The Debt Ceiling and the Electoral College are dinosaurs!

[mamooth]

What the Fuck? This is meaningless even for you.

We aren't a democracy,

This isn't a debate. We are a democracy. Only those fascists most dedicated to destroying that democracy pretend otherwise.

we believe in the rights of all citizens, not just 51% like you do. And wow, you are exploiting it

No, you believe in the rights of the crazy 20%, the tyrannical minority that wants to force obedience from the liberty-minded 80%.

In contrast, we believe in the rights of the 100%. Liberal policies aren't forcing obedience from anyone, as your policies do. We just leave people alone.

So how do you kooks justify your "Tyranny of the majority is bad, but tyranny of the minority rocks!" philosophy?

 

[kaz]

They are dinosaurs that serve no useful economic or political purpose in today's world. What useful purpose do they serve? What do you think?

It's be so much easier for Democrats to steal more votes in huge leftist bastions like NY and California than deal with all those States with farmers and other people you hate, huh?

 

[kaz]

Hmmm. Republicans don't seem to have an issue with raising the debt ceiling when there's a Republican in the White House.
Wonder why that is?

They aren't as bad as you, but until Democrats went batshit crazy, this is why I voted third party.

So when Republicans did that, you said Democrat votes are theirs and you have no say in how you use your vote like you're saying now to them, right? LOL, I crack myself up, LOL

 

[j-mac]

They are dinosaurs that serve no useful economic or political purpose in today's world. What useful purpose do they serve? What do you think?

What’s the matter? The destruction of America taking too long?

 

[Lakhota]

What’s the matter? The destruction of America taking too long?

How do those two dinosaurs help to improve America?

 

[mamooth]

It's be so much easier for Democrats to steal more votes in huge leftist bastions like NY and California than deal with all those States with farmers and other people you hate, huh?

There's the usual sore-loser conspiracy babbling. Some losers just don't have the courage to admit they lost fair and square.

So, why do you think a voter in Wyoming should have more influence than a voter in NYC?

That is the fundamental point here, the unfairness of it, and the raging elitism of the uber-elitist conservatives. Elitism is the fundamental force driving conservatives. They believe that, since they are superior master-race humans, they have a divine right to rule over and force obedience from the majority that they consider to be subhuman.

 

[kaz]

There's the usual sore-loser conspiracy babbling. Some losers just don't have the courage to admit they lost fair and square.

So, why do you think a voter in Wyoming should have more influence than a voter in NYC?

That is the fundamental point here, the unfairness of it, and the raging elitism of the uber-elitist conservatives. Elitism is fundamental force riving conservaticve. They believe that, since they are superior master race humans, they have a divine right to rule over and terrorize those they see as their inferiors.

Be honest, your stupid shit even sounds like mindless babble to you, doesn't it?

 

[Nostra]

You think wrong! I'm for the popular vote regardless of the outcome! People vote - not acreage!

You want LA county to have more say than 34 states.

 

[mamooth]

Be honest, your stupid shit even sounds like mindless babble to you, doesn't it?

You didn't answer. Why do you think you have the right, as a minority, to force the majority to obey?

 

[mamooth]

You want LA county to have more say than 34 states.

What about "people vote, not land" is confusing you so?

 

[Nostra]

What about "people vote, not land" is confusing you so?

Nothing.

 

[kaz]

You didn't answer. Why do you think you have the right, as a minority, to force the majority to obey?

You so fundamentally don't grasp freedom. Neither 20% nor 80% have a right to trample on anyone's freedom. Gawd you're stupid

 

[Orangecat]

See? There's one who hates democracy with a white-hot fire, and wants a fascist republic instead.

The person who wrote the Pledge of Allegiance "hates democracy with a white-hot fire and wants a fascist republic"?
Could you be any more stupid and childish?

 

[mamooth]

The person who wrote the Pledge of Allegiance "hates democracy with a white-hot fire and wants a fascist republic"?

