silentbob Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 Someone gave him ice cream and diet cokes for bed, and now he’ll be up all night tweeting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osxmatt Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 6 hours ago, Jason said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osxmatt Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBladeRoden Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 Obama: I can't believe I'm no longer in office and he still complains about me. Hillary: I can't believe I lost to him and not running again and he still complains about me. McCain's Ghost: Hold my beer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaladinSolo Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 37 minutes ago, osxmatt said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewhyteboar Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 36 minutes ago, osxmatt said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaladinSolo Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 Just one though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatGamble Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 9 hours ago, Jason said: One thing I’m against is getting rid of the electoral college. It gives too much power to high population states. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 18 minutes ago, TheGreatGamble said: One thing I’m against is getting rid of the electoral college. It gives too much power to high population states. How dare the majority not want to be ruled by a tyranny of the minority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatGamble Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 3 minutes ago, Jason said: How dare the majority not want to be ruled by a tyranny of the minority. Man, we have states looking to circumvent the will of their state by giving out electorate to the nationwide winner instead of the states winner. It’s disgusting. the electoral college stops states like NY and Cali from making decisions for smaller states. That’s a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amazatron Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 4 minutes ago, TheGreatGamble said: Man, we have states looking to circumvent the will of their state by giving out electorate to the nationwide winner instead of the states winner. It’s disgusting. the electoral college stops states like NY and Cali from making decisions for smaller states. That’s a good thing. Why should my vote in California be worth jack shit compared to someone in North Dakota? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 9 minutes ago, TheGreatGamble said: Man, we have states looking to circumvent the will of their state by giving out electorate to the nationwide winner instead of the states winner. It’s disgusting. the electoral college stops states like NY and Cali from making decisions for smaller states. That’s a good thing. The electoral college wasn't designed to do that. With the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929, the House and thus the EC would have kept expanding. https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1901-1950/The-Permanent-Apportionment-Act-of-1929/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatGamble Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 4 minutes ago, Amazatron said: Why should my vote in California be worth jack shit compared to someone in North Dakota? Your vote isn’t worth less. It’s as important as any other vote in your state. The electoral college was created so rich states couldn’t rule over poorer/less populated ones. We shouldn’t have to change the electoral process because democrats are mad they didn’t win. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 12 minutes ago, TheGreatGamble said: Your vote isn’t worth less. Yes it is. All 577,737 people in Wyoming get one representative and they have 1 EV per 192,579 people. California has 746,000 people per representative and 719,000 per EV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osxmatt Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 53 minutes ago, TheGreatGamble said: One thing I’m against is getting rid of the electoral college. It gives too much power to high population states. Are you also for electoral voting in state and local elections? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marioandsonic Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 10 hours ago, Jason said: I like how the party that believes a 16 year old is responsible enough to own and use a gun also lacks the mental capacity to vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 1 hour ago, TheGreatGamble said: One thing I’m against is getting rid of the electoral college. It gives too much power to high population states. As opposed to a small list of low-population states? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 1 hour ago, TheGreatGamble said: One thing I’m against is getting rid of the electoral college. It gives too much power to high population states. Wrong. It makes only a half dozen states as important rather than the whole country. Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are all high population states that get disproportionate attention because the state populations are “swingy” 23 minutes ago, TheGreatGamble said: Your vote isn’t worth less. It’s as important as any other vote in your state. The electoral college was created so rich states couldn’t rule over poorer/less populated ones. We shouldn’t have to change the electoral process because democrats are mad they didn’t win. Wrong again. The EC as conceived is wholly different than what we have in practice. What it was made for was that elites from each state would select the president, and giving slave states disproportionate influence due to the 3/5 “compromise”. After the election of Thomas Jefferson laws were passed that essentially mandated that electors vote in accordance with the “popular” vote of their state. And and the entire premise of a popular vote “will neglect small states” is pure bunk. Right now, a Democrat can write off campaigning in Mississippi, despite the heavy influence of African Americans in the party and within that state, but since 100% of the electoral votes from MS go to the state winner (read: the republican) Democrat’s don’t campaign there. Under a national popular vote, dollars go further in smaller, less populated states when it comes to campaigning and get out the vote operations. And since it’s a national campaign, you want to get votes from everywhere you can, you can’t afford to neglect 35 states as you do now. A simple examination of governor races in big states like NY and CA (18% of the population in total btw) shows this—you can only get so many votes from big cities. Why does Andrew cuomo campaign upstate when NYC can carry him to victory? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaladinSolo Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 The only time abolishing the EC has fallen below 60% support is when its benefitted the GOP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaysWho? Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 People talk about "big states" like they're a living thing, some dog that's running around doing shit. A state is something we made up with borders we made up. If I live in New York, I'm a "big state making decisions for a smaller state." If I move to Kansas, I didn't change; I just moved to Kansas and I will have the same politics. They're just imagined borders with a bunch of people living there; there's not some underground creature zapping tentacles in our brains, making us "big state" or "small state" humans. Which is why it's irrelevant what state I'm in; it should be one person, one vote. The small states already have everything geared toward them anyway. Senate? They have the same amount of Senators as big states. House? Gerrymandered as all fuck, giving Republicans more power than they would have otherwise (look at what happened in Pennsylvania once that joke of a map was struck down as to how well Republicans could actually hold, and then look at Wisconsin's state legislature). Presidency? Votes count for more in small states. What more does the world owe them? We also didn't have a billion small states with nobody living in them when the country was founded. Why are there two Dakotas? Why Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma? Why Idaho and Wyoming? A bunch of states, some of which can be combined, have 14 Senators because someone decided we needed all of them to be shaped like that and that they would all be different states. Also, it's not as if big states/small states vote much differently anyway. The GOP Senators in Texas and Georgia vote pretty damn similar to the ones in Wyoming, Idaho and Nebraska. Votes are primarily driven by party, not by state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 10 minutes ago, SaysWho? said: People talk about "big states" like they're a living thing, some dog that's running around doing shit. A state is something we made up with borders we made up. If I live in New York, I'm a "big state making decisions for a smaller state." If I move to Kansas, I didn't change; I just moved to Kansas and I will have the same politics. They're just imagined borders with a bunch of people living there; there's not some underground creature zapping tentacles in our brains, making us "big state" or "small state" humans. Which is why it's irrelevant what state I'm in; it should be one person, one vote. The small states already have everything geared toward them anyway. Senate? They have the same amount of Senators as big states. House? Gerrymandered as all fuck, giving Republicans more power than they would have otherwise (look at what happened in Pennsylvania once that joke of a map was struck down as to how well Republicans could actually hold, and then look at Wisconsin's state legislature). Presidency? Votes count for more in small states. What more does the world owe them? We also didn't have a billion small states with nobody living in them when the country was founded. Why are there two Dakotas? Why Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma? Why Idaho and Wyoming? A bunch of states, some of which can be combined, have 14 Senators because someone decided we needed all of them to be shaped like that and that they would all be different states. Also, it's not as if big states/small states vote much differently anyway. The GOP Senators in Texas and Georgia vote pretty damn similar to the ones in Wyoming, Idaho and Nebraska. Votes are primarily driven by party, not by state. As I said above, the House was originally meant to keep growing as the population increased, which would have also meant that a state's electoral votes would have kept going up as its population went up—meaning that the system was not intended to weight anywhere near as heavily in favor of smaller states as it presently does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema- Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 Without an electoral college states don’t speak with one voice. 2 million votes in New York for a republican are still 2 million votes. Without an EC, in fact, people that haven’t been represented start to count instead of being ignored like they are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osxmatt Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 More dunking on the dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaladinSolo Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littleronin Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 3 minutes ago, PaladinSolo said: To Trump's defense, he thinks he speaks to dead soldiers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chairslinger Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 Doesn't Trump get any credit for remembering not to call him John McWar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 41 minutes ago, Chairslinger said: Doesn't Trump get any credit for remembering not to call him John McWar? Mr. John McCain's Daughter's Father Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osxmatt Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, Jason said: My favorite part about that piece of paper is it showed two graphics. One of the locations ISIS controlled when he took office, and one of the locations ISIS controlled now. One the graphic that showed now, there was a small sliver of red, showing ISIS controlled location, but he said that will be "gone by tonight." There were a solid two months of his campaign where his entire platform was "not telegraphing our military decisions." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSoxFan9 Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 The McCains deserve the abuse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted March 20, 2019 Author Share Posted March 20, 2019 12 minutes ago, osxmatt said: There were a solid two months of his campaign where his entire platform was "not telegraphing our military decisions." I'm like 99.9% certain those black sharpie lines are covering up the classification markings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jwheel86 Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 8 hours ago, TheGreatGamble said: One thing I’m against is getting rid of the electoral college. It gives too much power to high population states. 11 out of 50 dates = 270. This map isn't crazy for the democrats in a decade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarSolo Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 8 hours ago, TheGreatGamble said: Your vote isn’t worth less. It’s as important as any other vote in your state. The electoral college was created so rich states couldn’t rule over poorer/less populated ones. We shouldn’t have to change the electoral process because democrats are mad they didn’t win. Meanwhile, a bunch of shit hole red neck states are ruling over rich states. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 14 minutes ago, MarSolo said: Meanwhile, a bunch of shit hole red neck states are ruling over rich states. Isn't that a good thing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.