|
Panzeh posted:Im not sure the rural population is any better. People are people. 1 person, one vote. I hope thats not too radical for you. Lol, 1 person 1 vote, okay the whites all vote to ship the blacks to Africa now what
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:24 |
|
|
Mordor She Wrote posted:Oh boy, national policy should totally be dictated by groups of people that totally believe any day now, those manufacturing jobs were you walk in with a firm handshake and have a job for life are going to come back. They should at least have their problems addressed instead of sneered at by elites and their cocksucking lackeys and the EC assured that's going to happen. Working as intended. No change needed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
Mordor She Wrote posted:I took think people living in Viola Wisconsin should have a more representative vote than someone living in the most populated, economically strong, and educated areas. Some how a black man with a funny name got these rural Wisconsin racists to vote for him. I wonder how???
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Toadvine posted:consistently downtrodden groups can be manipulated by greedy types to act against their own best interests They are innately bigoted and mislead, and choose to be mislead, want to be mislead and only want to deal with people who mislead them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:Lol, 1 person 1 vote, okay the whites all vote to ship the blacks to Africa now what Well you see I only mean 1 person 1 vote when it personally benefits me and all those other protections against mob rule that I like should stay in place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Mordor She Wrote posted:They are innately bigoted and mislead, and choose to be mislead, want to be mislead and only want to deal with people who mislead them. But enough about the Democrats and their voters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
Mordor She Wrote posted:They are innately bigoted and mislead, and choose to be mislead, want to be mislead and only want to deal with people who mislead them. You seem like team progressive but who exactlY are you trying to help if you think half of voting America is immune to progress?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:They should at least have their problems addressed instead of sneered at by elites and their cocksucking lackeys and the EC assured that's going to happen. Working as intended. No change needed. Their concerns were addressed during the election "those jobs are never coming back, how about cheaper education?". Meanwhile Trump said those jobs will be bigly and everyone voted for the retarded option. So that's why their concerns shouldn't matter, because they can't accept reality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
Toadvine posted:You seem like team progressive but who exactlY are you trying to help if you think half of voting America is immune to progress? the other half that didn't choose to shoot themselves in the foot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:41
|
|
|
Mordor She Wrote posted:Their concerns were addressed during the election "those jobs are never coming back, how about cheaper education?". Meanwhile Trump said those jobs will be bigly and everyone voted for the retarded option. So that's why their concerns shouldn't matter, because they can't accept reality. trump won and you're still raging about the poopular vote maybe you should accept reality 
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:41
|
|
|
Mordor She Wrote posted:Their concerns were addressed during the election "those jobs are never coming back, how about cheaper education?". Meanwhile Trump said those jobs will be bigly and everyone voted for the retarded option. So that's why their concerns shouldn't matter, because they can't accept reality. Who can guess why they voted against the party that told them "tough poo poo, maybe your kids will have cheaper school" when they are dying of poverty and addiction?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
Mordor She Wrote posted:the other half that didn't choose to shoot themselves in the foot. I hate to break this to you, but the only people who shot themselves more in the foot this time around than the Trumpsters are the DNC.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
Mordor She Wrote posted:Their concerns were addressed during the election "those jobs are never coming back, how about cheaper education?". Meanwhile Trump said those jobs will be bigly and everyone voted for the retarded option. So that's why their concerns shouldn't matter, because they can't accept reality. This is a failure of the democrats to craft a persuasive message and you're blaming the public for not being persuaded. Politics is funny that way, you gotta convince people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:Who can guess why they voted against the party that told them "tough poo poo, maybe your kids will have cheaper school" when they are dying of poverty and addiction? Well now they'll die of poverty and addiction and so will their kids and they won't even have a chance for a decent education, so I guess the Republicans have their voting base set for the next century.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:Lol, 1 person 1 vote, okay the whites all vote to ship the blacks to Africa now what Thats kind of a ridiculous argument because the intended counter to mob rule was a voter property qualification. Do you think some people should have more votes than others?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
The plight of people stupid enough to want more jobs should be ignored. More jobs to make more crap for more people to buy is what got America an addict mentality, swapping that for heroin is just the free market in action.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
