Should the popular vote be the ultimate decider?

[Redfish]

in a word----------------YES. otherwise large numbers of citizens have no voice. Its why the EC was created, and like it or not, its not going away.

Ummmmmm nnnnnnnnnno, it isn't. Once AGAIN nothing like our contemporary population centers (cities) existed when the EC was created. Nor for that matter did California. Or Texas. Most Americans lived on farms and in the sticks. Your fallacy is Anachronism. Try again.

from the left wing Washington post..

In defense of the electoral college

Sorry, WaPo links are useless. I'm not buying. If you are go ahead and quote it.

so if a left wing publication doesn't toe the line it is to be denigrated? You are pathetic.

SO the WaPo charges for access, Dumbass. And I'm NOT BUYING. Which is what I just said.

Am I writing in Slovenian here or what? Do I need to get Michelle O'bama in here to translate?

The Wash post is a left leaning paper. One of yours that happened to print something that you disagree with. I thought all you libs did the goose step together and clicked your heels to WaPo. If you personally don't, good for you.

 

[Redfish]

funny because that is exactly what the left is trying to do----------------make all of you into sheep/parrots who all think and say what they tell you to. If you dare leave the dem plantation you are to be ridiculed, called a traitor and a racist, especially if you happen to be black.

You fools demonize what you are, amazing.

Yuh huh. And who would "you fools" be then, Mr.Oblivious-to-the-fact-that-you-just-did-the-same-thing?

nope, the truth is that conservatives think for themselves, and are not punished by the party for doing so. its only the dems who demand complete agreement and compliance.

So you're still locked into party-think and purporting to preach to an Independent.

Think about it.

you are no more an independent than Pelosi, Schumer, or crazy Maxine.

Ummmm yeah OK. Post my voter registration and prove it then. Obviously you have a copy.

your posts give you away, you are a leftie, why is that hard to admit? ashamed?

 

[Pogo]

Ummmmmm nnnnnnnnnno, it isn't. Once AGAIN nothing like our contemporary population centers (cities) existed when the EC was created. Nor for that matter did California. Or Texas. Most Americans lived on farms and in the sticks. Your fallacy is Anachronism. Try again.

from the left wing Washington post..

In defense of the electoral college

Sorry, WaPo links are useless. I'm not buying. If you are go ahead and quote it.

so if a left wing publication doesn't toe the line it is to be denigrated? You are pathetic.

SO the WaPo charges for access, Dumbass. And I'm NOT BUYING. Which is what I just said.

Am I writing in Slovenian here or what? Do I need to get Michelle O'bama in here to translate?

The Wash post is a left leaning paper. One of yours that happened to print something that you disagree with. I thought all you libs did the goose step together and clicked your heels to WaPo. If you personally don't, good for you.

Once AGAIN for the literarily retarded, I am NOT purchasing a subscription to WaPo or anything else, just to read what you can't articulate. If you can't articulate a point, then you haven't got one.

Number TWO --- you don't get to dictate my terms and declare some source that I can't even see to be "one of mine". I don't have a "mine" so fuck you and your little façile dichotomous proxy-puppet show you have to resort to because you can't articulate a point.

Everything you post is dishonest. You have no argument. You are bereft.

 

[Redfish]

from the left wing Washington post..

In defense of the electoral college

Sorry, WaPo links are useless. I'm not buying. If you are go ahead and quote it.

so if a left wing publication doesn't toe the line it is to be denigrated? You are pathetic.

SO the WaPo charges for access, Dumbass. And I'm NOT BUYING. Which is what I just said.

Am I writing in Slovenian here or what? Do I need to get Michelle O'bama in here to translate?

The Wash post is a left leaning paper. One of yours that happened to print something that you disagree with. I thought all you libs did the goose step together and clicked your heels to WaPo. If you personally don't, good for you.

Once AGAIN for the literarily retarded, I am NOT purchasing a subscription to WaPo or anything else, just to read what you can't articulate. If you can't articulate a point, then you haven't got one.

