Trumped

[Amazing Larry]

1 hour ago, Lou said:

 I agree. however, at least the reps allowed voters decide who their candidate would be. Hillary was never, ever not going to be the dem's candidate, especially with the bullshit Super Delegates. 

Have the dems even addressed the issue of the super delegates yet? It seems to me they would be better off focusing on fixing their own house before whining about cabinet appointments.

[Jason]

44 minutes ago, Lou said:

who loves a good comedy?

 

Lol! How embarrassing for MSNBC

[Blarg]

2 minutes ago, Lawrence said:

Have the dems even addressed the issue of the super delegates yet? It seems to me they would be better off focusing on fixing their own house before whining about cabinet appointments.

I guess you are under the misconception that the Democratic party embraces Democracy.

[Jason]

3 minutes ago, Lawrence said:

Have the dems even addressed the issue of the super delegates yet? It seems to me they would be better off focusing on fixing their own house before whining about cabinet appointments.

They are just doing what they think their followers want.

[Ordos]

56 minutes ago, Blarg said:

I'm just going to throw this out there and see what anyone thinks of it. In the national election, when you write in a candidate that isn't even running for office, are you not part of the systemic problem of our election process? You have trivialized the election to the point Mickey Mouse is your idea of a protest vote, that you didn't even try to find a solution. So why be angry at the results?

It's an interesting argument. However, should any such voter be satisfied with choosing the lesser of two evils? Take a Berner, as example. They got shut out of their favored choice, and were left with either selling their soul, or their beliefs.

What's the solution that you speak of?

[Glen]

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

I'm just going to throw this out there and see what anyone thinks of it. In the national election, when you write in a candidate that isn't even running for office, are you not part of the systemic problem of our election process? You have trivialized the election to the point Mickey Mouse is your idea of a protest vote, that you didn't even try to find a solution. So why be angry at the results?

Just about every other election I can think of, your vote counts directly. Get rid of the electoral college and make the president straight popular vote. That makes everyone's vote count exactly the same. It eliminates state races and it changes the entire landscape for running for president. 

Yes, I felt this way before 2016.

[Blarg]

If all decisions were made by popular vote minorities would be ignored. The whole point of the electoral college was to give states a share of equal representation rather than 10 densely populated areas deciding the outcome of every election. I am for more democracy over simple mob rule.

[Jason]

6 minutes ago, Blarg said:

If all decisions were made by popular vote minorities would be ignored. The whole point of the electoral college was to give states a share of equal representation rather than 10 densely populated areas deciding the outcome of every election. I am for more democracy over simple mob rule.

God knows we don't California and New York with all the political power

[Lou]

2 hours ago, colt4405 said:

 

Trump received 54% of the CA primary vote, a closed primary for registered republicans. 

Trump is exactly who Republicans wanted. He's got approval ~90% from his voters. Aside from being Russia's baby hands bitch, Trump's been the ideal (R). Walls, deportations, blowing up the EPA, overhauling department of education, promises to cut taxes for employers, etc.

However it's looking more and more likely Trump is Putin's bitch, and more obvious that half the country is too blinded by greed/power/"winning" to give a shit. I have it on pretty good authority that something's been up between those two. Could be an orchestrated money grab, could be part of something even worse, but "the know" has been aware of it for over a year. I can't explain what or who my sources are, but I am convinced. I'm also confident all of the info will reach the public soon, but will enough of the public believe it? 

Theres a reason Trump went ballistic on the media this week. It's a race to gain the publics trust. The truth will surface soon and they NEED 35-40% of the country to buy in to the "fake news" rhetoric.

 

I stopped reading after your first sentence since you obviously responded to something I wasn't referring to. The conversation was about the presidential election, not the primary. 

[Lou]

2 hours ago, Blarg said:

I'm just going to throw this out there and see what anyone thinks of it. In the national election, when you write in a candidate that isn't even running for office, are you not part of the systemic problem of our election process? You have trivialized the election to the point Mickey Mouse is your idea of a protest vote, that you didn't even try to find a solution. So why be angry at the results?

I wouldn't say a person is part of the problem if they write in a candidate. it's an option afforded to each registered voter, so a person has the right to vote for whomever he/she wishes.

personally, i've never voted with the "lesser of two evils" mentality, although i clearly understand why others choose to vote that way. 

[Lou]

47 minutes ago, Blarg said:

If all decisions were made by popular vote minorities would be ignored. 

are you saying Glen's a racist?

[Lou]

12 hours ago, cezero said:

anybody arguing in favor of anything trump advocates in any way, whether it's blaming liberals for his election or otherwise, isn't a fully functional human to me.

holy shit, cez.

i realize you had to endure Chone Figgins, but you've f'n lost it. 

 

[Thomas]

2 hours ago, Glen said:

Just about every other election I can think of, your vote counts directly. Get rid of the electoral college and make the president straight popular vote. That makes everyone's vote count exactly the same. It eliminates state races and it changes the entire landscape for running for president. 

Yes, I felt this way before 2016.

Californian wants the EC abolished. Shocking. 

[Glen]

1 minute ago, Thomas said:

Californian wants the EVabolished. Shocking. 

New Mexico has 1/11th of the electoral college votes of California, yet it has less than 1/18th of the population, to use one example. What does New Mexico provide that makes up for that discrepancy, besides your logical an coherent arguments  (which used to come from CA)?

