New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

How Small of a Minority could Win the Electoral College?

Didn't say any one group of Americans was more important than another. Said that ALL regions of the country should have a voice.
Regions don't have interests. The people inside those regions have interests. Regions don't vote, the people living inside them have interests.
What part of Greater LA and the NYC metro region would effectively silence the rest of the country in presidential elections for the foreseeable future are y'all not getting? You know it's true. You know what the result would be. Wish you'd all stop defending your partisanship with disingenuous appeals to fairness.
First there are democrats literally everywhere. They don't just reside in New York and LA.
And secondly every new yorkers vote would be equally as important as a rural american. Regions don't vote, people do. We should stop pretending that someplace with 100 people is as important as some place with 100,000 people. The places are what matter, its the people that matter.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Probably because the House is stonewalling him from enforcing the law. And the Clinton appointed judges are keeping him from enforcing the law.

There's no way Democrats could win California without illegal aliens. That place is the Haiti of America. A real shithole.
How is the House of Representatives keeping Trump from enforcing the law on illegal immigrants voting?
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Didn't say any one group of Americans was more important than another. Said that ALL regions of the country should have a voice.
What part of Greater LA and the NYC metro region would effectively silence the rest of the country in presidential elections for the foreseeable future are y'all not getting? You know it's true. You know what the result would be. Wish you'd all stop defending your partisanship with disingenuous appeals to fairness.
How many voters do you think voted democrat in LA or NYC? Was it more than 60 million? Was it a million?

Trump won Pa, Michigan and Wisconsin by less than 1% in each state. Somehow you equate that to a state having a voice. It gets even worse when you consider just how many people voted.

There are 8.5 million registered voters in a population of 12.8 million people. Trump got 2.9 million votes, but you pretend that the 25% of the population spoke for all the rest and therefore got 100% of the 20 electors.
 

Emily

NSDAP Kanzler
Regions don't have interests. The people inside those regions have interests. Regions don't vote, the people living inside them have interests.
Regions don't vote, people do.
Word games. You know what I meant.

there are democrats literally everywhere. They don't just reside in New York and LA.
Enough Democrats reside in the LA and NYC regions that, in a two-way election determined by popular vote, the Democrat will always win. You know that.

We should stop pretending that someplace with 100 people is as important as some place with 100,000 people.
Nothing in our present system makes small population centers as important as large population centers. The present system allows small population centers to have an impact on the outcome. You know that. The majority of people in the smaller population centers don't always vote the way you want them to; the majority in the large ones always do. Your desire is to effectively disenfranchise those who don't always vote as you want them to.

We were never supposed to be voting for the POTUS in the first place. The foolishness of doing so is plainly apparent.
 
Word games. You know what I meant.


Enough Democrats reside in the LA and NYC regions that, in a two-way election determined by popular vote, the Democrat will always win. You know that.


Nothing in our present system makes small population centers as important as large population centers. The present system allows small population centers to have an impact on the outcome. You know that. The majority of people in the smaller population centers don't always vote the way you want them to; the majority in the large ones always do. Your desire is to effectively disenfranchise those who don't always vote as you want them to.

We were never supposed to be voting for the POTUS in the first place. The foolishness of doing so is plainly apparent.
geographic location shouldn't make people's vote more important than others.
One person, one vote, no matter where you live.
 

EatTheRich

President
Absolutely it does. The number of electoral votes is reflected by the total number of U.S. representatives and senators a state has. The two are directly intertwined.....and ONCE AGAIN was a compromise between large states and small states to give large states more say but once again to assure small states have A say. Educate yourself, pea brain:

https://verdict.justia.com/2016/12/05/electoral-college-works-fine-just

Better yet, take a good look at this map:




This is called "broad appeal". Any questions?
Yes, why is appealing to big, almost empty sections of the countryside where a small, homogeneous population lives considered broader appeal than appealing to the diverse majority that lives in the cities?
 