Did they claim the USA is not a democracy?

No. But all the fascists here do.

Sweet Jeebus, you're stupid.

 

[mamooth]

You so fundamentally don't grasp freedom. Neither 20% nor 80% have a right to trample on anyone's freedom.

Your side is doing almost all of the censoring, controlling, political violence and election-rigging. And you support them doing it.

 

[kaz]

Your side is doing almost all of the censoring, controlling, political violence and election-rigging. And you support them doing it.

You're consistently full of shit. If you want to know what Democrats are doing, look at what they are accusing you of. That's you, Miss Kitty

 

[Orangecat]

Did they claim the USA is not a democracy?

No. But all the fascists here do.

Sweet Jeebus, you're stupid.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There's the usual sore-loser conspiracy babbling. Some losers just don't have the courage to admit they lost fair and square.

So, why do you think a voter in Wyoming should have more influence than a voter in NYC?

That is the fundamental point here, the unfairness of it, and the raging elitism of the uber-elitist conservatives. Elitism is the fundamental force driving conservatives. They believe that, since they are superior master-race humans, they have a divine right to rule over and force obedience from the majority that they consider to be subhuman.

So, why do you think a voter in Wyoming should have more influence than a voter in NYC?

Why did the Founders think that?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your side is doing almost all of the censoring, controlling, political violence and election-rigging. And you support them doing it.

Exactly!!!
That's why Twitter, Facebook and all the MSM ignored Hunter Biden's laptop before the election.
They censored the story, because they're conservative.

 

[Lakhota]

The Electoral College is a system used in the United States to elect the President and Vice President. It was created by the framers of the U.S. Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. The Electoral College system is designed to give more power to smaller states, but it has been criticized for a number of reasons, including that it can result in a candidate winning the presidency without winning the popular vote.

Some other criticisms of the Electoral College include that it can discourage voter turnout in states that are not considered “swing states,” and that it can lead to a lack of representation for minority groups.

THE GOOD​

One of the advantages is the end result is clear: “Somebody wins; somebody gets a majority of the electoral votes,” says DeRosa. If presidents were elected purely by popular vote, a candidate could win the presidency with less than 50% of the vote. “If you had more than two parties contending for the presidency, you might have somebody winning with 30% of the votes, and that’s a ticket to an extremist candidate.”

THE BAD​

The first problem with the Electoral College is that it gives more weight to voters in small states than those in more populous ones, says DeRosa. Every state gets a minimum of three electoral votes. However, each state’s total allotment is based on its representation in the Senate (always two people) and the House (varies by population). “So take Washington, D.C., as an example,” says DeRosa. “More people live in D.C. than in Wyoming, the least populous state in the union; but they both get three electoral votes.” (Plus, unlike Wyoming, D.C. gets no voting representation in Congress.)

THE UGLY​

The biggest problem with the Electoral College is that it encourages vote suppression, says DeRosa. Southern states always had an advantage in the population count, because they got electoral votes appointed on the basis of their slave populations and their white populations. That gave the states extra representation for people they weren’t really representing at all.

After the Civil War, former slaves were counted as “whole” persons, not three-fifths of one, for purposes of electoral vote allotment. But Black voter suppression still took place through Jim Crow laws. This further “inflated the electoral count of people who were not representing all the people in their state,” says DeRosa. “So the Electoral College became a pillar of white supremacy.”

THE FUTURE​

Love it or hate it, the Electoral College is here to stay because changing it would require “constitutional surgery,” says DeRosa. “You would need three-fourths of the states to ratify any change, and too many states that are intent on suppressing votes benefit from the Electoral College.” The downside? “If you never have to appeal to the electorate because you’re successfully suppressing some large part of it, then you have a broken system.”

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly about The Electoral College - Monmouth Magazine

A history professor shares his insights on the governmental institution that has increasingly become the deciding factor in American presidential races.

www.monmouth.edu