Wish Kasich would just switch parties and get it over with

[Ray From Cleveland]

You're talking about the EC system giving smaller states more power to make them more equal to the big boy states. But I've shown you time and again why it's not true. The money being spent on the Presidential election shows quite clearly that only 12 states get the attention.

I never said it made less populated states equal, but it gave them better footing than if we had a popular vote. In other words, their vote would actually count to a candidate.

92 countries in the world use proportional representation and not one of them has the cities controlling the rest of the country. Not one. Yet you're pulling this shit out of your ass and trying to claim that this is the case. Yet you don't even know one system that uses PR, you didn't even know what PR was and you were too ******* lazy to even look up what PR was.

Again, you don't give a shit. You like the partisan system that gives your side the supposed benefits. That's it. Stop pretending you know stuff that you don't know. Stop throwing fake statistics at me once a week to make it look like you're even trying, and stop pretending that you're anything other than a partisan hack doing what your rich bitches want you to do and say.

I don't have to have numbers from other countries, I have our numbers and they are the only ones that count. I did prove to you that one city has more power than nine states. What more evidence do you need than that?

Moreover is that the Democrats never had a problem with our voting system when they won. Now that they are losing, they are not going to blame themselves, they are going to blame the way we've been voting for hundreds of years.

It's ridiculous. "Oh, we're not winning anymore, so let's change the rules of the game so we do win!" How ridiculous.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, seeing as you don't know about any other systems, how can you even say this? It's typical of people on forums like this, think they know everything, but know nothing.

But I'll try and educate you.

The EC isn't fair because:

A) It gives more power of votes to people in smaller states. This is inherently unfair.
B) It gives more power of votes to people in swing states. This is inherently unfair.

If you live in Hawaii and you vote Republican, your vote is a waste vote. 62.22% of people voted for Hillary. The highest (except for DC) that Hillary got. Hawaii always votes Democrat, so Republicans votes simple aren't even worth counting. It's not FAIR for Republicans in Hawaii. Their voice isn't heard, no one cares about them.

If you live in West Virginia, Trump's highest (except 3rd in Nebraska) then your vote is a waste of time too.

In fact there are only 12 states in the US where is really actually any point in turning out to vote. Your president doesn't get decided by your vote. Screw you, **** off, you don't choose.

Also, a president can win with less votes, this isn't the will of the people, it's the will of the system. It also tells presidential candidates to attack swing states and ignore strong states. Meaning that Hawaii and West Virginia get nothing. It doesn't matter what you do.

136.6 million people voted in the presidential election.

The states that mattered were
Nevada, 1 million votes.
Colorado 1.3 million votes
Iowa 1.45 million votes
Minnesota 1.7 million votes
Wisconsin 1.8 million votes
Michigan 2.5 million votes
Ohio 3 million votes
Pennsylvania 5.8 million votes
New Hampshire 700,000 votes
Virginia 3.7 million votes
North Carolina 4.4 million votes
Florida 9 million votes

Add these up together you get about 28.2 million people. That's less than 21% of the vote. Yes, less than 21% of people in the US decide the US election. Everyone else's vote is out of the window, who cares?


In Germany with PR they have a 5% run off, this means if you vote for a party that gets less than 5% your vote is a waste of time.

44 million people votes in 2009 federal election in Germany. 41.7 million votes therefore decided who would be in parliament and 2.3 million votes were out of the window. That's 95% of the voters.


Now, you're trying to tell me that a system which has 95% of voters getting to choose their govt is better than 21%? I think you're bullshitting me.


Also, in Germany there were 6 parties that got into parliament. That means that people got to CHOOSE between 6 parties, whereas in the US it was TWO parties. You're telling me this is fairer?

No, you're wrong. And as long as you have your head so far up your partisan ass, you'll be wrong until the cows come home.

How am I wrong? What you want is a pure Democracy which this country is not. We are a Republic, live with that. But since you like numbers so much, here are the populations of some of our states:

Wyoming......... under 590,000
Virginia.............under 625,000
Alaska..............under 742,000
North Dakota....under 760,000
South Dakota around 865,000
Deleware..........under 953,000
Montana...........under 1.1 million

Now if you add all these people up, the population for these seven states is under 5.5 million people. So what is my point? My point is the population in New York City alone is over 8.5 million people. That means there is more power in one city in our country than there are in nine of our least populated states.

While the electoral college doesn't even the score for those smaller states compared to NYC, it at least gives them a larger voice in our elections than they otherwise would have had. Now if you want to add the population of California with NYC, that's a grand total of 40 million people in one state and one city. And since they heavily vote Democrat, that would mean we would be a single-party government forever. It would make no sense for anybody else to vote without the EC system we have today.

Oh and Ray, your statistics SUCK BALLS. If you think Virginia has a population of "under 625,000", then....

My bad, I meant to type Vermont.

Oh wow.

But still Ray, can you tell me how much attention these 7 states got in the US presidential election? Can you tell me how much attention they get in the US senate or house elections? I bet you can't.

Each state gets two Senators regardless of size or population. Much like our Electoral College, the Senate was designed so that smaller states have some power. Congress people are elected as per population. Larger states have more power in Congress, but equal power in the Senate. It's sort of a checks and balances thing.

Now if we elected Senators like Congress, then smaller states would be virtually powerless. Larger populated states would control the entire country, and that would leave a lot of people out of the loop. Their states might not ever get any federal funding, they may not even get disaster relief. No politician would care about them because they would not have enough power TO care about them.

Trump did visit those smaller states that Hillary ignored. Those smaller states still had the electoral votes he needed to win the presidency. Hillary just assumed if she got the EC's of the larger populated states, that would be more than enough to push her into the White House.

Listen, Wyoming has three times the power of a vote than California or Texas. Yet it gets ignored in Presidential elections.

The Crazy, Lopsided Math of Campaign 2016's Ad Spending So Far

Wyoming had $167,000 spent on it by June 10th 2016
Vermont had $204,000
Alaska had $115,000
North Dakota and South Dakota, Deleware and Montana seem to have had nothing spent on them.

Hardly proving your point that the EC forces people to spend money on them.