A voting system would ideally represent the actual distribution of power. It was created so instead of people going to war to determine who gets what, they would instead count how much power everyone has and predict what would happen if a war took place and then just skip the war and go straight to the aftermath of the hypothetical war. This way there is less death and destruction. So the ideal voting system for a given scenario depends on the power of the different factions. For example if the city folks outnumbered the rural folks 1000:1, but the city folks only had pistols, while the rural folks had nukes, then the ideal voting system would put most of the power in the hands of the rural folks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
The idea of the pro-trump crowd for the left is that they should surrender and help trump which is really dumb.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Thats kind of a ridiculous argument because the intended counter to mob rule was a voter property qualification. It's not 1 vote per person, that's majority rule which is unstable. Dude if you want it like that we should switch the UN to a popular vote so the world will be run by India and China and gently caress places like Sweden. Do you see how loving stupid that is
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
Anyone who is pro-popular vote should tell me why it would be smart to have the UN decided by China and India's population and how that might gently caress things up immensely
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:Lol, 1 person 1 vote, okay the whites all vote to ship the blacks to Africa now what u become thankful u dont' live ina democracy more like democrazy haha nice
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
qkkl posted:A voting system would ideally represent the actual distribution of power. It was created so instead of people going to war to determine who gets what, they would instead count how much power everyone has and predict what would happen if a war took place and then just skip the war and go straight to the aftermath of the hypothetical war. This way there is less death and destruction. So the ideal voting system for a given scenario depends on the power of the different factions. For example if the city folks outnumbered the rural folks 1000:1, but the city folks only had pistols, while the rural folks had nukes, then the ideal voting system would put most of the power in the hands of the rural folks. wow thanks 4 copypasting my fallout 4 review on steam
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
Honestly the hope is that you diversify the rural areas by developing industries there. If you create jobs in the rural areas, people of all colors will move there and the electoral college won't seem so wacky
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:It's not 1 vote per person, that's majority rule which is unstable. So you like New York republicans and Texas democrats being disenfranchised in presidential elections?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:Honestly the hope is that you diversify the rural areas by developing industries there. If you create jobs in the rural areas, people of all colors will move there and the electoral college won't seem so wacky Hmm yes, everyone is going to open up multiple plants for all the small towns across the U.S with livable wages with a diverse series of labor options for everyon...hahahahah
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:So you like New York republicans and Texas democrats being disenfranchised in presidential elections? Would a popular vote work for a representative body like the UN? And if not, what is the difference
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:So you like New York republicans and Texas democrats being disenfranchised in presidential elections? I prefer the combo of state/popular vote the EC uses instead of a direct mob vote. It only hurts progressives when they run super lovely candidates and if punishing the Dems for running Clinton is the end result then full steam ahead. Every election is the Dem's to lose and somehow they manage at least half the time by their own doing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
Mordor She Wrote posted:They are innately bigoted and mislead, and choose to be mislead, want to be mislead and only want to deal with people who mislead them. and that's why obama won
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:Would a popular vote work for a representative body like the UN? And if not, what is the difference The UN is designed a bit differently and has a different role from the US government. The UN is not a world government. If the US presidential elections worked like UN assembly resolutions, it would be pretty dumb, I think. The reason why the most powerful countries have veto power, for example, is because such a body would not have the most influential powers in it. It is an entirely different thing from the USG. The UN assembly is more about building consensus than about governance, which is why it does this. new phone who dis posted:I prefer the combo of state/popular vote the EC uses instead of a direct mob vote. It only hurts progressives when they run super lovely candidates and if punishing the Dems for running Clinton is the end result then full steam ahead. Every election is the Dem's to lose and somehow they manage at least half the time by their own doing. Why would republican votes in NY and democratic votes in TX mattering result in mob rule? Are these populations in particular bad for the country? The EC basically heavily rewards voters in states big enough to