. It's whitewashed history.

There was also the element of regionality, that one candidate shouldn't run up the score by amassing a big vote in a limited region. But that's clearly out the window by now; just have a look at the red and blue maps we're all familiar with and you've got a checkerboard of concentrated regions so it clearly doesn't work to do that. In fact the EC is the only reason that red and blue map, and the polarization it presents, EXISTS.

Again, it's constantly dividing people. We shouldn't live in a "red" state or a "blue" state --- we should live in a state, period. A state that has mountains or beaches or a certain cuisine or a certain music --- not one that starts classing people into binary colors to pit against each other like some giant four-year football game. That's entirely the fault of the EC. With a direct PV, how a given state votes is an arcane trivia question. As we just noted, that's a regional issue, not a state one.

It is the EC that has bestowed on us destructive terms like "blue wall" and "flyover country". And it seasons that negativity with the blanket psychological suggestion that "the entire South votes red (unanimously) and "The Pacific Coast votes blue (unanimously)". Neither are true, and it makes those alternative views invisible under that blanket. That only serves to perpetuate the same divisions.

As a Washingtonian you're one of those people, and you should not be considered a freak. "Red" votes in the west coast should not be trivialized any more than "blue" votes in the South should. And that also presents a certain peer pressure within each color-region.

How many not-very-interested voters in Kentucky or Rhode Island vote red or blue just because that's what their neighbors are doing? Voilà, there is your "mob rule".

Will you quit trying to put race into it.. That was the only way the south was going to become part of the UNITED STATES the southern smaller population states would of never entered into the fucking union with out the electoral college..

Again I would still live in the Chicago area if all states were the same.. I moved to South Carolina because they held my values..the Chicago area changed .. And I still get to be part of the United States.

.

Ummmmm..... the South was already part of the original Thirteen, Goober. It didn't need to "become part of the United States" --- it was part of the creation of it. And an influential part at that, since it got to count black people as three-fifths of a person while completely skipping out on the responsibility of giving them the vote.

That there's history, Hunior, and there's nothing you can do to change it.

No you litte racist Micheal Moore neddle dick .

Remember prick south Carolina left.. The god damn electoral college is the reason why they joined the Union..

Until the northern pricks started to fuck with state rights.. The North won the Civil battle.

And 130 plus years later we still have the electoral college.

That means we won the damn war..


You mad crack head?

 

[Pogo]

don't argue that it needs changing, but I do acknowledge the fact that the Founding Fathers had put it in place for a reason. To ensure against 'mob rule' that would happen if just left to the popular vote only. Yes, both come down to the same end......but both are still necessary.

There was also the element of regionality, that one candidate shouldn't run up the score by amassing a big vote in a limited region. But that's clearly out the window by now; just have a look at the red and blue maps we're all familiar with and you've got a checkerboard of concentrated regions so it clearly doesn't work to do that. In fact the EC is the only reason that red and blue map, and the polarization it presents, EXISTS.

See. . . that's where you short sighted partisanship is not allowing you to see the statistical truth of the big picture.

One candidate CAN run up the score by amassing a big vote in limited regions. That is exactly what Clinton did in this last election. Her supporters very much would like Chicago, NY, LA, and every other metropolitan area to decide policy for the rest of the nation. (Just look at the county map I have posted.)

The electoral college decidedly puts the breaks on the unfairness of a minority of counties in the US dictating policies for all the rest of the counties in the US.

Voting SHOULD NOT be based solely on the number of votes, but also on where those votes originate. IF they do not continue using this system, than it should be up to states to decide to leave the Union if they do not like the outcome of the election. How would an entirely rural state benefit from a President that was elected by voters who were appealed to by someone that knew nothing but metropolitan values, culture and policy?

Thank you Pogo thinks we would of still been the United States with out it, heck no we would of looked like Europe.. The constitution and electoral college was what united us.

And it's funny the libs always botched the founding fathers had slaves and women didn't get the right to vote..

Well dumb asses society was not ready for such a drastic change at the time but the constitution had the change set in stone and in motion..