Florida had $54 million spent on it. For a 20 million population, which is less than 4 times the population of your other 7 states, they spend 108 times the money. Doesn't add up, does it?
Iowa has a population of 3 million. $90 million spent in the primaries. Getting the EC votes of those 7 states before would be far more beneficial to your balanace than getting Iowa. Each of them has 3 votes, Iowa has 6 votes. That's 21 votes with a spending of $500,000 and 6 votes $90 million. Er... what?

The States Where Clinton and Trump Are Advertising the Most Until Election Day

From October 21st to election day advertising spending. Nothing was spent in your 7 states. Completely ignored.

You say Trump visited these states. How much? How much did he visit those states compared to other states.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You're talking about the EC system giving smaller states more power to make them more equal to the big boy states. But I've shown you time and again why it's not true. The money being spent on the Presidential election shows quite clearly that only 12 states get the attention.

I never said it made less populated states equal, but it gave them better footing than if we had a popular vote. In other words, their vote would actually count to a candidate.

92 countries in the world use proportional representation and not one of them has the cities controlling the rest of the country. Not one. Yet you're pulling this shit out of your ass and trying to claim that this is the case. Yet you don't even know one system that uses PR, you didn't even know what PR was and you were too ******* lazy to even look up what PR was.

Again, you don't give a shit. You like the partisan system that gives your side the supposed benefits. That's it. Stop pretending you know stuff that you don't know. Stop throwing fake statistics at me once a week to make it look like you're even trying, and stop pretending that you're anything other than a partisan hack doing what your rich bitches want you to do and say.

I don't have to have numbers from other countries, I have our numbers and they are the only ones that count. I did prove to you that one city has more power than nine states. What more evidence do you need than that?

Moreover is that the Democrats never had a problem with our voting system when they won. Now that they are losing, they are not going to blame themselves, they are going to blame the way we've been voting for hundreds of years.

It's ridiculous. "Oh, we're not winning anymore, so let's change the rules of the game so we do win!" How ridiculous.

The point here is Ray, it doesn't actually give smaller states more equal footing at all.

The problem here Ray is you don't know what you're talking about.

Ray, you don't have numbers from other countries and you don't know ANYTHING about other countries.

You said the EC system is the fairest, and yet you've admitted you know NOTHING about any other system.

It's like a kid with an ice cream "This ice cream is the best ice cream in the world" When he's only tried one ice cream.

Essentially Ray, ignorance doesn't make a good argument.

Now, how you know nothing about these systems when I've written to you about them many times I don't know. The only thing I can think of is that you don't bother reading what I write. It's true. I doubt you've even got this far.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You're talking about the EC system giving smaller states more power to make them more equal to the big boy states. But I've shown you time and again why it's not true. The money being spent on the Presidential election shows quite clearly that only 12 states get the attention.

I never said it made less populated states equal, but it gave them better footing than if we had a popular vote. In other words, their vote would actually count to a candidate.

92 countries in the world use proportional representation and not one of them has the cities controlling the rest of the country. Not one. Yet you're pulling this shit out of your ass and trying to claim that this is the case. Yet you don't even know one system that uses PR, you didn't even know what PR was and you were too ******* lazy to even look up what PR was.

Again, you don't give a shit. You like the partisan system that gives your side the supposed benefits. That's it. Stop pretending you know stuff that you don't know. Stop throwing fake statistics at me once a week to make it look like you're even trying, and stop pretending that you're anything other than a partisan hack doing what your rich bitches want you to do and say.

I don't have to have numbers from other countries, I have our numbers and they are the only ones that count. I did prove to you that one city has more power than nine states. What more evidence do you need than that?

Moreover is that the Democrats never had a problem with our voting system when they won. Now that they are losing, they are not going to blame themselves, they are going to blame the way we've been voting for hundreds of years.

It's ridiculous. "Oh, we're not winning anymore, so let's change the rules of the game so we do win!" How ridiculous.

The point here is Ray, it doesn't actually give smaller states more equal footing at all.

The problem here Ray is you don't know what you're talking about.

Ray, you don't have numbers from other countries and you don't know ANYTHING about other countries.

You said the EC system is the fairest, and yet you've admitted you know NOTHING about any other system.

It's like a kid with an ice cream "This ice cream is the best ice cream in the world" When he's only tried one ice cream.

Essentially Ray, ignorance doesn't make a good argument.

Now, how you know nothing about these systems when I've written to you about them many times I don't know. The only thing I can think of is that you don't bother reading what I write. It's true. I doubt you've even got this far.

I guess it all depends on how much time I have. I used to read everything but finally realized a lot of people post blah-blah not associated with the discussion, so I only read things when I have the time to read them.

But you talk about what I don't read, and you just once again said I claimed that the EC puts states on equal levels even though only a few posts ago I corrected you on that. I never said it puts them on "equal" levels to other states. But of course, if you don't read it again, I guess you'll be making the same accusations.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

How am I wrong? What you want is a pure Democracy which this country is not. We are a Republic, live with that. But since you like numbers so much, here are the populations of some of our states:

Wyoming......... under 590,000
Virginia.............under 625,000
Alaska..............under 742,000
North Dakota....under 760,000
South Dakota around 865,000
Deleware..........under 953,000
Montana...........under 1.1 million

Now if you add all these people up, the population for these seven states is under 5.5 million people. So what is my point? My point is the population in New York City alone is over 8.5 million people. That means there is more power in one city in our country than there are in nine of our least populated states.

While the electoral college doesn't even the score for those smaller states compared to NYC, it at least gives them a larger voice in our elections than they otherwise would have had. Now if you want to add the population of California with NYC, that's a grand total of 40 million people in one state and one city. And since they heavily vote Democrat, that would mean we would be a single-party government forever. It would make no sense for anybody else to vote without the EC system we have today.

Oh and Ray, your statistics SUCK BALLS. If you think Virginia has a population of "under 625,000", then....

My bad, I meant to type Vermont.

Oh wow.

But still Ray, can you tell me how much attention these 7 states got in the US presidential election? Can you tell me how much attention they get in the US senate or house elections? I bet you can't.

Each state gets two Senators regardless of size or population. Much like our Electoral College, the Senate was designed so that smaller states have some power. Congress people are elected as per population. Larger states have more power in Congress, but equal power in the Senate. It's sort of a checks and balances thing.