Number TWO --- you don't get to dictate my terms and declare some source that I can't even see to be "one of mine". I don't have a "mine" so fuck you and your little façile dichotomous proxy-puppet show you have to resort to because you can't articulate a point.

Everything you post is dishonest. You have no argument. You are bereft.

you have been arguing against the EC, I merely provided a cite from a left leaning paper that favors the EC. If you want to ignore other viewpoints that's just fine, I really don't give a shit what an idiot like you chooses to read.

 

[August West]

I think your system is wise and was designed with careful thought and consideration. The Media concentration in NY and Cali can't use control and high populations to win election year after year. You are 50 States and it's beautifully designed with this in mind.

Giving representation to prairie dogs and sage brush is a beautiful thing? Screeching about the "Media" is asinine at best.

 

[Natural Citizen]

If I'm not mistaken the voting system was originally established on a popular vote.
Jo

Hi, Jo. How's it going? The way the Constitution was originally written was to send special people fro mth community to go to the convention and pick the President. It's been changed in some states, the legislatures have to authority to decide the rules and regulations on what they have to do. In places like Texas for instance there's no rule that says you must do this or that or you'll be fined or you'll go to prison, nothing at all like that there. I think 26 states do this, they have the right to do it, but this is not the original intent in the Constitution as it was originally written.

It doesn't work.

The origional intent of the Founders didn't last very long, it almost immediately got into partisanship and popular votes, but this was not the original intent, it's drifted away.

Personally, I'd like to see the electoral colelge changed, I'd lke to see it percentage-wise, in that if 10% votes for the libertarian, then the libertarian gets 10 electoral votes.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Just as an aside kind of thing, since the Union was mentioned, is that the Union used to be voluntary before Lincoln came along.

 

[Pogo]

Sorry, WaPo links are useless. I'm not buying. If you are go ahead and quote it.

so if a left wing publication doesn't toe the line it is to be denigrated? You are pathetic.

SO the WaPo charges for access, Dumbass. And I'm NOT BUYING. Which is what I just said.

Am I writing in Slovenian here or what? Do I need to get Michelle O'bama in here to translate?

The Wash post is a left leaning paper. One of yours that happened to print something that you disagree with. I thought all you libs did the goose step together and clicked your heels to WaPo. If you personally don't, good for you.

Once AGAIN for the literarily retarded, I am NOT purchasing a subscription to WaPo or anything else, just to read what you can't articulate. If you can't articulate a point, then you haven't got one.

Number TWO --- you don't get to dictate my terms and declare some source that I can't even see to be "one of mine". I don't have a "mine" so fuck you and your little façile dichotomous proxy-puppet show you have to resort to because you can't articulate a point.

Everything you post is dishonest. You have no argument. You are bereft.

you have been arguing against the EC, I merely provided a cite from a left leaning paper that favors the EC. If you want to ignore other viewpoints that's just fine, I really don't give a shit what an idiot like you chooses to read.

Yes it's a convenient escape hatch, posting links to sources that can't be accessed and then refusing to quote what it says. Courageous.

As I keep saying, if you can't articulate your point, then you didn't have one.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think your system is wise and was designed with careful thought and consideration. The Media concentration in NY and Cali can't use control and high populations to win election year after year. You are 50 States and it's beautifully designed with this in mind.

Giving representation to prairie dogs and sage brush is a beautiful thing? Screeching about the "Media" is asinine at best.

I thought we wanted to protect the environment and the eco-systems and shit. Who do you think is likely to know and care more about what's best for the Sonoran Desert (for example)? The people of the state of Arizona, or the people in LA and NY who would never deign to set foot in Arizona?

But now, suddenly, I guess the attitude is "Fuck everything in the country if it gets in the way of coastal liberals' power".

 

[Redfish]

so if a left wing publication doesn't toe the line it is to be denigrated? You are pathetic.

SO the WaPo charges for access, Dumbass. And I'm NOT BUYING. Which is what I just said.

Am I writing in Slovenian here or what? Do I need to get Michelle O'bama in here to translate?