So fuck you Pogo and you trying to make the electoral college racist and take that fat ass Micheal Moore with you.

Perhaps someday Google Translate or Berlitz will come up with a way to translate the above to Engish but for now, "the libs always botched the founding fathers had slaves and women didn't get the right to vote" isn't even a sentence.

Anyway the fact remains the Electrical College was set up around the Three Fifths Compromise in order to artificially inflate the influence of the slaveholding South, and the fact remains that it contributed directly to six of our first seven Presidents being exactly that -- slaveholders from the South (specifically Virginia, which by virtue of counting black people as three-fifths of a person had the most influence). And it's also a fact that all that is history and there ain't a damn thing you can do about it.

And no, that didn't get 'changed' until we had to go through our bloodiest war ever, and there's a strong case to be made that that Southern bias helped to set up that war by that very dynamic. Just for starters.

So no ---- fuck you, clown shoes.

Perhaps when you get your brain removed from your racist ass from your butt you could comprehend my post Pogo..

Hey, learn to write in English and maybe you'll find something intelligent to say, Nimmie. But what I quoted above --- your words verbatim --- isn't even a sentence.

 

[Wyatt earp]

don't argue that it needs changing, but I do acknowledge the fact that the Founding Fathers had put it in place for a reason. To ensure against 'mob rule' that would happen if just left to the popular vote only. Yes, both come down to the same end......but both are still necessary.

Well no, it wasn't put there for that purpose ---- that's a whitewash slogan that's been banded about over and over, yet no one can explain why it equates to "mob rule". It's exactly the same way any state elects its Governor. Out of all 57 states I can't name a single one that finds it necessary to filter their county votes through an electoral college (or in that case electoral high school) in order to circumvent "mob rule". There is no "mob rule". Elections of Senators, Congresscritters, Mayors, everything down to Commissioner of Paper Clips, all elected by direct popular vote, and nobody ever cries "mob rule".

The EC was in fact put there to shore up slave states and Slave Power as I've already laid out. The slave states had enough population to dominate, but ONLY if they counted their slaves, who had no vote. Thus Virginia, a slave state that gave us six of our first seven Presidents who were ALL slaveowners, became the dominant force in Presidential elections -- a dominance ("Old Dominion") it would not have had ----- if not for the Electoral College.

Sorry if that doesn't sync with what we were taught in school but that's exactly why we weren't taught it. It's whitewashed history.

There was also the element of regionality, that one candidate shouldn't run up the score by amassing a big vote in a limited region. But that's clearly out the window by now; just have a look at the red and blue maps we're all familiar with and you've got a checkerboard of concentrated regions so it clearly doesn't work to do that. In fact the EC is the only reason that red and blue map, and the polarization it presents, EXISTS.

Again, it's constantly dividing people. We shouldn't live in a "red" state or a "blue" state --- we should live in a state, period. A state that has mountains or beaches or a certain cuisine or a certain music --- not one that starts classing people into binary colors to pit against each other like some giant four-year football game. That's entirely the fault of the EC. With a direct PV, how a given state votes is an arcane trivia question. As we just noted, that's a regional issue, not a state one.

It is the EC that has bestowed on us destructive terms like "blue wall" and "flyover country". And it seasons that negativity with the blanket psychological suggestion that "the entire South votes red (unanimously) and "The Pacific Coast votes blue (unanimously)". Neither are true, and it makes those alternative views invisible under that blanket. That only serves to perpetuate the same divisions.

As a Washingtonian you're one of those people, and you should not be considered a freak. "Red" votes in the west coast should not be trivialized any more than "blue" votes in the South should. And that also presents a certain peer pressure within each color-region.

How many not-very-interested voters in Kentucky or Rhode Island vote red or blue just because that's what their neighbors are doing? Voilà, there is your "mob rule".

Will you quit trying to put race into it.. That was the only way the south was going to become part of the UNITED STATES the southern smaller population states would of never entered into the fucking union with out the electoral college..

Again I would still live in the Chicago area if all states were the same.. I moved to South Carolina because they held my values..the Chicago area changed .. And I still get to be part of the United States.

.

