|
DavidAlltheTime posted:Can someone reverse that so I can use it to pray? Thanks and god bless.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 22:57 |
|
|
# ? May 30, 2024 07:17 |
|
A thing of beauty.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:14 |
|
It's a miracle!
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:20 |
|
Amen.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:24 |
|
"Electors, in an election this important it is crucial for our American democracy that you feel free to vote your conscience and not be bound by the voters in your state. WAIT! NOT YOU GUYS!" Seven faithless electors today, all changed their votes away from Clinton. In Washington Colin Powell got 3 votes and Faith Spotted Eagle got one. http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/four-washington-electors-break-ranks-and-dont-vote-for-clinton/
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:32 |
|
Well, I mean, they're basically invalidating the votes of their electorate by doing so, but I do hope this forces a move to a straight popular vote system cause the electoral college is loving busted.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:43 |
|
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:49 |
|
Kurieg posted:Well, I mean, they're basically invalidating the votes of their electorate by doing so, but I do hope this forces a move to a straight popular vote system cause the electoral college is loving busted. A straight popular vote would be loving busted in different ways. Arrow's theorem, California would become even more important than it is under an electoral system, etc etc. But that's another thread.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2016 23:50 |
|
Kurieg posted:Well, I mean, they're basically invalidating the votes of their electorate by doing so, but I do hope this forces a move to a straight popular vote system cause the electoral college is loving busted. you want proportional representation not a popular vote
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 00:04 |
|
Jose posted:you want proportional representation not a popular vote How about logarithmic representation?
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 00:15 |
|
Beaten, but I'm posting it anyway
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 00:18 |
|
Kurieg posted:Well, I mean, they're basically invalidating the votes of their electorate by doing so, but I do hope this forces a move to a straight popular vote system cause the electoral college is loving busted. Actually the electoral college system is specifically designed to protect the country from the situation where some used car salesman wins the popular vote by going up on stage and promising everyone a million dollars and a mansion and a pony it's just been so perverted that now it does the exact opposite of that
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 01:26 |
|
So the electoral college is fuckin' busted then? I can't really say this is schadenfreude for you guys though cause we're doing a brexit.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 01:38 |
|
The schadenfreude will be when everything is fine under Trump and then he gets reelected.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 01:39 |
Jose posted:you want proportional representation not a popular vote The electoral college tries that. In practice, it gives more votes to depopulated states like Wyoming than the math would actually give them because otherwise they'd get a fraction of a single vote, so conservative rural voters end up with disproportionate representation compared to urban areas. Considering that there's only been 5 instances where the popular vote loser won the electoral vote in all of American history and two of those were 2 of the last 3 presidents, I think we can safely say that throwing out the electoral college won't exactly be a mistake.
|
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 01:52 |
|
Schadenfreude when the Electoral College is abolished. “Ten people have more voting power than two people. Oh the humanity!”
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 01:54 |
|
Why don't you just not have elections? Clearly as a country you don't really deserve them. I know this, because we don't deserve ours either.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 01:59 |
|
chitoryu12 posted:The electoral college tries that. In practice, it gives more votes to depopulated states like Wyoming than the math would actually give them because otherwise they'd get a fraction of a single vote, so conservative rural voters end up with disproportionate representation compared to urban areas. Yes, because disenfranchising the rural vote even more is totally the solution. Look, there were a lot of shitstorms this election; taking action based on rare situations just because you don't like how they turned out rarely goes well (and in actual practice it tends to make things worse, not better). Abolishing the EC isn't the answer unless you have an alternative that performs the intended function better.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 02:10 |
|
orange sky posted:People will do anything to get high, jesus. One of the first replies to the post about it was "No poo poo?"
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 02:23 |
|
orange sky posted:People will do anything to get high, jesus. Or drunk! There was a report just today from Siberia of at least 48 people dying and a bunch being hospitalized from drinking scented bath oil. The label said the bath oil contained 93% ethanol but it turns out it was methanol instead.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 02:32 |
|
This kills the Christ. This also kills the Christ.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 02:40 |
|
What the gently caress is wrong with people. The guy inhaling gasoline needs to read the story of the guy who inhaled gas and duster when he was a teenager, and had never gotten high before, and ended up with brain damage and unable to run. I mean if you do that regularly you're lucky if you have ten years to live.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 02:43 |
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Or drunk! There was a report just today from Siberia of at least 48 people dying and a bunch being hospitalized from drinking scented bath oil. The label said the bath oil contained 93% ethanol but it turns out it was methanol instead. I guess you don't need to use very much of it, but it doesn't seem like you should be putting methanol in your bath.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 02:46 |
|
Here's the huffing kid's trip report (https://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=67325) quote:Hello, I'm a 19 year old male, this experience happened when I was 16 years old, I first got the ideas of inhaling substances from school from some goth kids saying they did in the cafeteria. Me and my friends weren't part of this group of people so I didn't talk to them, but I remember how much the idea of getting 'high' on these would be, I herd them talking about duster and I remember my mom having a can of century duster it was called, I figured this would do the job. Having herd about gas inhaling too I thought 'gently caress it might as well go all out' that thought will haunt me for the rest of my life.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 02:48 |
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Or drunk! There was a report just today from Siberia of at least 48 people dying and a bunch being hospitalized from drinking scented bath oil. The label said the bath oil contained 93% ethanol but it turns out it was methanol instead. There was a story I read a little while ago of some Russian or Ukrainian conscript troops who found some white powder on an abandoned military base in canisters. I can't remember if it was anthrax powder or something radioactive, but either way, the way they decided to deal with it was by checking to see if they would get high by smoking it, and then when they didn't, using it as foot powder. I wish I could find the link because it's loving terrifying.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:00 |
|
https://zippy.gfycat.com/MeaslyDefiniteFly.mp4
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:05 |
|
Sovereign Citizen tries to fight a ticket for an unregistered car, guess the outcome. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN-dU3QcPxA
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:06 |
|
Edit: Nevermind, not going to continue the detail.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:07 |
|
That's a good way to gently caress up your icepack
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:11 |
Aerdan posted:Yes, because disenfranchising the rural vote even more is totally the solution. Look, there were a lot of shitstorms this election; taking action based on rare situations just because you don't like how they turned out rarely goes well (and in actual practice it tends to make things worse, not better). Abolishing the EC isn't the answer unless you have an alternative that performs the intended function better. So you think that removing the electoral college is "disenfranchising the rural vote", but the Electoral College avoids this by making rural voters disproportionately powerful. Do you have any solution that makes everyone truly equal? I personally don't give a poo poo if it "disenfranchises" them, because the whole point is supposed to be that everyone's vote counts equally. The President himself gets to vote in elections, but his vote doesn't count extra. Why should someone be given extra power just because he lives in Bumfuck Nowhere?