Now if we elected Senators like Congress, then smaller states would be virtually powerless. Larger populated states would control the entire country, and that would leave a lot of people out of the loop. Their states might not ever get any federal funding, they may not even get disaster relief. No politician would care about them because they would not have enough power TO care about them.

Trump did visit those smaller states that Hillary ignored. Those smaller states still had the electoral votes he needed to win the presidency. Hillary just assumed if she got the EC's of the larger populated states, that would be more than enough to push her into the White House.

Listen, Wyoming has three times the power of a vote than California or Texas. Yet it gets ignored in Presidential elections.

The Crazy, Lopsided Math of Campaign 2016's Ad Spending So Far

Wyoming had $167,000 spent on it by June 10th 2016
Vermont had $204,000
Alaska had $115,000
North Dakota and South Dakota, Deleware and Montana seem to have had nothing spent on them.

Hardly proving your point that the EC forces people to spend money on them.

Florida had $54 million spent on it. For a 20 million population, which is less than 4 times the population of your other 7 states, they spend 108 times the money. Doesn't add up, does it?
Iowa has a population of 3 million. $90 million spent in the primaries. Getting the EC votes of those 7 states before would be far more beneficial to your balanace than getting Iowa. Each of them has 3 votes, Iowa has 6 votes. That's 21 votes with a spending of $500,000 and 6 votes $90 million. Er... what?

The States Where Clinton and Trump Are Advertising the Most Until Election Day

From October 21st to election day advertising spending. Nothing was spent in your 7 states. Completely ignored.

You say Trump visited these states. How much? How much did he visit those states compared to other states.

You misread what I said. When I talk about spending, I'm not talking about election spending, I'm talking about federal aid.

In other words, lets say that Iowa has a tornado and it wipes out streets and homes. The President ignores their woes because we have a popular vote election. Their measly couple hundred thousand voters don't mean crap. Spend that money in California studying lesbian eating habits instead. They have nearly 40 million people, and it's better for a President to spend our money there than anyplace because that's where a lot of votes are.

 

[JimH52]

I understand your pain. Listening to a reasonable, bipartisan, Republican must be excruciating

 

[RealDave]

I WAS a Kasich supporter. I supported him for his reelection as Governor, and I supported him for his presidential bid. But now I regret and am even ashamed that I did.

Besides his childish behavior during the primaries, he not only went back on his word to support whoever the Republican nominee might be, he also didn't attend the RNC held by his own party in his very own state. Afterwards had nothing kind to say about our new President. But now he's gone off the deep end.

Gov. John Kasich blasts President Donald Trump, invites immigrant 'Dreamers' to Ohio

Who does this clown think he is anyway? Does he now believe he's the king of Ohio where he can say "And, by the way, if the Dreamers want to go somewhere and live? Come to Ohio. We want all the immigrants to come to Ohio, because we know how much they contribute to America."

Who is this "we" that he's talking about here? There is no "we" that feels this way, there is you and speak for yourself! I would expect a statement like this out of California, Massachusetts or New York, but not out of my state of Ohio.

Kasich is finished as Governor because he can only serve two terms; not that he would get reelected again anyway, but I seriously doubt he will just go away. If he runs for any other public office, he should just switch to the Democrat party first and get it over with. After all, Republicans have no use for this guy anymore, and so it seems, Democrat voters really like him. Now I can understand why. He's petulant, feels he's entitled, thinks like a liberal, and has little in the way of integrity.

Because Kasich has logic & makes sense he should leave the party that loves stupid uninformed people like Trump.

 

[Rustic]

I WAS a Kasich supporter. I supported him for his reelection as Governor, and I supported him for his presidential bid. But now I regret and am even ashamed that I did.

Besides his childish behavior during the primaries, he not only went back on his word to support whoever the Republican nominee might be, he also didn't attend the RNC held by his own party in his very own state. Afterwards had nothing kind to say about our new President. But now he's gone off the deep end.

Gov. John Kasich blasts President Donald Trump, invites immigrant 'Dreamers' to Ohio

Who does this clown think he is anyway? Does he now believe he's the king of Ohio where he can say "And, by the way, if the Dreamers want to go somewhere and live? Come to Ohio. We want all the immigrants to come to Ohio, because we know how much they contribute to America."

Who is this "we" that he's talking about here? There is no "we" that feels this way, there is you and speak for yourself! I would expect a statement like this out of California, Massachusetts or New York, but not out of my state of Ohio.

Kasich is finished as Governor because he can only serve two terms; not that he would get reelected again anyway, but I seriously doubt he will just go away. If he runs for any other public office, he should just switch to the Democrat party first and get it over with. After all, Republicans have no use for this guy anymore, and so it seems, Democrat voters really like him. Now I can understand why. He's petulant, feels he's entitled, thinks like a liberal, and has little in the way of integrity.

Because Kasich has logic & makes sense he should leave the party that loves stupid uninformed people like Trump.

Kasich is not a conservative in anyway, he's a progressive through and through. And his butt buddies - spineless McCain and cross-dressing Graham… Don't you understand?

 

[Rustic]

Absolutely impossible for the silly ****** to be a conservative when Chris Matthews that supports the son of a *****… LOL

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I WAS a Kasich supporter. I supported him for his reelection as Governor, and I supported him for his presidential bid. But now I regret and am even ashamed that I did.

Besides his childish behavior during the primaries, he not only went back on his word to support whoever the Republican nominee might be, he also didn't attend the RNC held by his own party in his very own state. Afterwards had nothing kind to say about our new President. But now he's gone off the deep end.

Gov. John Kasich blasts President Donald Trump, invites immigrant 'Dreamers' to Ohio

Who does this clown think he is anyway? Does he now believe he's the king of Ohio where he can say "And, by the way, if the Dreamers want to go somewhere and live? Come to Ohio. We want all the immigrants to come to Ohio, because we know how much they contribute to America."

Who is this "we" that he's talking about here? There is no "we" that feels this way, there is you and speak for yourself! I would expect a statement like this out of California, Massachusetts or New York, but not out of my state of Ohio.

Kasich is finished as Governor because he can only serve two terms; not that he would get reelected again anyway, but I seriously doubt he will just go away. If he runs for any other public office, he should just switch to the Democrat party first and get it over with. After all, Republicans have no use for this guy anymore, and so it seems, Democrat voters really like him. Now I can understand why. He's petulant, feels he's entitled, thinks like a liberal, and has little in the way of integrity.