Ummmmm..... the South was already part of the original Thirteen, Goober. It didn't need to "become part of the United States" --- it was part of the creation of it. And an influential part at that, since it got to count black people as three-fifths of a person while completely skipping out on the responsibility of giving them the vote.

That there's history, Hunior, and there's nothing you can do to change it.

No you litte racist Micheal Moore neddle dick .

Remember prick south Carolina left.. The god damn electoral college is the reason why they joined the Union..

Until the northern pricks started to fuck with state rights.. The North won the Civil battle.

And 130 plus years later we still have the electoral college.

That means we won the damn war..


You mad crack head?

Why are you even bringing this up

It can be talked about but it will never change like the 2nd or roe vs wade never in a million years so dream on.

 

[Pogo]

If two or three big cities are going to rule the entire country then I'll through my monetary weight into breaking up the USA as it no longer represents the interests of the states.

There's simply no way to make that argument. That line gets tossed like confetti in the thread about the EC (which I already linked) but no one has yet been able to support it.

The fact is, a single voter in downtown Manhattan has exactly the same number of votes as a single voter in East Jipip Wyoming --- one. And one is equal to one is equal to one, always and forever.

And as I keep pointing out there, it's already the way every state elects its governor, and its Senators, and its own state legislators. And nobody in any state is crying the blues about its cities controlling it. Because it simply doesn't work that way.

 

[Slyhunter]

California needs to be broken up into three states.

 

[Wyatt earp]

There was also the element of regionality, that one candidate shouldn't run up the score by amassing a big vote in a limited region. But that's clearly out the window by now; just have a look at the red and blue maps we're all familiar with and you've got a checkerboard of concentrated regions so it clearly doesn't work to do that. In fact the EC is the only reason that red and blue map, and the polarization it presents, EXISTS.

See. . . that's where you short sighted partisanship is not allowing you to see the statistical truth of the big picture.

One candidate CAN run up the score by amassing a big vote in limited regions. That is exactly what Clinton did in this last election. Her supporters very much would like Chicago, NY, LA, and every other metropolitan area to decide policy for the rest of the nation. (Just look at the county map I have posted.)

The electoral college decidedly puts the breaks on the unfairness of a minority of counties in the US dictating policies for all the rest of the counties in the US.

Voting SHOULD NOT be based solely on the number of votes, but also on where those votes originate. IF they do not continue using this system, than it should be up to states to decide to leave the Union if they do not like the outcome of the election. How would an entirely rural state benefit from a President that was elected by voters who were appealed to by someone that knew nothing but metropolitan values, culture and policy?

Thank you Pogo thinks we would of still been the United States with out it, heck no we would of looked like Europe.. The constitution and electoral college was what united us.

And it's funny the libs always botched the founding fathers had slaves and women didn't get the right to vote..

Well dumb asses society was not ready for such a drastic change at the time but the constitution had the change set in stone and in motion..


So fuck you Pogo and you trying to make the electoral college racist and take that fat ass Micheal Moore with you.

Perhaps someday Google Translate or Berlitz will come up with a way to translate the above to Engish but for now, "the libs always botched the founding fathers had slaves and women didn't get the right to vote" isn't even a sentence.

Anyway the fact remains the Electrical College was set up around the Three Fifths Compromise in order to artificially inflate the influence of the slaveholding South, and the fact remains that it contributed directly to six of our first seven Presidents being exactly that -- slaveholders from the South (specifically Virginia, which by virtue of counting black people as three-fifths of a person had the most influence). And it's also a fact that all that is history and there ain't a damn thing you can do about it.

And no, that didn't get 'changed' until we had to go through our bloodiest war ever, and there's a strong case to be made that that Southern bias helped to set up that war by that very dynamic. Just for starters.

So no ---- fuck you, clown shoes.

Perhaps when you get your brain removed from your racist ass from your butt you could comprehend my post Pogo..

Hey, learn to write in English and maybe you'll find something intelligent to say, Nimmie. But what I quoted above --- your words verbatim --- isn't even a sentence.