The Wash post is a left leaning paper. One of yours that happened to print something that you disagree with. I thought all you libs did the goose step together and clicked your heels to WaPo. If you personally don't, good for you.

Once AGAIN for the literarily retarded, I am NOT purchasing a subscription to WaPo or anything else, just to read what you can't articulate. If you can't articulate a point, then you haven't got one.

Number TWO --- you don't get to dictate my terms and declare some source that I can't even see to be "one of mine". I don't have a "mine" so fuck you and your little façile dichotomous proxy-puppet show you have to resort to because you can't articulate a point.

Everything you post is dishonest. You have no argument. You are bereft.

you have been arguing against the EC, I merely provided a cite from a left leaning paper that favors the EC. If you want to ignore other viewpoints that's just fine, I really don't give a shit what an idiot like you chooses to read.

Yes it's a convenient escape hatch, posting links to sources that can't be accessed and then refusing to quote what it says. Courageous.

As I keep saying, if you can't articulate your point, then you didn't have one.

if you cant open the link, you may have a computer problem. Do a google search on the subject instead of posting juvenile attempts at insults.

 

[LaDexter]

Shouldn't we just rig every election so Dems always win regardless of how much they steal?

 

[justoffal]

If I'm not mistaken the voting system was originally established on a popular vote.
Jo

Hi, Jo. How's it going? The way the Constitution was originally written was to send special people fro mth community to go to the convention and pick the President. It's been changed in some states, the legislatures have to authority to decide the rules and regulations on what they have to do. In places like Texas for instance there's no rule that says you must do this or that or you'll be fined or you'll go to prison, nothing at all like that there. I think 26 states do this, they have the right to do it, but this is not the original intent in the Constitution as it was originally written.

It doesn't work.

The origional intent of the Founders didn't last very long, it almost immediately got into partisanship and popular votes, but this was not the original intent, it's drifted away.

Personally, I'd like to see the electoral colelge changed, I'd lke to see it percentage-wise, in that if 10% votes for the libertarian, then the libertarian gets 10 electoral votes.

Hmmm.... I could almost be convinced by that method. It all hinges on how much recognition each state needs or wants for itself as a sovereign entity. I know that some will reason that a populous state like California should of course have more rights and more of a voice in national policy then a less populous state like Utah. However when States first decided to join the union they certainly would not have been persuaded if they were told you will have only the amount of influence that your population affords you. In such a case I would think that many of the smallest states may have decided not to join at all. Now nearly 250 to 300 years later it's hard to remember what the original conditions were when territories first decided to become part of the United States and it's easy to forget that States originally were independent sovereign territories. Now we tend to see Utah, Arizona or New Mexico as less populated suburbs of California.... I can assure you they do not see themselves that way.


Jo

 

[Pogo]

SO the WaPo charges for access, Dumbass. And I'm NOT BUYING. Which is what I just said.

Am I writing in Slovenian here or what? Do I need to get Michelle O'bama in here to translate?

The Wash post is a left leaning paper. One of yours that happened to print something that you disagree with. I thought all you libs did the goose step together and clicked your heels to WaPo. If you personally don't, good for you.

Once AGAIN for the literarily retarded, I am NOT purchasing a subscription to WaPo or anything else, just to read what you can't articulate. If you can't articulate a point, then you haven't got one.

Number TWO --- you don't get to dictate my terms and declare some source that I can't even see to be "one of mine". I don't have a "mine" so fuck you and your little façile dichotomous proxy-puppet show you have to resort to because you can't articulate a point.

Everything you post is dishonest. You have no argument. You are bereft.

you have been arguing against the EC, I merely provided a cite from a left leaning paper that favors the EC. If you want to ignore other viewpoints that's just fine, I really don't give a shit what an idiot like you chooses to read.

Yes it's a convenient escape hatch, posting links to sources that can't be accessed and then refusing to quote what it says. Courageous.

As I keep saying, if you can't articulate your point, then you didn't have one.

if you cant open the link, you may have a computer problem. Do a google search on the subject instead of posting juvenile attempts at insults.