Because Kasich has logic & makes sense he should leave the party that loves stupid uninformed people like Trump.

Actually I think he should leave the party because of his liberal stance on things.

If the guy had logic, he would have hired professionals to tell him to quit talking about his past and talk about the future during the debates. If he had any logic, he would have gained respect from the voters by honoring his word about supporting whoever the Republican candidate was. If he had any integrity, he would have at least stopped by Cleveland to welcome "his party" to his state for the Republican National Convention. If he had any logic, he would not have spoken for all of us by saying Ohio welcomes illegals.

I don't think he's logical at all, I think he's a liberal.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I understand your pain. Listening to a reasonable, bipartisan, Republican must be excruciating

No, what's excruciating is having a liberal in the Republican party.

 

[Desperado]

Kasich is a lot like McCain, a true "Never Trumper"

Both are RINO's

 

[oreo]

I WAS a Kasich supporter. I supported him for his reelection as Governor, and I supported him for his presidential bid. But now I regret and am even ashamed that I did.

Besides his childish behavior during the primaries, he not only went back on his word to support whoever the Republican nominee might be, he also didn't attend the RNC held by his own party in his very own state. Afterwards had nothing kind to say about our new President. But now he's gone off the deep end.

Gov. John Kasich blasts President Donald Trump, invites immigrant 'Dreamers' to Ohio

Who does this clown think he is anyway? Does he now believe he's the king of Ohio where he can say "And, by the way, if the Dreamers want to go somewhere and live? Come to Ohio. We want all the immigrants to come to Ohio, because we know how much they contribute to America."

Who is this "we" that he's talking about here? There is no "we" that feels this way, there is you and speak for yourself! I would expect a statement like this out of California, Massachusetts or New York, but not out of my state of Ohio.

Kasich is finished as Governor because he can only serve two terms; not that he would get reelected again anyway, but I seriously doubt he will just go away. If he runs for any other public office, he should just switch to the Democrat party first and get it over with. After all, Republicans have no use for this guy anymore, and so it seems, Democrat voters really like him. Now I can understand why. He's petulant, feels he's entitled, thinks like a liberal, and has little in the way of integrity.

Well then I imagine you would have also told Ronald Reagan to switch his party status---

Ronald Reagan is well known for setting off the largest & longest lasting economic expansion in this Nation's history. So what did he do different than any other President? With a swipe of a pen he legalized all illegals in this country.

They came out of their hiding places, got real jobs, and paid real taxes. They opened business's and hired other Americans. They bought & built homes, bought American cars, T.V.'s, furniture, applicances, went to school and paid for college educations. They set off the greatest, longest lasting economic expansion in this Nation's history.

There's nothing more BONE-HEADED--DUMB ASS'D IDEA that sending Kids that grew up in this country and were educated in this country, to a foreign country where they will be an asset to them, stimulating their economies (not ours) and paying taxes in a foreign country (not ours.) Keeping in mind that we have dreamers on college campus's and in Universities all over this country.

Next issue: SOCIAL SECURITY/MEDICARE:
We have an aging population in this country called Babyboomers. In the 1950's average family size was 4 kids, over the last several decades family size has been reduced to 2 our less. There are 10K babyboomers entering these funds on a daily basis and this rate will continue for the next 9 to 10 years, resulting in another 84 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities. Right now 1 working person is supporting 3 retirees on borrowed money from China. This is why we're continually having to raise the debt ceiling.

So your options are:
1. Let Social Security/Medicare go bankrupt.
2. Cut benefits to the bone.
3. Raise the eligibility age to 75 years old.
4. Means testing--meaning take from the wealthier to give to the poorer
5. Keep kids that grew up here and were educated here, (RIGHT HERE) to support these funds while also paying Federal and State income taxes, while stimulation our economy.

Now I realize that you Fascist Reich wingers aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer when it comes to economics. But right now we don't even have the younger working population in this country to support the military.

This is no longer the Republican party of Lincoln or Reagan. It is now the party of Trump. Stuffed full of ignorance, anger, hate, bigotry, misogyny, and now Neo-Nazi's, White Supremacists and the ALT right.
White Supremacists Praise Trump's Return To Rhetoric Blaming 'Both Sides'
Ex-KKK Leader David Duke Says White Supremacists Will 'Fulfill' Trump's Promises

If you're a moderate Republican it's time to get out of this party.

Switch your party status to Independent and get as far away as you can from the Republcan party. I did. This party no longer represents me. I don't even recognize it anymore.

A message from a long time friend and former staffer of RONALD REAGAN.

 

[Rustic]

I WAS a Kasich supporter. I supported him for his reelection as Governor, and I supported him for his presidential bid. But now I regret and am even ashamed that I did.

Besides his childish behavior during the primaries, he not only went back on his word to support whoever the Republican nominee might be, he also didn't attend the RNC held by his own party in his very own state. Afterwards had nothing kind to say about our new President. But now he's gone off the deep end.

Gov. John Kasich blasts President Donald Trump, invites immigrant 'Dreamers' to Ohio

Who does this clown think he is anyway? Does he now believe he's the king of Ohio where he can say "And, by the way, if the Dreamers want to go somewhere and live? Come to Ohio. We want all the immigrants to come to Ohio, because we know how much they contribute to America."

Who is this "we" that he's talking about here? There is no "we" that feels this way, there is you and speak for yourself! I would expect a statement like this out of California, Massachusetts or New York, but not out of my state of Ohio.

Kasich is finished as Governor because he can only serve two terms; not that he would get reelected again anyway, but I seriously doubt he will just go away. If he runs for any other public office, he should just switch to the Democrat party first and get it over with. After all, Republicans have no use for this guy anymore, and so it seems, Democrat voters really like him. Now I can understand why. He's petulant, feels he's entitled, thinks like a liberal, and has little in the way of integrity.

Well then I imagine you would have also told Ronald Reagan to switch his party status---

Ronald Reagan is well known for setting of the longest expansion in this Nation's history. So what did he do different than any other President? With a swipe of a pen he legalized all illegals in this country.

They came out of their hiding places, got real jobs, and paid real taxes. They opened business's and hired other Americans. They bought & built homes, bought American cars, T.V.'s, furniture, applicances, went to school and paid for college educations. They set off the greatest, longest lasting economic expansion in this Nation's history.