Why do I need to? I have a great paying job. The only people that need to post like you that don't has to much time on your hands I am watching a movie. You're just masturbating to my posts trying to pick out grammar and spelling errors.

.

 

[Pogo]

don't argue that it needs changing, but I do acknowledge the fact that the Founding Fathers had put it in place for a reason. To ensure against 'mob rule' that would happen if just left to the popular vote only. Yes, both come down to the same end......but both are still necessary.

Well no, it wasn't put there for that purpose ---- that's a whitewash slogan that's been banded about over and over, yet no one can explain why it equates to "mob rule". It's exactly the same way any state elects its Governor. Out of all 57 states I can't name a single one that finds it necessary to filter their county votes through an electoral college (or in that case electoral high school) in order to circumvent "mob rule". There is no "mob rule". Elections of Senators, Congresscritters, Mayors, everything down to Commissioner of Paper Clips, all elected by direct popular vote, and nobody ever cries "mob rule".

The EC was in fact put there to shore up slave states and Slave Power as I've already laid out. The slave states had enough population to dominate, but ONLY if they counted their slaves, who had no vote. Thus Virginia, a slave state that gave us six of our first seven Presidents who were ALL slaveowners, became the dominant force in Presidential elections -- a dominance ("Old Dominion") it would not have had ----- if not for the Electoral College.

Sorry if that doesn't sync with what we were taught in school but that's exactly why we weren't taught it. It's whitewashed history.

There was also the element of regionality, that one candidate shouldn't run up the score by amassing a big vote in a limited region. But that's clearly out the window by now; just have a look at the red and blue maps we're all familiar with and you've got a checkerboard of concentrated regions so it clearly doesn't work to do that. In fact the EC is the only reason that red and blue map, and the polarization it presents, EXISTS.

Again, it's constantly dividing people. We shouldn't live in a "red" state or a "blue" state --- we should live in a state, period. A state that has mountains or beaches or a certain cuisine or a certain music --- not one that starts classing people into binary colors to pit against each other like some giant four-year football game. That's entirely the fault of the EC. With a direct PV, how a given state votes is an arcane trivia question. As we just noted, that's a regional issue, not a state one.

It is the EC that has bestowed on us destructive terms like "blue wall" and "flyover country". And it seasons that negativity with the blanket psychological suggestion that "the entire South votes red (unanimously) and "The Pacific Coast votes blue (unanimously)". Neither are true, and it makes those alternative views invisible under that blanket. That only serves to perpetuate the same divisions.

As a Washingtonian you're one of those people, and you should not be considered a freak. "Red" votes in the west coast should not be trivialized any more than "blue" votes in the South should. And that also presents a certain peer pressure within each color-region.

How many not-very-interested voters in Kentucky or Rhode Island vote red or blue just because that's what their neighbors are doing? Voilà, there is your "mob rule".

Will you quit trying to put race into it.. That was the only way the south was going to become part of the UNITED STATES the southern smaller population states would of never entered into the fucking union with out the electoral college..

Again I would still live in the Chicago area if all states were the same.. I moved to South Carolina because they held my values..the Chicago area changed .. And I still get to be part of the United States.

.

Ummmmm..... the South was already part of the original Thirteen, Goober. It didn't need to "become part of the United States" --- it was part of the creation of it. And an influential part at that, since it got to count black people as three-fifths of a person while completely skipping out on the responsibility of giving them the vote.

That there's history, Hunior, and there's nothing you can do to change it.

No you litte racist Micheal Moore neddle dick .

Remember prick south Carolina left.. The god damn electoral college is the reason why they joined the Union..

Until the northern pricks started to fuck with state rights.. The North won the Civil battle.

And 130 plus years later we still have the electoral college.

That means we won the damn war..


You mad crack head?

Why are you even bringing this up

It can be talked about but it will never change like the 2nd or roe vs wade never in a million years so dream on.

Apparently you're so drunk that now you're replying to yourself. The good news is, with a little punctuation you almost have a sentence there.

Anyway I didn't bring it up. YOU did.

 

[Pogo]

Why do I need to? I have a great paying job.

Apparently one that does not involve written communication.

You're a waste of time, asshat.