EatTheRich

President
But not nearly as nasty as all that left wing feces and needles in the streets of your left wing cities. Or as nasty as your pandering to the policies that created it. Facts suck, don't they?






And dirt poor left wingers living on the streets, defecating on the sidewalks, and unable to meet the necessities of life is what you get from these policies. And if having slums that rival the worst in the world makes California "the greatest state in the union" our country is f-cked. Fortunately, people actually have jobs, don't live on welfare, have very few homeless, and no feces on the streets. They are called red states.

:D




It's not "THE PEOPLE". It's the one percenters. They don't represent California's poverty, homeless, and destitute who make up millions of the people in the state. That left wing trash is "THE PEOPLE" in that shithole. The one percenters trend Republican over the general population. The homeless and welfare moochers? Trend democrat. Facts matter.






They don't have "budget shortfalls" in red states my low IQ left winger.

The top five most fiscally solvent states are Nebraska (#1), South Dakota (#2), Tennessee (#3), Florida (#4), and Oklahoma (#5).

The bottom five states in terms of fiscal solvency are Kentucky (#46), Massachusetts (#47), New Jersey (#48), Connecticut (#49), and Illinois (#50).

https://www.mercatus.org/statefiscalrankings

We'll explain this to you again because your low IQ can't figure it out. Red states are more financially sound. And they do it by running with lower taxes. How? They don't have ridiculous welfare systems that reward the lazy. They don't pander social services to help criminal illegal aliens. People in red states work. They don't live in poverty. They don't commit crime. They are taxed lightly which increases quality of life. And government services are only for the necessities. Excess and abuses are not tolerated. There aren't millions of homeless [Unwelcome language removed] on the streets, poverty stricken slums, etc.


You're dismissed to go clean up shit in your streets by your disgusting part of the electorate.

Lulz
Well, it’s the one percenters who control the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, and every government in the U.S. So if the masses are suffering they are responsible.

Red states have higher rates of welfare use than the national average. They are more reliant on aid from Washington. They have higher poverty rates. 97% of the poorest counties in the U.S. are in red states. Red states have higher crime rates.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jul/29/facebook-posts/are-97-nations-100-poorest-counties-red-states/
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/
https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theroot.com/republicans-control-the-poorest-states-democrats-contr-1829948803/amp
https://editions.lib.umn.edu/smartpolitics/2009/09/16/red-states-have-higher-crime-r/
 

EatTheRich

President
Didn't say any one group of Americans was more important than another. Said that ALL regions of the country should have a voice.
What part of Greater LA and the NYC metro region would effectively silence the rest of the country in presidential elections for the foreseeable future are y'all not getting? You know it's true. You know what the result would be. Wish you'd all stop defending your partisanship with disingenuous appeals to fairness.
No, it’s not even close to true. Collectively they have barely 10% of the voting population.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Word games. You know what I meant.


Enough Democrats reside in the LA and NYC regions that, in a two-way election determined by popular vote, the Democrat will always win. You know that.


Nothing in our present system makes small population centers as important as large population centers. The present system allows small population centers to have an impact on the outcome. You know that. The majority of people in the smaller population centers don't always vote the way you want them to; the majority in the large ones always do. Your desire is to effectively disenfranchise those who don't always vote as you want them to.

We were never supposed to be voting for the POTUS in the first place. The foolishness of doing so is plainly apparent.
Again...how many democrats do you think live in LA and NYC? Over 120 million people voted in 2016. Do a majority of them live in cities? No. It is a slim majority (3 million) who voted for Clinton over Trump.

How that becomes a mob rule environment is beyond me. Why do you think no other election is done with an Electoral College kind of deal? Why don't we elect governors that way? Each Zip code gets one elector. How about senators? Is it fair that 100,000 voters in Denver can decide who the senator is and just ignore the 9o,000 voters who live in the eastern plains? How about 1 elector for every 10,000 square miles.

Or maybe the point is that every single voter has interests and if they care about elections they vote those interests. In some cases their interests are the same as voters in LA or NYC and sometimes they aren't....SO WHAT!
 