There nothing more BONE-HEADED--DUMB ASS'D IDEA that sending Kids that grew up in this country and were educated in this country, to a foreign country where they will be an asset to them, stimulating their economies (not ours) and paying taxes in a foreign country (not ours.) Keeping in mind that we have dreamers on college campus's and in Universities all over this country.

Next issue: SOCIAL SECURITY/MEDICARE:
We have an aging population in this country called Babyboomers. In the 1950's average family size was 4 kids, over the last several decades family size has been reduced to 2 our less. There are 10K babyboomers entering these funds on a daily basis and this rate will continue for the next 9 to 10 years, resulting in another 84 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities. Right now 1 working person is supporting 3 retirees on borrowed money from China. This is why we're continually having to raise the debt ceiling.

So your options are:
1. Let Social Security/Medicare go bankrupt.
2. Cut benefits to the bone.
3. Raise the eligibility age to 75 years old.
4. Means testing--meaning take from the wealthier to give to the poorer
5. Keep kids that grew up here and were educated here, (RIGHT HERE) to support these funds while also paying Federal and State income taxes, while stimulation our economy.

Now I realize that you Reich wingers aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer when it comes to economics. But right now we don't even have the younger working population in this country to support the military.

This is no longer the Republican party of Lincoln or Reagan. It is now the party of Trump. Stuffed full of ignorance, anger, hate, bigotry & misogyny.

And it's time to get out!

Switch your party status to Independent and get as far away as you can from the Republcan party. I did.

Ronald Ragan and Lincoln were both career politicians, not the least bit conservative

 

[oreo]

I WAS a Kasich supporter. I supported him for his reelection as Governor, and I supported him for his presidential bid. But now I regret and am even ashamed that I did.

Besides his childish behavior during the primaries, he not only went back on his word to support whoever the Republican nominee might be, he also didn't attend the RNC held by his own party in his very own state. Afterwards had nothing kind to say about our new President. But now he's gone off the deep end.

Gov. John Kasich blasts President Donald Trump, invites immigrant 'Dreamers' to Ohio

Who does this clown think he is anyway? Does he now believe he's the king of Ohio where he can say "And, by the way, if the Dreamers want to go somewhere and live? Come to Ohio. We want all the immigrants to come to Ohio, because we know how much they contribute to America."

Who is this "we" that he's talking about here? There is no "we" that feels this way, there is you and speak for yourself! I would expect a statement like this out of California, Massachusetts or New York, but not out of my state of Ohio.

Kasich is finished as Governor because he can only serve two terms; not that he would get reelected again anyway, but I seriously doubt he will just go away. If he runs for any other public office, he should just switch to the Democrat party first and get it over with. After all, Republicans have no use for this guy anymore, and so it seems, Democrat voters really like him. Now I can understand why. He's petulant, feels he's entitled, thinks like a liberal, and has little in the way of integrity.

Well then I imagine you would have also told Ronald Reagan to switch his party status---

Ronald Reagan is well known for setting of the longest expansion in this Nation's history. So what did he do different than any other President? With a swipe of a pen he legalized all illegals in this country.

They came out of their hiding places, got real jobs, and paid real taxes. They opened business's and hired other Americans. They bought & built homes, bought American cars, T.V.'s, furniture, applicances, went to school and paid for college educations. They set off the greatest, longest lasting economic expansion in this Nation's history.

There nothing more BONE-HEADED--DUMB ASS'D IDEA that sending Kids that grew up in this country and were educated in this country, to a foreign country where they will be an asset to them, stimulating their economies (not ours) and paying taxes in a foreign country (not ours.) Keeping in mind that we have dreamers on college campus's and in Universities all over this country.

Next issue: SOCIAL SECURITY/MEDICARE:
We have an aging population in this country called Babyboomers. In the 1950's average family size was 4 kids, over the last several decades family size has been reduced to 2 our less. There are 10K babyboomers entering these funds on a daily basis and this rate will continue for the next 9 to 10 years, resulting in another 84 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities. Right now 1 working person is supporting 3 retirees on borrowed money from China. This is why we're continually having to raise the debt ceiling.

So your options are:
1. Let Social Security/Medicare go bankrupt.
2. Cut benefits to the bone.
3. Raise the eligibility age to 75 years old.
4. Means testing--meaning take from the wealthier to give to the poorer
5. Keep kids that grew up here and were educated here, (RIGHT HERE) to support these funds while also paying Federal and State income taxes, while stimulation our economy.

Now I realize that you Reich wingers aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer when it comes to economics. But right now we don't even have the younger working population in this country to support the military.

This is no longer the Republican party of Lincoln or Reagan. It is now the party of Trump. Stuffed full of ignorance, anger, hate, bigotry & misogyny.

And it's time to get out!

Switch your party status to Independent and get as far away as you can from the Republcan party. I did.

Ronald Ragan and Lincoln were both career politicians, not the least bit conservative

Lincoln & Reagan are the ICONS of the Republican party--they are the party.

What's happened over the last 2 decades is invaders have entered the party referring to themselves as "conservatives"--that don't understand the meaning of being a Republican much less a conservative.

The Republican party has been shattered into 4 groups. The religious right wing that want to hammer away at already settled U.S. supreme court issues, and are typically single issue voters. The extreme right wing aka Tea Party, that has their head stuck so far up their ass's, they never realised they just elected someone who is more liberal than Hillary Clinton, who just rolled over Republican leaders on a debt deal, then went on to N. Dakota to bragg about the great deal he made with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. Then moderates are the majority that went along to get along. Now we have the Alt Right, a white supremacist group that has found a new home with Donald Trump in office.
All Along I Thought Trump Wasn’t a Conservative/Republican, But Now I Realize I’m Not

This is not the Republican party I grew up with and stayed with throughout my adult life. It's changed dramatically, and that change started in 2010 with the Tea Party and got worse. It had help with right wing talk show hosts that Republicans became attached at the hip too.

Right wing talk show hosts promoted this ass clown and sold them to their audiences, in 3 or more daily hours of right wing hyperbole, half truths, all out lies, and enough conspiracy theories to fill the capital building from floor to ceiling. They instilled the hate, bigotry & misogyny in their audiences.

