these people are DUMB

[BookShaka]

The Electoral College - Origin and History

I'm not really sure how that disproves my point, but it was interesting.

It doesn’t give the government final say in who wins, as voters’ votes still count, just at a state-wide level. Our founders didn’t like the system from which they left and therefore created the EC to thwart what they viewed as a corrupt system. Where did all those votes that Hillary received over Trump come from?

I had no say and no knowledge of who the electors were in my district. That was all chosen by party insiders. And they are the ones who vote for the President.

The electors vote for who the people voted for. It’s unprecedented for electors to shun results from the people, which I remember hearing a couple were considering doing in order to prevent Trump from winning. Many aspects of government are “we know what’s good for you better than you do.” It’s the nature of the beast. You’re acting as if the EC cancels out your vote, and in some cases it does, as in my vote for Trump in MN. Losing trust in the system bc it didn’t yield the desired result is fine, but changing it bc you can’t accept the outcome is, to me, juvenile and a bit authoritarian. If you don’t want to allow the government too much control, why would you be okay with them removing a system that’s been in place since the beginning?

changing it bc you can’t accept the outcome
That's not why I think a simple majority vote would be better. It's too fucking late for that.

Many aspects of government are “we know what’s good for you better than you do.” It’s the nature of the beast.
THIS is why. It doesn't need to be that way.

I’m talking about the Dems wanting to do away with the EC, not you specifically.

 

[jc456]

They are doing nothing more than pandering to their base. Same as impeachment and their radical agenda.
Just like what they say trump does

You know, Harley, there's the buzz word "radical" flying around, that usually serves to cut off thinking beyond the thinker's nose.

When, actually, there is nothing remotely radical about making the promise of One (wo)man, one vote, a reality. Neither is there anything radical about placing the executive, the president and his high-level henchmen in particular, firmly under the law, making the promise of A country governed by laws, not men, a reality.

But then, declaring folks who would kick-start a debate about these very worthy issues "DUMB" without a solid argument demonstrating same, seemingly before even having taken the time and making the effort to think about it, is really dumb. Squared. I find, you are doing yourself a disservice here.

Oh, BTW, since you are gladly throwing the "pandering to the base" charge around: How about you take a second look at different ways and modes of pandering, like, whether or not the country would be better (or worse) off, in case the "pandering" proved to be successful. Finally, the claim that Democrats don't have the votes for impeachment is factually incorrect, which further demonstrates you rather seem to be not at the top of your game.

except for the fact of why the EC was created. perhaps you should read.

All posts were elected by EC to begin with, I heard. Senate, too. States insisted on having that power before they would ratify the Constitution.

old woman, you could have posted a link on that. can you?

 

[OldLady]

She wants someone to show evidence of what they claim is common knowledge. How hard can that be?

She wants someone to do the work for her even as she tells them they’re wrong. Well you’re right, it’s not hard. I did the work for her she could have easily done herself.

If I insisted you were wrong and refused to provide evidence, you would be making a different argument, though.

You’ve insisted others were wrong and refused to look up if what you claimed was even accurate. Your response to the sources I provided you tells me you learned something, yet before you read it you spoke as if you already had that knowledge. That speaks volumes.

The EC was created to balance out the vote and not give too much power to densely populated areas, such as Cali and New York. Thanks to the EC, my vote for Trump didn’t even count since I reside in MN... so shouldn’t that make me an advocate to get rid of it? I trust the system put into place. If the rolls were reversed and Trump had won the popular vote but Hillary took the EC, yes I would feel cheated but I wouldn’t say the whole thing needs to go. I’m mature enough to accept things as they are.

I was aware of most of the information in that article. I didn't know I would have to recite it in order to point out that if it were a one (wo)man-one vote system, not everyone in the state of California or any other densely populated state would vote the same way.

It’s almost like you refuse to get it.

Explain, then. Because nothing I read in that article said anything refuting my point..

 

[whitehall]

Democrats have a history of hatred, hysteria and incoherent behavior. When the democrat party gained the majority in both houses midway into Bush's 2nd term they told America that Fannie Mae was solvent on the eve of the biggest monetary collapse in modern history and went on to hearings on steroid use in baseball.

 

[BookShaka]

She wants someone to do the work for her even as she tells them they’re wrong. Well you’re right, it’s not hard. I did the work for her she could have easily done herself.

If I insisted you were wrong and refused to provide evidence, you would be making a different argument, though.

You’ve insisted others were wrong and refused to look up if what you claimed was even accurate. Your response to the sources I provided you tells me you learned something, yet before you read it you spoke as if you already had that knowledge. That speaks volumes.