|
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:14 |
|
Aerdan posted:Yes, because disenfranchising the rural vote even more is totally the solution. Look, there were a lot of shitstorms this election; taking action based on rare situations just because you don't like how they turned out rarely goes well (and in actual practice it tends to make things worse, not better). Abolishing the EC isn't the answer unless you have an alternative that performs the intended function better. The intended function of the EC was to give slave states the power of their inflated populations without actually letting those pesky slaves vote. I'm ok throwing that intended function out. The winner of the presidential election should be the person who gets the most votes. Maybe we'll even get politicians to pretend to give a poo poo about cities, where most Americans live, every now and then.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:27 |
The real question here is whether states should play any role in the presidential election.
|
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:34 |
|
Data Graham posted:The real question here is whether states should play any role in the presidential election. Yes. If they don’t like the results, they should secede and fire on federal forts.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:38 |
|
zakharov posted:The intended function of the EC was to give slave states the power of their inflated populations without actually letting those pesky slaves vote. I'm ok throwing that intended function out. The winner of the presidential election should be the person who gets the most votes. Maybe we'll even get politicians to pretend to give a poo poo about cities, where most Americans live, every now and then. As it stands right now, as someone who lives in the urban area of a predominantly rural state, the only way to make my vote "count" the way I want it to is to move to a state the holds my values.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 03:49 |
|
Kurieg posted:As it stands right now, as someone who lives in the urban area of a predominantly rural state, the only way to make my vote "count" the way I want it to is to move to a state the holds my values. I live in New York City and I'm effectively disenfranchised in the presidential election. It's great!
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 04:00 |
|
zakharov posted:The intended function of the EC was to give slave states the power of their inflated populations without actually letting those pesky slaves vote. That's what the 3/5ths Compromise was for. zakharov posted:I'm ok throwing that intended function out. The winner of the presidential election should be the person who gets the most votes. Maybe we'll even get politicians to pretend to give a poo poo about cities, where most Americans live, every now and then. Maybe don't support parties who kowtow to Wall Street at the expense of the rest of the country, then. This has nothing to do with the Electoral College. chitoryu12 posted:So you think that removing the electoral college is "disenfranchising the rural vote", but the Electoral College avoids this by making rural voters disproportionately powerful. Do you have any solution that makes everyone truly equal? No. I asked if you had a solution, however, and since you responded with a question, I'm assuming that you don't either. Removing an imperfect system that exists to prevent half the country from running roughshod over the other half is kind of stupid if you don't have an alternative that performs that function better. chitoryu12 posted:I personally don't give a poo poo if it "disenfranchises" them, because the whole point is supposed to be that everyone's vote counts equally. The President himself gets to vote in elections, but his vote doesn't count extra. Why should someone be given extra power just because he lives in Bumfuck Nowhere? Wow. Yeah. Let's completely ignore minority viewpoints just because the majority disagrees with them. That's totally not a major issue facing America or anything...
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 04:00 |
|
Everyone feels ignored when their candidate doesn't win. It happened with Obama and now trump and shall continue until the heat death of the universe.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 04:04 |
|
Aerdan posted:Wow. Yeah. Let's completely ignore minority viewpoints just because the majority disagrees with them. That's totally not a major issue facing America or anything... The minority viewpoint of "i want it to be the 1950s again" should be ignored.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 04:05 |
|
bush made amends by writing me a 600$ check under the guise of economic stimulus. if trump can even match half of that ill be happy enough
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 04:09 |
|
|
# ? May 30, 2024 07:17 |
|
The 3/5 compromise and the EC were closely related. Southern states get their representation inflated, get more electoral votes, ta-da! It's also tied into the longstanding (and stupid) American myth of rural people as Real Americans and city dwellers as the other.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2016 04:11 |