matter(many rural states don't matter, even if they're contested, because 3 EC votes are worthless) that are really close. Why is winner-take-all in these situations the superior option? I'm not talking about one election or another- as I said before, everyone goes into these elections knowing the rules. I'm just wondering what the virtue is here. Genuinely curious. I can point out a lot of counter examples to the notion that the EC protects interests that are otherwise vulnerable(the Senate, for example, is much more effective if you're trying to empower West Virginians and North Dakotans). For example, in a proportional EC system, the Republican votes in California would actually matter- not every vote in that state would go to democrats. It would be the other way around in many other states. People are talking about how the country would be dominated by LA and NY, but in all honesty it would even things out a lot more. Rural people would still disproportionately have some EC votes, and the margins might be small enough that the 3 WV electors matter some day. Panzeh fucked around with this message at 17:24 on Mar 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
rezatahs posted:trump won and you're still raging about the poopular vote #Hillarywouldhavewon
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:I'm just wondering what the virtue is here. The city votes for more money, the city gets more money, more people move into the city, the city votes for more money, the city gets more money, more people move into the city, rinse repeat
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:The city votes for more money, the city gets more money, more people move into the city, the city votes for more money, the city gets more money, more people move into the city, rinse repeat The cities would no longer controll all of their states' EC in a proportional method though. New York would send both R and D electors in a presidential election. It would broaden campaigning as improving the margins in solidly oppositional states would amount to something now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:The cities would no longer controll all of their states' EC in a proportional method though. New York would send both R and D electors in a presidential election. It's not about party affiliation it's about voting for self-interests.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:It's not about party affiliation it's about voting for self-interests. So why are rural voters' self interest more important than urban voters' self interest? Why would rural votes in NY State mattering make the urbanites stronger? Also, why wouldn't rural voters just vote themselves in more money and devastate the urban areas like this? It feels like i'm talking with a brick wall here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:So why are rural voters' self interest more important than urban voters' self interest? Why would rural votes in NY State mattering make the urbanites stronger? They're not more important, they just shouldn't be bulldozed by the mob.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:They're not more important, they just shouldn't be bulldozed by the mob. However, their EC votes in upstate New York are currently being 'bulldozed' by the 'mob'. Why is that just? It's the same for rural california, urban Texas, urban Georgia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:They're not more important, they just shouldn't be beholden to actual democracy ftfy
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:The UN is designed a bit differently and has a different role from the US government. The UN is not a world government. If the US presidential elections worked like UN assembly resolutions, it would be pretty dumb, I think. The reason why the most powerful countries have veto power, for example, is because such a body would not have the most influential powers in it. It is an entirely different thing from the USG. The UN assembly is more about building consensus than about governance, which is why it does this. The EC ensures a minimum amount of influence and power a state can exert on the Executive election regardless of population and a maximum limit as well. In a system where so much is delegated to state governments who face challenges unique to them, it's a good thing to not let a state get entirely ignored in favor of more populous areas or to let one get so populous and powerful that it dictates the policies of entire regions it has nothing to do with. It also allows states experiencing problems others would rather not address (hello, rust belt) to influence the election more when their populations get riled and start defecting. This is a good thing since politicians have to pay attention to those areas instead of just shoring up more support in already friendly areas to keep them marginalized. You want an electoral process where the Executive branch has to appeal to as wide a group as possible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
Sparta was a democracy and they had a system where the underclass would be murdered during a festival for fun
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:24 |
|
|
Panzeh posted:However, their EC votes in upstate New York are currently being 'bulldozed' by the 'mob'. Why is that just? It's the same for rural california, urban Texas, urban Georgia. None of those groups have their own state government pursuing an agenda or representing them. It's chopped up by state because that's how the entire government works. Splitting the country up into ideological fiefdoms isn't the answer, especially when doing so runs counter to the entire system we have in place for managing our country at the state level.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 17:36
|
|