The EC was created to balance out the vote and not give too much power to densely populated areas, such as Cali and New York. Thanks to the EC, my vote for Trump didn’t even count since I reside in MN... so shouldn’t that make me an advocate to get rid of it? I trust the system put into place. If the rolls were reversed and Trump had won the popular vote but Hillary took the EC, yes I would feel cheated but I wouldn’t say the whole thing needs to go. I’m mature enough to accept things as they are.

I was aware of most of the information in that article. I didn't know I would have to recite it in order to point out that if it were a one (wo)man-one vote system, not everyone in the state of California or any other densely populated state would vote the same way.

It’s almost like you refuse to get it.

Explain, then. Because nothing I read in that article said anything refuting my point..

No one ever said that EVERY voter in Cali and New York would vote a certain way, but in certain areas of the country many people do hold the same beliefs and vote the same and the EC’s aim is to take power away from them so those in less densely populated areas won’t be drowned out by the big cities. This is not hard to understand. I’ll ask you again a question you didn’t answer a couple posts ago: where did the three million or so votes Hillary got over Trump come from?

 

[OldLady]

They are doing nothing more than pandering to their base. Same as impeachment and their radical agenda.
Just like what they say trump does

You know, Harley, there's the buzz word "radical" flying around, that usually serves to cut off thinking beyond the thinker's nose.

When, actually, there is nothing remotely radical about making the promise of One (wo)man, one vote, a reality. Neither is there anything radical about placing the executive, the president and his high-level henchmen in particular, firmly under the law, making the promise of A country governed by laws, not men, a reality.

But then, declaring folks who would kick-start a debate about these very worthy issues "DUMB" without a solid argument demonstrating same, seemingly before even having taken the time and making the effort to think about it, is really dumb. Squared. I find, you are doing yourself a disservice here.

Oh, BTW, since you are gladly throwing the "pandering to the base" charge around: How about you take a second look at different ways and modes of pandering, like, whether or not the country would be better (or worse) off, in case the "pandering" proved to be successful. Finally, the claim that Democrats don't have the votes for impeachment is factually incorrect, which further demonstrates you rather seem to be not at the top of your game.

except for the fact of why the EC was created. perhaps you should read.

All posts were elected by EC to begin with, I heard. Senate, too. States insisted on having that power before they would ratify the Constitution.

old woman, you could have posted a link on that. can you?

I'm glad you challenged me, because I was wrong. I like learning something new every day.
Passed by Congress May 13, 1912, and ratified April 8, 1913, the 17th amendmentmodified Article I, section 3, of the Constitution by allowing voters to cast direct votes for U.S. Senators. Prior to its passage, Senators were chosen by state legislatures. ... Each state legislature would elect two senators to 6-year terms.
did electoral college choose senators historically - Google Search

 

[OldLady]

If I insisted you were wrong and refused to provide evidence, you would be making a different argument, though.

You’ve insisted others were wrong and refused to look up if what you claimed was even accurate. Your response to the sources I provided you tells me you learned something, yet before you read it you spoke as if you already had that knowledge. That speaks volumes.

The EC was created to balance out the vote and not give too much power to densely populated areas, such as Cali and New York. Thanks to the EC, my vote for Trump didn’t even count since I reside in MN... so shouldn’t that make me an advocate to get rid of it? I trust the system put into place. If the rolls were reversed and Trump had won the popular vote but Hillary took the EC, yes I would feel cheated but I wouldn’t say the whole thing needs to go. I’m mature enough to accept things as they are.

I was aware of most of the information in that article. I didn't know I would have to recite it in order to point out that if it were a one (wo)man-one vote system, not everyone in the state of California or any other densely populated state would vote the same way.

It’s almost like you refuse to get it.

Explain, then. Because nothing I read in that article said anything refuting my point..

No one ever said that EVERY voter in Cali and New York would vote a certain way, but in certain areas of the country many people do hold the same beliefs and vote the same and the EC’s aim is to take power away from them so those in less densely populated areas won’t be drowned out by the big cities. This is not hard to understand. I’ll ask you again a question you didn’t answer a couple posts ago: where did the three million or so votes Hillary got over Trump come from?

They came from voters whose votes didn't matter because of the EC.

 

[BookShaka]

You’ve insisted others were wrong and refused to look up if what you claimed was even accurate. Your response to the sources I provided you tells me you learned something, yet before you read it you spoke as if you already had that knowledge. That speaks volumes.

