Raoul_Luke
"Wait, it's all Marxism?" "Always has been."
LOL! You certainly have the propaganda needed to maintain the intellectual viability of communism down pat.
Trump's script
- Thread starter middleview
- Start date
LOL! You certainly have the propaganda needed to maintain the intellectual viability of communism down pat.
Raoul_Luke
"Wait, it's all Marxism?" "Always has been."
Tell that to the people leaving California, Illinois and New York in droves. Sometimes "the majority" is wrong. Any system that impedes their ability to cram an idiotic agenda down everyone's throats is a pretty good one, in my view.
Yeah...that's a great excuse for a convoluted system that makes the presidential election matter only in battleground states.
Raoul_Luke
"Wait, it's all Marxism?" "Always has been."
All it does is even the plying field in a way wholly consistent with the vision of our founders. You know, the guys you think are a bunch of racist, misogynous and misguided losers...
The EC is not what they designed.
Raoul_Luke
"Wait, it's all Marxism?" "Always has been."
I didn't say they did. You have a bad habit of putting words in my mouth. I said it was "wholly consistent with the vision of our founders." Period.
It bridges the gap between the house (population based) and senate (state based) by combining aspects of both. It could not be more fair within the parameters of our governing documents, and is quite a brilliant construct, when you think about it.
do you feel attacked when it is pointed out to you that you and your fellow Trumpies are led by a megalomanical moron who can't seem to figure out that he isn't as smart as the generals and doesn't know as much as the doctors and still thinks windmills cause cancer. He gets his information from One America News or InfoWars or Sean Hannity and that, all by itself, should shake your confidence in the guy...but doesn't.
You've surrounded yourself with anti-American right wingers...am I right?
EatTheRich
President
The historical reality: Stalin institutes his apparatus of repression largely to purge the Communist Party of, well, communists and facilitate his anti-communist course. Over 80% of pre-1917 members of the party are kicked out and the leaders systematically killed.
The Stalinist regime is perforce weakened (so-called destalinization) in the wake of the defeat of Nazi Germany and the establishment of socialist regimes in E. Europe, N. Korea, and China, i.e., when the revolution ceases to retreat and begins again to advance.
Putin revives the dictatorship in a much harder form, first to facilitate the restoration of capitalism and then to maintain the capitalist regime.
Meanwhile, in China, protesters singing “The East is Red” are massacred at Tiananmen Square to clear the way for Deng Xiaoping’s pro-capitalist reforms.
How odd....why did you accuse me of putting words in your mouth. I pointed out a fact. The EC had been changed substantially in about 1836. It was redesigned to make political parties more powerful.
A couple of facts.
1. The number of electors is not based on the number of voters. It actually counts the number of illegal immigrants as well as people too young to vote or people not permitted to vote.
2. The number of electors awarded to a candidate does not reflect the number of votes cast for that candidate. Explain the logic of pretending that counts votes against as if they were votes for.
3. Most states are considered one party states. The minority voters in that state might as well stay home. Republicans in New York, Democrats in Texas...don't waste your time. Do you think the founders would actually be in favor of vote suppression?
The EC and popular vote have been in agreement for all but 2 elections in the last 100 years. You now think that the 80,000 voters in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania were smarter than the three million voters in the other 47 states who voted for Clinton?
EatTheRich
President
In other words, it reduces the power of the individual (compared with majority rule) and increases the power of the state. Mazel tov!
Raoul_Luke
"Wait, it's all Marxism?" "Always has been."
1. Same goes for the House
2. Same goes for the Senate
3. I think they would recoil in horror at the prospect of a popularity contest determining the POTUS
Yes (obviously).
2. Same goes for the Senate
3. I think they would recoil in horror at the prospect of a popularity contest determining the POTUS
Yes (obviously).
Raoul_Luke
"Wait, it's all Marxism?" "Always has been."
It reduces the power of the mob, and increases the power of the minority. The "state" is simply the instrument the voters use to effect their desired outcomes. Simple majority rule increases the power of the state because it never needs to answer to the minority. See any major city, New Jersey, Illinois, etc. for reference. I'm certainly not surprised you are trying to gaslight us about what, in fact, "majority rule" means, but I wonder why you would think anyone without shit for brains would buy the propaganda you are pushing here.
So you seem to think that the individual republican voter in California has more of a say in who is elected president because of the electoral college?
Actually, Trump thinks he doesn't have to answer to the majority, as long as he can play the EC math game. The only states that matter will be the battleground states...
If you're a republican in New York...stay home. A Democrat in Texas, don't waste your time. Your votes don't count...same is true of about 40 one party states.
The founders actually set up the EC so that you'd vote for "respected" members of your community to travel to the capitol and cast a vote for president. You weren't even actually supposed to vote for the president and probably wouldn't even know who the candidates were. You were supposed to trust those electors. Of course that didn't work all that well and the system was changed dramatically in 1836...which gave tremendous power to the political parties, because they chose the electors.
Face it...elections are popularity contests. We have had better candidates that nobody knew and therefore dropped out early. I had a beer with Wesley Clark, who I'd have supported for president. He said the skills you need to get the job have nothing to do with the skills you need to do the job.
By the way....every state gets two senators, population has nothing to do with it.
EatTheRich
President
Texas might be in play this time.
Raoul_Luke
"Wait, it's all Marxism?" "Always has been."
LOL!
I think no such thing. I haven't given a glancing thought to republican voters in California. They should move.
As if the democrats would give a, well, glancing thought to the republicans if the system was 100% majority rule.
So what? They should move.
Raoul_Luke
"Wait, it's all Marxism?" "Always has been."
Yes, you're right. The founders were quite wary of "majority rule." Which, of course, is why they put the "respected members of your community" in the role of electors.
The EC "electors" routinely thwart the will of the voters they represent? Do you have any evidence of that?
I supported Wesley Clark's campaign. I think he probably would have been a pretty good POTUS. Joe Biden, for the record, is no Wesley Clark.