And when this all comes down on your heads- and it's going too-you make certain you point your fingers in the right direction.

Donald Trump broke the conservative media

"It is not entirely true that Trump engineered a “hostile takeover” of the GOP, provided that the party is defined more broadly than elected officials and party insiders. As Conor Friedersdorf wrote last year in the Atlantic: “the elements of the party that sent pro-Trump cues or 'Trump is at least acceptable’ signals to primary voters—Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, Bill O'reilly, Rudi Guiliani, Jeff Sessions, Rick Scott, Jan Brewer, Joe Arpaio, Sarah Palin, Ben Carson, Chris Christie, Breitbart.com, The Drudge Report, The New York Post, are simply more powerful, relative to National Review, Mitt Romney, John McCain, and other ‘Trump is unacceptable’ forces, than previously thought.”
The GOP That Failed

You were warned over and over again about Trump, you ignored all those warnings, and frankly you deserve everything coming your way. Trump is going to destroy the entire Republican party.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You're talking about the EC system giving smaller states more power to make them more equal to the big boy states. But I've shown you time and again why it's not true. The money being spent on the Presidential election shows quite clearly that only 12 states get the attention.

I never said it made less populated states equal, but it gave them better footing than if we had a popular vote. In other words, their vote would actually count to a candidate.

92 countries in the world use proportional representation and not one of them has the cities controlling the rest of the country. Not one. Yet you're pulling this shit out of your ass and trying to claim that this is the case. Yet you don't even know one system that uses PR, you didn't even know what PR was and you were too ******* lazy to even look up what PR was.

Again, you don't give a shit. You like the partisan system that gives your side the supposed benefits. That's it. Stop pretending you know stuff that you don't know. Stop throwing fake statistics at me once a week to make it look like you're even trying, and stop pretending that you're anything other than a partisan hack doing what your rich bitches want you to do and say.

I don't have to have numbers from other countries, I have our numbers and they are the only ones that count. I did prove to you that one city has more power than nine states. What more evidence do you need than that?

Moreover is that the Democrats never had a problem with our voting system when they won. Now that they are losing, they are not going to blame themselves, they are going to blame the way we've been voting for hundreds of years.

It's ridiculous. "Oh, we're not winning anymore, so let's change the rules of the game so we do win!" How ridiculous.

The point here is Ray, it doesn't actually give smaller states more equal footing at all.

The problem here Ray is you don't know what you're talking about.

Ray, you don't have numbers from other countries and you don't know ANYTHING about other countries.

You said the EC system is the fairest, and yet you've admitted you know NOTHING about any other system.

It's like a kid with an ice cream "This ice cream is the best ice cream in the world" When he's only tried one ice cream.

Essentially Ray, ignorance doesn't make a good argument.

Now, how you know nothing about these systems when I've written to you about them many times I don't know. The only thing I can think of is that you don't bother reading what I write. It's true. I doubt you've even got this far.

I guess it all depends on how much time I have. I used to read everything but finally realized a lot of people post blah-blah not associated with the discussion, so I only read things when I have the time to read them.

But you talk about what I don't read, and you just once again said I claimed that the EC puts states on equal levels even though only a few posts ago I corrected you on that. I never said it puts them on "equal" levels to other states. But of course, if you don't read it again, I guess you'll be making the same accusations.

So, you have enough time to reply to me.
You have enough time to make stuff up and pretend you know what you're talking about when you clearly don't.

But you don't have enough time to actually read my post properly.
You don't have enough time to type in FPTP or PR and see what they are.
You don't have enough time to learn a single thing about the topic.

Sound about right?


I mean, why do you bother replying to me then if you're A) not going to learn anything about the topic and B) make stuff up?

You corrected me about the EC, but you are wrong. It doesn't put the states on an equal footing and I've shown evidence of this and you haven't shown anything to back your case up at all. You haven't even bothered to look at what I've written.

So, Ray, either read what I write or I'm just going to stick you on ignore because, quite frankly, you're as frustrating as ****, because this isn't a debate. This is like talking to a stone because you don't read what people write and you don't care.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Oh and Ray, your statistics SUCK BALLS. If you think Virginia has a population of "under 625,000", then....

My bad, I meant to type Vermont.

Oh wow.

But still Ray, can you tell me how much attention these 7 states got in the US presidential election? Can you tell me how much attention they get in the US senate or house elections? I bet you can't.

Each state gets two Senators regardless of size or population. Much like our Electoral College, the Senate was designed so that smaller states have some power. Congress people are elected as per population. Larger states have more power in Congress, but equal power in the Senate. It's sort of a checks and balances thing.

Now if we elected Senators like Congress, then smaller states would be virtually powerless. Larger populated states would control the entire country, and that would leave a lot of people out of the loop. Their states might not ever get any federal funding, they may not even get disaster relief. No politician would care about them because they would not have enough power TO care about them.

Trump did visit those smaller states that Hillary ignored. Those smaller states still had the electoral votes he needed to win the presidency. Hillary just assumed if she got the EC's of the larger populated states, that would be more than enough to push her into the White House.

Listen, Wyoming has three times the power of a vote than California or Texas. Yet it gets ignored in Presidential elections.

The Crazy, Lopsided Math of Campaign 2016's Ad Spending So Far

Wyoming had $167,000 spent on it by June 10th 2016
Vermont had $204,000
Alaska had $115,000
North Dakota and South Dakota, Deleware and Montana seem to have had nothing spent on them.

Hardly proving your point that the EC forces people to spend money on them.

Florida had $54 million spent on it. For a 20 million population, which is less than 4 times the population of your other 7 states, they spend 108 times the money. Doesn't add up, does it?
Iowa has a population of 3 million. $90 million spent in the primaries. Getting the EC votes of those 7 states before would be far more beneficial to your balanace than getting Iowa. Each of them has 3 votes, Iowa has 6 votes. That's 21 votes with a spending of $500,000 and 6 votes $90 million. Er... what?

The States Where Clinton and Trump Are Advertising the Most Until Election Day

From October 21st to election day advertising spending. Nothing was spent in your 7 states. Completely ignored.

You say Trump visited these states. How much? How much did he visit those states compared to other states.

You misread what I said. When I talk about spending, I'm not talking about election spending, I'm talking about federal aid.