The EC was created to balance out the vote and not give too much power to densely populated areas, such as Cali and New York. Thanks to the EC, my vote for Trump didn’t even count since I reside in MN... so shouldn’t that make me an advocate to get rid of it? I trust the system put into place. If the rolls were reversed and Trump had won the popular vote but Hillary took the EC, yes I would feel cheated but I wouldn’t say the whole thing needs to go. I’m mature enough to accept things as they are.

I was aware of most of the information in that article. I didn't know I would have to recite it in order to point out that if it were a one (wo)man-one vote system, not everyone in the state of California or any other densely populated state would vote the same way.

It’s almost like you refuse to get it.

Explain, then. Because nothing I read in that article said anything refuting my point..

No one ever said that EVERY voter in Cali and New York would vote a certain way, but in certain areas of the country many people do hold the same beliefs and vote the same and the EC’s aim is to take power away from them so those in less densely populated areas won’t be drowned out by the big cities. This is not hard to understand. I’ll ask you again a question you didn’t answer a couple posts ago: where did the three million or so votes Hillary got over Trump come from?

They came from voters whose votes didn't matter because of the EC.

WHERE did they come from?

 

[g5000]

The house doesnt have votes for their radical agenda, nor impeachment.
The electoral college process is in the 12th amendment. You cant just vote it away in congress you fucking morons!
Its funny because all trump does is "talk shit to get his base riled up" while they do the same thing!
Both sides need to chill out. Thats with their fear of the future and disingenuous outrage. STFU already!

Pseudocons spent eight years trying to get Obama impeached.

Birther Trump spent several years trying to claim Obama was an illegitimate President.

Karma's a BITCH!

 

[TNHarley]

The house doesnt have votes for their radical agenda, nor impeachment.
The electoral college process is in the 12th amendment. You cant just vote it away in congress you fucking morons!
Its funny because all trump does is "talk shit to get his base riled up" while they do the same thing!
Both sides need to chill out. Thats with their fear of the future and disingenuous outrage. STFU already!

Pseudocons spent eight years trying to get Obama impeached.

Birther Trump spent several years trying to claim Obama was an illegitimate President.

Karma's a BITCH!

Its embarrassing. It isnt a bitch unless you are a fucking retard.

 

[Pete7469]

Weapons Grade Stupid.

 

[joaquinmiller]

I was aware of most of the information in that article. I didn't know I would have to recite it in order to point out that if it were a one (wo)man-one vote system, not everyone in the state of California or any other densely populated state would vote the same way.

It’s almost like you refuse to get it.

Explain, then. Because nothing I read in that article said anything refuting my point..

No one ever said that EVERY voter in Cali and New York would vote a certain way, but in certain areas of the country many people do hold the same beliefs and vote the same and the EC’s aim is to take power away from them so those in less densely populated areas won’t be drowned out by the big cities. This is not hard to understand. I’ll ask you again a question you didn’t answer a couple posts ago: where did the three million or so votes Hillary got over Trump come from?

They came from voters whose votes didn't matter because of the EC.

WHERE did they come from?

Americans. Pardon the expression.

 

[g5000]

Impeaching Clinton earned the Republicans a Republican Congress and a Republican President in the next election.

Screaming for Obama's impeachment for eight years earned the Republicans a Republican Congress and a Republican President.

The Democrats are just taking a page from the Republican playbook.

And it's been working. They got the House in the mid terms.


Karma's a BITCH!

 

[OldLady]

I was aware of most of the information in that article. I didn't know I would have to recite it in order to point out that if it were a one (wo)man-one vote system, not everyone in the state of California or any other densely populated state would vote the same way.

It’s almost like you refuse to get it.

Explain, then. Because nothing I read in that article said anything refuting my point..

No one ever said that EVERY voter in Cali and New York would vote a certain way, but in certain areas of the country many people do hold the same beliefs and vote the same and the EC’s aim is to take power away from them so those in less densely populated areas won’t be drowned out by the big cities. This is not hard to understand. I’ll ask you again a question you didn’t answer a couple posts ago: where did the three million or so votes Hillary got over Trump come from?

They came from voters whose votes didn't matter because of the EC.

WHERE did they come from?

Oh--you mean what states? That is significant, you think?

 

[Olde Europe]

[...] ya condescending smartass.

Yeah, someone has been caught with his pants down, and didn't like the experience very much. You know it isn't required to advertise that fact, right?

 

[TNHarley]

[...] ya condescending smartass.

Yeah, someone has been caught with his pants down, and didn't like the experience very much. You know it isn't required to advertise that fact, right?