 

[Wyatt earp]

See. . . that's where you short sighted partisanship is not allowing you to see the statistical truth of the big picture.

One candidate CAN run up the score by amassing a big vote in limited regions. That is exactly what Clinton did in this last election. Her supporters very much would like Chicago, NY, LA, and every other metropolitan area to decide policy for the rest of the nation. (Just look at the county map I have posted.)

The electoral college decidedly puts the breaks on the unfairness of a minority of counties in the US dictating policies for all the rest of the counties in the US.

Voting SHOULD NOT be based solely on the number of votes, but also on where those votes originate. IF they do not continue using this system, than it should be up to states to decide to leave the Union if they do not like the outcome of the election. How would an entirely rural state benefit from a President that was elected by voters who were appealed to by someone that knew nothing but metropolitan values, culture and policy?

Thank you Pogo thinks we would of still been the United States with out it, heck no we would of looked like Europe.. The constitution and electoral college was what united us.

And it's funny the libs always botched the founding fathers had slaves and women didn't get the right to vote..

Well dumb asses society was not ready for such a drastic change at the time but the constitution had the change set in stone and in motion..


So fuck you Pogo and you trying to make the electoral college racist and take that fat ass Micheal Moore with you.

Perhaps someday Google Translate or Berlitz will come up with a way to translate the above to Engish but for now, "the libs always botched the founding fathers had slaves and women didn't get the right to vote" isn't even a sentence.

Anyway the fact remains the Electrical College was set up around the Three Fifths Compromise in order to artificially inflate the influence of the slaveholding South, and the fact remains that it contributed directly to six of our first seven Presidents being exactly that -- slaveholders from the South (specifically Virginia, which by virtue of counting black people as three-fifths of a person had the most influence). And it's also a fact that all that is history and there ain't a damn thing you can do about it.

And no, that didn't get 'changed' until we had to go through our bloodiest war ever, and there's a strong case to be made that that Southern bias helped to set up that war by that very dynamic. Just for starters.

So no ---- fuck you, clown shoes.

Perhaps when you get your brain removed from your racist ass from your butt you could comprehend my post Pogo..

Hey, learn to write in English and maybe you'll find something intelligent to say, Nimmie. But what I quoted above --- your words verbatim --- isn't even a sentence.

Why do I need to? I have a great paying job. The only people that need to post like you that don't has to much time on your hands I am watching a movie. You're just masturbating to my posts trying to pick out grammar and spelling errors.

.

Let me guess Pogo your a 7 bucks an hour hamburger flipper college grad Sucks to be you

 

[Wyatt earp]

Why do I need to? I have a great paying job.

Apparently one that does not involve written communication.

You're a waste of time, asshat.

No you can't handle the truth.. Asshat..

No communication needed it in mathematics or mechanics.. I am fluent and have demonstrated my ability and can comprehend like 500 languages when fixing god damn machines

 

[EverCurious]

Ditching EC just makes Alaska even more a slave to larger states - which is of course the goal, to make our voices irrelevant because we're conservative and always have been.

Alaska population 800k, under Popular vote we're fucked no matter what we vote because the entire population of our state doesn't stand a chance against /one/ city in the lower 48. Why the hell should we stay "loyal" to a country that has none of /our/ interests in it's heart? Why the hell should we support a system that would intentionally disregard our voice as an /equal/ state in the union?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Well no, it wasn't put there for that purpose ---- that's a whitewash slogan that's been banded about over and over, yet no one can explain why it equates to "mob rule". It's exactly the same way any state elects its Governor. Out of all 57 states I can't name a single one that finds it necessary to filter their county votes through an electoral college (or in that case electoral high school) in order to circumvent "mob rule". There is no "mob rule". Elections of Senators, Congresscritters, Mayors, everything down to Commissioner of Paper Clips, all elected by direct popular vote, and nobody ever cries "mob rule".

The EC was in fact put there to shore up slave states and Slave Power as I've already laid out. The slave states had enough population to dominate, but ONLY if they counted their slaves, who had no vote. Thus Virginia, a slave state that gave us six of our first seven Presidents who were ALL slaveowners, became the dominant force in Presidential elections -- a dominance ("Old Dominion") it would not have had ----- if not for the Electoral College.