EatTheRich

President
Again...how many democrats do you think live in LA and NYC? Over 120 million people voted in 2016. Do a majority of them live in cities? No. It is a slim majority (3 million) who voted for Clinton over Trump.

How that becomes a mob rule environment is beyond me. Why do you think no other election is done with an Electoral College kind of deal? Why don't we elect governors that way? Each Zip code gets one elector. How about senators? Is it fair that 100,000 voters in Denver can decide who the senator is and just ignore the 9o,000 voters who live in the eastern plains? How about 1 elector for every 10,000 square miles.

Or maybe the point is that every single voter has interests and if they care about elections they vote those interests. In some cases their interests are the same as voters in LA or NYC and sometimes they aren't....SO WHAT!
To many conservatives, “LA and NYC” is code for Blacks, Latinos, Jews, Asians, and gays. Who must be silenced by any means necessary.
 

Spamature

President
But not nearly as nasty as all that left wing feces and needles in the streets of your left wing cities. Or as nasty as your pandering to the policies that created it. Facts suck, don't they?
Excuse me ? Right wing policies created the opiate epidemic and it is THE WORST in Republican Trump voting states. The map I posted shows you that.




And dirt poor left wingers living on the streets, defecating on the sidewalks, and unable to meet the necessities of life is what you get from these policies. And if having slums that rival the worst in the world makes California "the greatest state in the union" our country is f-cked. Fortunately, people actually have jobs, don't live on welfare, have very few homeless, and no feces on the streets. They are called red states.
Let make that poverty you speak of relative.



You noted NY and Hawaii having higher rate. I suppose you'd call those great states shite holes too. Now take your tiny mind and try to figure out exactly why it might be that is is easier to become homeless in these states than it is in the right wing rabble states where the Calif minimum wage gets you a place that would cost about $3000+/ month if you are lucky in LA.




It's not "THE PEOPLE". It's the one percenters. They don't represent California's poverty, homeless, and destitute who make up millions of the people in the state. That left wing trash is "THE PEOPLE" in that shithole. The one percenters trend Republican over the general population. The homeless and welfare moochers? Trend democrat. Facts matter.
Look the fact that the GOP is famous for sucking **** for political donations from the wealthy is well known. Sure a lot of ultra people love to put your party on their knees and have their knob gobbled while the mindless rabble rounding out the vast majority in that party sucks down mayonnaise sandwiches after a hard day scratching in the dirt in red states. While the party leaders laugh at them behind their backs for buying into their hokum the way you have bought into it.

But that is not the case here.

upload_2019-7-12_11-29-10.png

I hope this put your ****ing LIE to rest and you quit repeating it.


The top five most fiscally solvent states are Nebraska (#1), South Dakota (#2), Tennessee (#3), Florida (#4), and Oklahoma (#5).

The bottom five states in terms of fiscal solvency are Kentucky (#46), Massachusetts (#47), New Jersey (#48), Connecticut (#49), and Illinois (#50).

https://www.mercatus.org/statefiscalrankings

We'll explain this to you again because your low IQ can't figure it out. Red states are more financially sound. And they do it by running with lower taxes. How? They don't have ridiculous welfare systems that reward the lazy. They don't pander social services to help criminal illegal aliens. People in red states work. They don't live in poverty. They don't commit crime. They are taxed lightly which increases quality of life. And government services are only for the necessities. Excess and abuses are not tolerated. There aren't millions of homeless [Unwelcome language removed] on the streets, poverty stricken slums, etc.
They don't have "budget shortfalls" in red states my low IQ left winger.
They barely have budgets. What is there to pay for in SD and NB ? Wind blown rocks and mind numbing vast emptiness ? Also You could add all of those state budget together and they wouldn't equal Calif 's. I just showed you, you magnificent genius, that California has a $21 billion surplus.

Quality of life ?

The top 13 most polluted states are RED

Bottom 10 state for healthcare are RED

In fact the bottom states period are all RED


Also those illegal aliens work harder than any two red staters put together. Just look what happen to the harvest when some of your red state idiots try to drive them off. They couldn't find locals who would do that backbreaking labor.