Yea, like you trying to act all smart and shit and correct me when YOU were wrong?
Lol gtfo.

 

[jc456]

Really ????? So you are in denial of the alledged reports we had in the past concerning SS numbers being given to illegals either by employers or individuals so they could operate here under the radar as illegals for cheap labor etc ?? If they were able to secure through such SS numbers or identities stolen in order to be here illegally, then could they not take those identities and numbers and vote with them, and would they vote in favor of the party that keeps it all going ??? I'm just asking questions here.

I'd just like some proof, please. There have been voter fraud investigations before, and I would just like to see where your accusations are shown to be true.

What accusations ?? Mine is a study, and then an assessment of the possibilities of the very way things could have actually been connected or done, even though the elites won't connect the dots for us because they may have been involved in it all.

Well, yeah, it's hard to accuse someone of 'what if'.

Happens in court all the time.. It's called circumstantial evidence. Get enough of it, and things begin to turn.

No, it doesn't. That's bullshit. Circumstantial evidence and idle speculation are not the same things.

you do know that if someone uses someone elses name to vote, the only way to find them is at the time they vote. so, without voter ID laws, that can't happen. and you are against it. why? not one of you says why you are against voter ID for elections.

You’ve insisted others were wrong and refused to look up if what you claimed was even accurate. Your response to the sources I provided you tells me you learned something, yet before you read it you spoke as if you already had that knowledge. That speaks volumes.

The EC was created to balance out the vote and not give too much power to densely populated areas, such as Cali and New York. Thanks to the EC, my vote for Trump didn’t even count since I reside in MN... so shouldn’t that make me an advocate to get rid of it? I trust the system put into place. If the rolls were reversed and Trump had won the popular vote but Hillary took the EC, yes I would feel cheated but I wouldn’t say the whole thing needs to go. I’m mature enough to accept things as they are.

I was aware of most of the information in that article. I didn't know I would have to recite it in order to point out that if it were a one (wo)man-one vote system, not everyone in the state of California or any other densely populated state would vote the same way.

It’s almost like you refuse to get it.

Explain, then. Because nothing I read in that article said anything refuting my point..

No one ever said that EVERY voter in Cali and New York would vote a certain way, but in certain areas of the country many people do hold the same beliefs and vote the same and the EC’s aim is to take power away from them so those in less densely populated areas won’t be drowned out by the big cities. This is not hard to understand. I’ll ask you again a question you didn’t answer a couple posts ago: where did the three million or so votes Hillary got over Trump come from?

They came from voters whose votes didn't matter because of the EC.

so you know, when you vote for someone and your rep loses, your vote didn't matter. You know that right?

 

[Olde Europe]

[...] ya condescending smartass.

Yeah, someone has been caught with his pants down, and didn't like the experience very much. You know it isn't required to advertise that fact, right?

Yea, like you trying to act all smart and shit and correct me when YOU were wrong?
Lol gtfo.

Yeah, dummy, you replaced "radical" with "crazy" - without an explanation in either case - and falsely claimed that GOP votes in the Judiciary Committee would be necessary.

Dems have the votes in the "house" (your expression) to impeach, contrary to your assertion they have not. It isn't even necessary to involve the House Judiciary Committee, but your ignorance is just the sole underpinning of your unjustifiable certainty.

But then, laughing at your own stupidity without realizing it characterizes you well.

 

[Olde Europe]

Oh--you mean what states? That is significant, you think?

They came, about 57,000 on average, from each of the 50 States.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

They really think the states are going to give up the EC

Probably they won't, but a lot of people would welcome it, I think, based on what I've heard here. It's not the weirdest idea in the world, TN.

So you want to give all the power to a couple of states?
While not the weirdest idea it sure is the stupidest.

I didn't actually say if I like the idea or not, but this argument that a couple of states would get all the power seems crazy to me. If the vote were simple majority, like everything else, it would be individual voters, not states, making the decisions. Do you think everyone in certain states votes the same way? Because a state is "red" or "blue" doesn't mean everyone feels that way. Just the majority of those who vote. Maybe if the individual's choice mattered more, more people would vote.
But I don't really care one way or the other. Until the parties start giving us better candidates, it doesn't really matter how the vote is counted.

You'd be giving all the power to a couple of states and thats a fact.
Do you really want the people of Calipornia and New Dork deciding who runs our country?

She doesn’t get it and obviously has never informed herself about the EC and why it exists in the first place. Her words display her ignorance.

She's only been paying attention to politics for three years so I'm really not surprised she's ignorant on the subject.