In other words, lets say that Iowa has a tornado and it wipes out streets and homes. The President ignores their woes because we have a popular vote election. Their measly couple hundred thousand voters don't mean crap. Spend that money in California studying lesbian eating habits instead. They have nearly 40 million people, and it's better for a President to spend our money there than anyplace because that's where a lot of votes are.

Well it doesn't really matter, does it. The argument is still the same. In Germany every vote matters. You spend X amount of money on these 100,000 people it's the same as on those 100,000 people.

But then again you haven't backed up your argument. Can you show that other countries end up with a disproportional amount of money compared to the US which you seem to think doesn't have a disproportional amount spent on the larger states? Do you have an argument or are you making this shit up AGAIN and AGAIN?

 

[oreo]

I WAS a Kasich supporter. I supported him for his reelection as Governor, and I supported him for his presidential bid. But now I regret and am even ashamed that I did.

Besides his childish behavior during the primaries, he not only went back on his word to support whoever the Republican nominee might be, he also didn't attend the RNC held by his own party in his very own state. Afterwards had nothing kind to say about our new President. But now he's gone off the deep end.

Gov. John Kasich blasts President Donald Trump, invites immigrant 'Dreamers' to Ohio

Who does this clown think he is anyway? Does he now believe he's the king of Ohio where he can say "And, by the way, if the Dreamers want to go somewhere and live? Come to Ohio. We want all the immigrants to come to Ohio, because we know how much they contribute to America."

Who is this "we" that he's talking about here? There is no "we" that feels this way, there is you and speak for yourself! I would expect a statement like this out of California, Massachusetts or New York, but not out of my state of Ohio.

Kasich is finished as Governor because he can only serve two terms; not that he would get reelected again anyway, but I seriously doubt he will just go away. If he runs for any other public office, he should just switch to the Democrat party first and get it over with. After all, Republicans have no use for this guy anymore, and so it seems, Democrat voters really like him. Now I can understand why. He's petulant, feels he's entitled, thinks like a liberal, and has little in the way of integrity.

Well then I imagine you would have also told Ronald Reagan to switch his party status---

Ronald Reagan is well known for setting of the longest expansion in this Nation's history. So what did he do different than any other President? With a swipe of a pen he legalized all illegals in this country.

They came out of their hiding places, got real jobs, and paid real taxes. They opened business's and hired other Americans. They bought & built homes, bought American cars, T.V.'s, furniture, applicances, went to school and paid for college educations. They set off the greatest, longest lasting economic expansion in this Nation's history.

There nothing more BONE-HEADED--DUMB ASS'D IDEA that sending Kids that grew up in this country and were educated in this country, to a foreign country where they will be an asset to them, stimulating their economies (not ours) and paying taxes in a foreign country (not ours.) Keeping in mind that we have dreamers on college campus's and in Universities all over this country.

Next issue: SOCIAL SECURITY/MEDICARE:
We have an aging population in this country called Babyboomers. In the 1950's average family size was 4 kids, over the last several decades family size has been reduced to 2 our less. There are 10K babyboomers entering these funds on a daily basis and this rate will continue for the next 9 to 10 years, resulting in another 84 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities. Right now 1 working person is supporting 3 retirees on borrowed money from China. This is why we're continually having to raise the debt ceiling.

So your options are:
1. Let Social Security/Medicare go bankrupt.
2. Cut benefits to the bone.
3. Raise the eligibility age to 75 years old.
4. Means testing--meaning take from the wealthier to give to the poorer
5. Keep kids that grew up here and were educated here, (RIGHT HERE) to support these funds while also paying Federal and State income taxes, while stimulation our economy.

Now I realize that you Reich wingers aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer when it comes to economics. But right now we don't even have the younger working population in this country to support the military.

This is no longer the Republican party of Lincoln or Reagan. It is now the party of Trump. Stuffed full of ignorance, anger, hate, bigotry & misogyny.

And it's time to get out!

Switch your party status to Independent and get as far away as you can from the Republcan party. I did.

Ronald Ragan and Lincoln were both career politicians, not the least bit conservative

You're right, and I am sick and tired of your right wing talk show hosts always bringing up Ronald Reagan's name in praise.

You would have hated Ronald Reagan, as much as he would have hated you. Rush Limbaugh would have tagged him an "Establishment candidate" as soon as he threw his hat into the ring.

So stop talking about Lincoln & Reagan in praise--and write or email your right wing talk show hosts and inform them of that. You don' t want to hear their names mentioned again--or you'll interupt those obscene profit breaks by turning them off.

This is no longer the party of Lincoln or Reagan, it is now the party of Trump. (Glorify in it while you can.)

 

[Rustic]

I WAS a Kasich supporter. I supported him for his reelection as Governor, and I supported him for his presidential bid. But now I regret and am even ashamed that I did.

Besides his childish behavior during the primaries, he not only went back on his word to support whoever the Republican nominee might be, he also didn't attend the RNC held by his own party in his very own state. Afterwards had nothing kind to say about our new President. But now he's gone off the deep end.

Gov. John Kasich blasts President Donald Trump, invites immigrant 'Dreamers' to Ohio

Who does this clown think he is anyway? Does he now believe he's the king of Ohio where he can say "And, by the way, if the Dreamers want to go somewhere and live? Come to Ohio. We want all the immigrants to come to Ohio, because we know how much they contribute to America."

Who is this "we" that he's talking about here? There is no "we" that feels this way, there is you and speak for yourself! I would expect a statement like this out of California, Massachusetts or New York, but not out of my state of Ohio.

Kasich is finished as Governor because he can only serve two terms; not that he would get reelected again anyway, but I seriously doubt he will just go away. If he runs for any other public office, he should just switch to the Democrat party first and get it over with. After all, Republicans have no use for this guy anymore, and so it seems, Democrat voters really like him. Now I can understand why. He's petulant, feels he's entitled, thinks like a liberal, and has little in the way of integrity.

Well then I imagine you would have also told Ronald Reagan to switch his party status---

Ronald Reagan is well known for setting of the longest expansion in this Nation's history. So what did he do different than any other President? With a swipe of a pen he legalized all illegals in this country.