You're dismissed to go clean up shit in your streets by your disgusting part of the electorate.
This was another beat down on clown town.
Thanks for the opportunity to hand it out.

Lulz
 
Last edited:

kaz

Small l libertarian
geographic location shouldn't make people's vote more important than others.
One person, one vote, no matter where you live.
Why didn't the founding fathers do it that way? You don't know, do you?

Learning how our system works and explaining why you think it should change in the context of how it works would be a lot more effective than spouting off inane political rhetoric.

I'll give you a hint. You believe in a central government. You believe States are lines on maps and it'd be cool one day to be in every one. That isn't what the Founding Fathers thought. What did the founding fathers think of that?
 

kaz

Small l libertarian
Regions don't have interests. The people inside those regions have interests. Regions don't vote, the people living inside them have interests
And you're making your arguments based on an unstated assumption about the nature of government. The founding fathers did not share that assumption. What is that assumption you are making? What was the assumption of the founding fathers? You don't know, do you?
 
Why didn't the founding fathers do it that way? You don't know, do you?

Learning how our system works and explaining why you think it should change in the context of how it works would be a lot more effective than spouting off inane political rhetoric.

I'll give you a hint. You believe in a central government. You believe States are lines on maps and it'd be cool one day to be in every one. That isn't what the Founding Fathers thought. What did the founding fathers think of that?
They also thought black be should count as 3/5 a person. It really doesn't matter why they thought it a black person was 3/5 of a person or why they thought rural voters were more important than urban ones, what they thought was wrong and it should be fixed.
 
And you're making your arguments based on an unstated assumption about the nature of government. The founding fathers did not share that assumption. What is that assumption you are making? What was the assumption of the founding fathers? You don't know, do you?
You seem to think they were infallible. They were not, they were at least smart enough to know that which is why they gave us a system for amending the constitution and fixing their dumbass mistakes.
 

kaz

Small l libertarian
They also thought black be should count as 3/5 a person. It really doesn't matter why they thought it a black person was 3/5 of a person or why they thought rural voters were more important than urban ones, what they thought was wrong and it should be fixed.
I'm just laughing my ass off. You don't know anything about history other than what fake news spoon fed you.

Yeah, when the founding fathers sat down and designed our government, they did it based on how to count black people. That's as much as you understand, isn't it?

Seriously, you were obviously government educated, as if they educate you in government schools. Don't you want more for your kids than the shitty non-education you got in government schools? All you learned to do is like Christian schools do to their kids. They learned to love Jesus, you learned to love government. What kind of education is that?
 

kaz

Small l libertarian
You seem to think they were infallible. They were not, they were at least smart enough to know that which is why they gave us a system for amending the constitution and fixing their dumbass mistakes.
Kaz: You don't know the principles the founding fathers used in designing the country

ObamacareForever: Oh, that means you think they are infallable!!!!

That's just stupid. It's a non-sequitur on multiple levels.

I asked you why they created a House and Senate the way they did, and you don't know. You have a vague idea about the House and none at all about the Senate. The rest is you deflecting, running and hiding.

What were they trying to do?
 

kaz

Small l libertarian
You seem to think they were infallible. They were not, they were at least smart enough to know that which is why they gave us a system for amending the constitution and fixing their dumbass mistakes.
I'm taking off for a week of vacation now and I'm sure not delaying it for you. So I'll tell you the answer.

You believe in a central government where the Federal government has all the power. States only have the powers the Federal government decides to allow them to have. If one accepts your assumption, your arguments are reasonable.

However, that isn't the principle our government was founded on. We were founded on distributed government. Most power was to be held by the States. The Federal government provided defense. Most government should be local.

The feds were balanced. The House based on population, the Senate by number of States. Either can block the other. It was to limit Federal power for the States.

It's incredible you don't know any of this. What did you do during civics class in high school? Anyway, for now, see ya!
 
Top