Sorry if that doesn't sync with what we were taught in school but that's exactly why we weren't taught it. It's whitewashed history.

There was also the element of regionality, that one candidate shouldn't run up the score by amassing a big vote in a limited region. But that's clearly out the window by now; just have a look at the red and blue maps we're all familiar with and you've got a checkerboard of concentrated regions so it clearly doesn't work to do that. In fact the EC is the only reason that red and blue map, and the polarization it presents, EXISTS.

Again, it's constantly dividing people. We shouldn't live in a "red" state or a "blue" state --- we should live in a state, period. A state that has mountains or beaches or a certain cuisine or a certain music --- not one that starts classing people into binary colors to pit against each other like some giant four-year football game. That's entirely the fault of the EC. With a direct PV, how a given state votes is an arcane trivia question. As we just noted, that's a regional issue, not a state one.

It is the EC that has bestowed on us destructive terms like "blue wall" and "flyover country". And it seasons that negativity with the blanket psychological suggestion that "the entire South votes red (unanimously) and "The Pacific Coast votes blue (unanimously)". Neither are true, and it makes those alternative views invisible under that blanket. That only serves to perpetuate the same divisions.

As a Washingtonian you're one of those people, and you should not be considered a freak. "Red" votes in the west coast should not be trivialized any more than "blue" votes in the South should. And that also presents a certain peer pressure within each color-region.

How many not-very-interested voters in Kentucky or Rhode Island vote red or blue just because that's what their neighbors are doing? Voilà, there is your "mob rule".

Will you quit trying to put race into it.. That was the only way the south was going to become part of the UNITED STATES the southern smaller population states would of never entered into the fucking union with out the electoral college..

Again I would still live in the Chicago area if all states were the same.. I moved to South Carolina because they held my values..the Chicago area changed .. And I still get to be part of the United States.

.

Ummmmm..... the South was already part of the original Thirteen, Goober. It didn't need to "become part of the United States" --- it was part of the creation of it. And an influential part at that, since it got to count black people as three-fifths of a person while completely skipping out on the responsibility of giving them the vote.

That there's history, Hunior, and there's nothing you can do to change it.

No you litte racist Micheal Moore neddle dick .

Remember prick south Carolina left.. The god damn electoral college is the reason why they joined the Union..

Until the northern pricks started to fuck with state rights.. The North won the Civil battle.

And 130 plus years later we still have the electoral college.

That means we won the damn war..


You mad crack head?

Why are you even bringing this up

It can be talked about but it will never change like the 2nd or roe vs wade never in a million years so dream on.

Apparently you're so drunk that now you're replying to yourself. The good news is, with a little punctuation you almost have a sentence there.

Anyway I didn't bring it up. YOU did.

Says the resident USMB crack head and racist?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Tell us some more Pogo how you are parrorting off of Michael fat as Moore?

You are so butt hurt that the working class union members told you to fuck off..

 

[JustAnotherNut]

Ditching EC just makes Alaska even more a slave to larger states - which is of course the goal, to make our voices irrelevant because we're conservative and always have been.

Alaska population 800k, under Popular vote we're fucked no matter what we vote because the entire population of our state doesn't stand a chance against /one/ city in the lower 48. Why the hell should we stay "loyal" to a country that has none of /our/ interests in it's heart? Why the hell should we support a system that would intentionally disregard our voice as an /equal/ state in the union?

And that is why I do think the EC does need to be changed......so that it is more reflective of EVERYONE'S vote. Unlike some who would rather just throw it out entirely

 

[JustAnotherNut]

Tell us some more Pogo how you are parrorting off of Michael fat as Moore?

You are so butt hurt that the working class union members told you to fuck off..

Some people are book smart & life dumb....

 

[Wyatt earp]

Pogo your god damn democrat party left behind the middle class.. Now you're upset.. That you want to change the electoral college..

Way to funny.


Here is an idea you shit for brains how about the democrats help the middle class?