They came out of their hiding places, got real jobs, and paid real taxes. They opened business's and hired other Americans. They bought & built homes, bought American cars, T.V.'s, furniture, applicances, went to school and paid for college educations. They set off the greatest, longest lasting economic expansion in this Nation's history.

There nothing more BONE-HEADED--DUMB ASS'D IDEA that sending Kids that grew up in this country and were educated in this country, to a foreign country where they will be an asset to them, stimulating their economies (not ours) and paying taxes in a foreign country (not ours.) Keeping in mind that we have dreamers on college campus's and in Universities all over this country.

Next issue: SOCIAL SECURITY/MEDICARE:
We have an aging population in this country called Babyboomers. In the 1950's average family size was 4 kids, over the last several decades family size has been reduced to 2 our less. There are 10K babyboomers entering these funds on a daily basis and this rate will continue for the next 9 to 10 years, resulting in another 84 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities. Right now 1 working person is supporting 3 retirees on borrowed money from China. This is why we're continually having to raise the debt ceiling.

So your options are:
1. Let Social Security/Medicare go bankrupt.
2. Cut benefits to the bone.
3. Raise the eligibility age to 75 years old.
4. Means testing--meaning take from the wealthier to give to the poorer
5. Keep kids that grew up here and were educated here, (RIGHT HERE) to support these funds while also paying Federal and State income taxes, while stimulation our economy.

Now I realize that you Reich wingers aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer when it comes to economics. But right now we don't even have the younger working population in this country to support the military.

This is no longer the Republican party of Lincoln or Reagan. It is now the party of Trump. Stuffed full of ignorance, anger, hate, bigotry & misogyny.

And it's time to get out!

Switch your party status to Independent and get as far away as you can from the Republcan party. I did.

Ronald Ragan and Lincoln were both career politicians, not the least bit conservative

You're right, and I am sick and tired of your right wing talk show hosts always bringing up Ronald Reagan's name in praise.

You would have hated Ronald Reagan, as much as he would have hated you. Rush Limbaugh would have tagged him an "Establishment candidate" as soon as he threw his hat into the ring.

So stop talking about Lincoln & Reagan in praise--and write or email your right wing talk show hosts and inform them of that. You don' t want to hear their names mentioned again--or you'll interupt those obscene profit breaks by turning them off.

This is no longer the party of Lincoln or Reagan, it is now the party of Trump. (Glorify in it while you can.)

Career politicians are all the same no matter what party

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

My bad, I meant to type Vermont.

Oh wow.

But still Ray, can you tell me how much attention these 7 states got in the US presidential election? Can you tell me how much attention they get in the US senate or house elections? I bet you can't.

Each state gets two Senators regardless of size or population. Much like our Electoral College, the Senate was designed so that smaller states have some power. Congress people are elected as per population. Larger states have more power in Congress, but equal power in the Senate. It's sort of a checks and balances thing.

Now if we elected Senators like Congress, then smaller states would be virtually powerless. Larger populated states would control the entire country, and that would leave a lot of people out of the loop. Their states might not ever get any federal funding, they may not even get disaster relief. No politician would care about them because they would not have enough power TO care about them.

Trump did visit those smaller states that Hillary ignored. Those smaller states still had the electoral votes he needed to win the presidency. Hillary just assumed if she got the EC's of the larger populated states, that would be more than enough to push her into the White House.

Listen, Wyoming has three times the power of a vote than California or Texas. Yet it gets ignored in Presidential elections.

The Crazy, Lopsided Math of Campaign 2016's Ad Spending So Far

Wyoming had $167,000 spent on it by June 10th 2016
Vermont had $204,000
Alaska had $115,000
North Dakota and South Dakota, Deleware and Montana seem to have had nothing spent on them.

Hardly proving your point that the EC forces people to spend money on them.

Florida had $54 million spent on it. For a 20 million population, which is less than 4 times the population of your other 7 states, they spend 108 times the money. Doesn't add up, does it?
Iowa has a population of 3 million. $90 million spent in the primaries. Getting the EC votes of those 7 states before would be far more beneficial to your balanace than getting Iowa. Each of them has 3 votes, Iowa has 6 votes. That's 21 votes with a spending of $500,000 and 6 votes $90 million. Er... what?

The States Where Clinton and Trump Are Advertising the Most Until Election Day

From October 21st to election day advertising spending. Nothing was spent in your 7 states. Completely ignored.

You say Trump visited these states. How much? How much did he visit those states compared to other states.

You misread what I said. When I talk about spending, I'm not talking about election spending, I'm talking about federal aid.

In other words, lets say that Iowa has a tornado and it wipes out streets and homes. The President ignores their woes because we have a popular vote election. Their measly couple hundred thousand voters don't mean crap. Spend that money in California studying lesbian eating habits instead. They have nearly 40 million people, and it's better for a President to spend our money there than anyplace because that's where a lot of votes are.

Well it doesn't really matter, does it. The argument is still the same. In Germany every vote matters. You spend X amount of money on these 100,000 people it's the same as on those 100,000 people.

But then again you haven't backed up your argument. Can you show that other countries end up with a disproportional amount of money compared to the US which you seem to think doesn't have a disproportional amount spent on the larger states? Do you have an argument or are you making this shit up AGAIN and AGAIN?

The United States is not other countries. Our government is different, our citizens are different, our societies are different. What may work there may not work here. What works here may not work there.

For instance let's take their gun stance in these countries. If we ever outlawed guns here, the criminals would be having a picnic because only the police and criminals would have the guns. Much like drugs in this country, you would never be able to stop criminals from getting guns. There would be more armed robberies on the streets, in our businesses, in our homes because there would be no fear for or an armed robber breaking into an occupied house. If Europe loves their restrictions and it works for them, fine, but it would never work here.

Or we can look at Commie Care--the closest thing we have to their socialized medical care. The money went to likely Democrat voters. If you make french fries for a living or sweep floors, you got medical care because of the huge subsides, but french fry makers likely vote Democrat. If you are a middle-class earner or above, you got screwed, and in many cases such as mine, the plans are garbage and simply unaffordable, but we likely vote Republican.

So politicians here do cater to their voters because those are the people that put them and will keep them in power, and they will use federal money to keep them happy. After all, when DumBama got comfortable in office, our food stamp recipients doubled, and it was no accident either.

That's just how our politics works in this country.