[Spirit]

4 hours ago, Lou said:

who loves a good comedy?

 

 

That was awesome

 

 

[gotbeer]

18 minutes ago, Glen said:

New Mexico has 1/11th of the electoral college votes of California, yet it has less than 1/18th of the population, to use one example. What does New Mexico provide that makes up for that discrepancy, besides your logical an coherent arguments  (which used to come from CA)?

The electoral college # per state is directly dependent on the number of congressmen that a state has.  This is based on population. 

Each state also gets 2 extra electoral college votes for each senator.  

So when you have 53 congressmen vs 3 congressmen based on population.  The 2 senators per will make the college seem skewed.  

I'm fine with that, because while very minor.  It prevents a popularity contest, where a handful of states can force their views on a majority of the states.  Which is why the senate is made up the way it is.

 

[Thomas]

12 minutes ago, Glen said:

New Mexico has 1/11th of the electoral college votes of California, yet it has less than 1/18th of the population, to use one example. What does New Mexico provide that makes up for that discrepancy, besides your logical an coherent arguments  (which used to come from CA)?

As noted in earlier threads without the EC the political clout of smaller states and lesser populated regions inside higher populated states would not revert to the equivalent of their population as you erroneously assert. It would fall far below that as the effort to court these voters would not return the same ROI as in higher density areas. Hence their interests would be treated with disproportionately less importance to those in the favored population areas. All voters being equal with some voters being more equal. Worse yet the population centers needs are more homogeneous across the country than the more diverse needs of the various rural regions. 

[Glen]

Fair enough.  I just want my vote to count more than yours.

When will a middle-class white dude from CA ever catch a break?

[Blarg]

2 hours ago, Lou said:

are you saying Glen's a racist?

He's white,  what else could he be? 

[Lou]

 

@cezero why did you vote for Hillary? 

[Lou]

7 minutes ago, calscuf said:

That sounded like a black guy trying to use big words.

leave Obama out of this 

[Lou]

On February 16, 2017 at 11:10 AM, cezero said:

The leaks are real, but the reporting on them is fake because it makes things much harder for me to make lucrative deals with Russia now--Donald Trump, 2/16/2017

 

On February 16, 2017 at 11:23 AM, cezero said:

pretty sure i just heard the turd ask a black reporter to set up a meeting for him with the congressional black caucus?

just lol

 

On February 16, 2017 at 11:53 PM, colt4405 said:

I'm starting to think that's all people like Jay ever wanted.

I really hope Republicans start to look in the mirror... They basically chose the guy who pissed off liberals the most when they had 15-20 better picks for POTUS. They may not have won, although I think they would have, but atleast people would get to keep their dignity. FFS it's only been 4 weeks! 

 

On February 17, 2017 at 9:29 AM, cezero said:

idiots elect a supreme idiot, and still find a way to blame liberals

surreal

 

On February 17, 2017 at 10:52 AM, cezero said:

"i'm too lazy, stupid, or indifferent to vote, and i'll make fun of anybody who cares about that which i don't care about"

reeks of privilege

 

23 hours ago, cezero said:

the media is the enemy of the american people is what the turd is saying now.

and for a few crazies on here, trump voters have no accountability because liberals made them do it. 

what an incredible way of looking at the world. entitled. aloof. stupid. 

 

16 hours ago, cezero said:

anybody arguing in favor of anything trump advocates in any way, whether it's blaming liberals for his election or otherwise, isn't a fully functional human to me.

i couldn't possibly care less what that subhuman garbage thinks about anything at all.

you can't educate those who revel in hate, fear, and ignorance. the same morons i'm talking about in 2017 would the ones talking about the positive good of slavery in 1800s, the evils of women's suffrage in the early 20th century, and advocating jim crow until the middle of this century. they're too stupid to understand it, but that's what they are.  the only thing that eradicates their ilk is time.

 

 

 

[fan_since79]

2 hours ago, gotbeer said:

The electoral college # per state is directly dependent on the number of congressmen that a state has.  This is based on population. 

Each state also gets 2 extra electoral college votes for each senator.  

So when you have 53 congressmen vs 3 congressmen based on population.  The 2 senators per will make the college seem skewed.  

I'm fine with that, because while very minor.  It prevents a popularity contest, where a handful of states can force their views on a majority of the states.  Which is why the senate is made up the way it is.

 

It's even worse than that. A popular vote election means that a handful of counties and cities (Los Angeles, New York, Boston) can force their views on the rest of the country.

 

[Vegas Halo Fan]

4 hours ago, Glen said:

Just about every other election I can think of, your vote counts directly. Get rid of the electoral college and make the president straight popular vote. That makes everyone's vote count exactly the same. It eliminates state races and it changes the entire landscape for running for president. 

Yes, I felt this way before 2016.

I have felt this way for decades. The race should be about campaigning for votes, not winning states. This system gives a disproportionate amount of influence to sparsely-populated states, and many states are ignored during the campaign because they aren't "in play". If every vote counted the same and it didn't matter where it came from, Democrats and Republicans would pay far more attention to states in which they have no chance of winning the popular vote, and there would be less pandering to key groups in closely-contested states. I'm sure that Republicans don't want this, because it's about the only way that they can win a national election.

Michael Palin once jokingly said that he would run for President of the United States "because of the uniquely American convention that the person with the least votes wins." This was said after the Bush-Gore election in 2000.

[Jay]

Melania looking pretty hot in her red dress today.