Once AGAIN for the slow ---- I can open the link just fine. But when I do I get a page that wants money, and/or gives me a limited and small number of articles I can access each month. And thatt's true for EVERYBODY who hasn't paid them for access.

And I ain't about to pay money just because you can neither articulate your point nor quote the source you want me to read. If you have a point to make, MAKE IT. If they make a point you like, COPY IT. Don't sit here and play games, son. You're wasting my time.

 

[Redfish]

The Wash post is a left leaning paper. One of yours that happened to print something that you disagree with. I thought all you libs did the goose step together and clicked your heels to WaPo. If you personally don't, good for you.

Once AGAIN for the literarily retarded, I am NOT purchasing a subscription to WaPo or anything else, just to read what you can't articulate. If you can't articulate a point, then you haven't got one.

Number TWO --- you don't get to dictate my terms and declare some source that I can't even see to be "one of mine". I don't have a "mine" so fuck you and your little façile dichotomous proxy-puppet show you have to resort to because you can't articulate a point.

Everything you post is dishonest. You have no argument. You are bereft.

you have been arguing against the EC, I merely provided a cite from a left leaning paper that favors the EC. If you want to ignore other viewpoints that's just fine, I really don't give a shit what an idiot like you chooses to read.

Yes it's a convenient escape hatch, posting links to sources that can't be accessed and then refusing to quote what it says. Courageous.

As I keep saying, if you can't articulate your point, then you didn't have one.

if you cant open the link, you may have a computer problem. Do a google search on the subject instead of posting juvenile attempts at insults.

Once AGAIN for the slow ---- I can open the link just fine. But when I do I get a page that wants money, and/or gives me a limited and small number of articles I can access each month. And thatt's true for EVERYBODY who hasn't paid them for access.

And I ain't about to pay money just because you can neither articulate your point nor quote the source you want me to read. If you have a point to make, MAKE IT. If they make a point you like, COPY IT. Don't sit here and play games, son. You're wasting my time.

that's weird. I opened it, read it and copied it. Never asked me for money, to subscribe, or anything else. the article took the position that the EC actually protects our elections be giving every locality a voice and preventing the large population states and cities from dominating.

As to articulating my point, I have done that very well several times, if you are too dense to grasp it, there is nothing more I can do.

 

[justoffal]

Shouldn't we just rig every election so Dems always win regardless of how much they steal?

You mean it's not there yet? Could fooled me.

Jo

 

[Pogo]

Once AGAIN for the literarily retarded, I am NOT purchasing a subscription to WaPo or anything else, just to read what you can't articulate. If you can't articulate a point, then you haven't got one.

Number TWO --- you don't get to dictate my terms and declare some source that I can't even see to be "one of mine". I don't have a "mine" so fuck you and your little façile dichotomous proxy-puppet show you have to resort to because you can't articulate a point.

Everything you post is dishonest. You have no argument. You are bereft.

you have been arguing against the EC, I merely provided a cite from a left leaning paper that favors the EC. If you want to ignore other viewpoints that's just fine, I really don't give a shit what an idiot like you chooses to read.

Yes it's a convenient escape hatch, posting links to sources that can't be accessed and then refusing to quote what it says. Courageous.

As I keep saying, if you can't articulate your point, then you didn't have one.

if you cant open the link, you may have a computer problem. Do a google search on the subject instead of posting juvenile attempts at insults.

Once AGAIN for the slow ---- I can open the link just fine. But when I do I get a page that wants money, and/or gives me a limited and small number of articles I can access each month. And thatt's true for EVERYBODY who hasn't paid them for access.

And I ain't about to pay money just because you can neither articulate your point nor quote the source you want me to read. If you have a point to make, MAKE IT. If they make a point you like, COPY IT. Don't sit here and play games, son. You're wasting my time.

that's weird. I opened it, read it and copied it. Never asked me for money, to subscribe, or anything else. the article took the position that the EC actually protects our elections be giving every locality a voice and preventing the large population states and cities from dominating.

As to articulating my point, I have done that very well several times, if you are too dense to grasp it, there is nothing more I can do.

Apparently there's some reason you're terrified of quoting your own link.

Kind of proves my point, doesn't it.

 

[Redfish]

you have been arguing against the EC, I merely provided a cite from a left leaning paper that favors the EC. If you want to ignore other viewpoints that's just fine, I really don't give a shit what an idiot like you chooses to read.

Yes it's a convenient escape hatch, posting links to sources that can't be accessed and then refusing to quote what it says. Courageous.

As I keep saying, if you can't articulate your point, then you didn't have one.

if you cant open the link, you may have a computer problem. Do a google search on the subject instead of posting juvenile attempts at insults.

Once AGAIN for the slow ---- I can open the link just fine. But when I do I get a page that wants money, and/or gives me a limited and small number of articles I can access each month. And thatt's true for EVERYBODY who hasn't paid them for access.

And I ain't about to pay money just because you can neither articulate your point nor quote the source you want me to read. If you have a point to make, MAKE IT. If they make a point you like, COPY IT. Don't sit here and play games, son. You're wasting my time.

that's weird. I opened it, read it and copied it. Never asked me for money, to subscribe, or anything else. the article took the position that the EC actually protects our elections be giving every locality a voice and preventing the large population states and cities from dominating.

As to articulating my point, I have done that very well several times, if you are too dense to grasp it, there is nothing more I can do.

Apparently there's some reason you're terrified of quoting your own link.

Kind of proves my point, doesn't it.

from the WaPo article: "The electoral college was an integral part of that federal plan. It made a place for the states as well as the people in electing the president by giving them a say at different points in a federal process and preventing big-city populations from dominating the election of a president."

your refusal to accept a differing opinion from a left wing source brands you as an idiot. congratulations.

 

[Lesh]

that's weird. I opened it, read it and copied it. Never asked me for money, to subscribe, or anything else. the article took the position that the EC actually protects our elections be giving every locality a voice and preventing the large population states and cities from dominating.

As to articulating my point, I have done that very well several times, if you are too dense to grasp it, there is nothing more I can do.

Paywalls aren't apparent until you have accessed the quota of free articles...

There IS a problem when states like Idaho,Montana,North Dakota,South Dakota, and Wyoming have the same TOTAL population as say...New Jersey but 5 times the power in the Senate. However the Constitution allows states to allocate their Senators in any way they see fit. They could simply appoint them or they could elect them on a regional or party basis.
So if Dems are really concerned about this they could win majorities and Governorships and either pas state laws or amend state Constitutions to elect Senators in amore "fair" manner.

All that being said...we have Puerto RIco and the District of Columbia where millions of American live and have NO representation.

They should be admitted as states and given two Senators each as well as the appropriate representation in the House

 

[August West]

It seems to me we've had this discussion before. If I'm not mistaken the voting system was originally established on a popular vote. It doesn't work, it never did and there's no possibility that human nature will change to the point where it will be possible for it to function in a large nation especially a nation such as we have which is really a collection of smaller nations that have managed to construct what can only be referred to as a non homogenous union.

For one thing a popular only vote system across a federal election violates the original pact made by States when they first formed the Union that would enable each and every state to be fairly represented as a part of that Union.

Jo

Giving representation to prairie dogs and sage brush makes very little sense.

 

[Redfish]

It seems to me we've had this discussion before. If I'm not mistaken the voting system was originally established on a popular vote. It doesn't work, it never did and there's no possibility that human nature will change to the point where it will be possible for it to function in a large nation especially a nation such as we have which is really a collection of smaller nations that have managed to construct what can only be referred to as a non homogenous union.

For one thing a popular only vote system across a federal election violates the original pact made by States when they first formed the Union that would enable each and every state to be fairly represented as a part of that Union.

Jo

Giving representation to prairie dogs and sage brush makes very little sense.

who do you consider to be sage brush and prairie dogs? People vote, plants and animals don't. WTF is wrong with you?