**** Elections thread *****

[Jack Sawyer]

That link seems to favor the electoral college. It looks to me that it pretty well refutes the two major objections to the system. I mean, this is an 8th grade debate man. Go read the James Madison quote at the end of that piece you linked. The Majority may not respect the rights of the Minority. If the presidency were selected by popular vote, a candidate could pander to Boston, San Fran, LA, NYC, Chicago, Houston, Denver, Seattle, Atlanta, and be done. What about the rest of the country?

The relevant fact was that the gallup poll itself showed that 63% of Americans wanted to do away with that system. I thought that in a democracy, when two-thirds of a country wants something, it was time to have a cold hard look at that thing. It’s not working. Legitimizing it because it worked this time for your purposes is a completely illogical argument made on clouds.


Plus, 5 times in 56 elections right? Curiously, twice in the last 5. As, dare I say it, Republicans get better and better at gerrymandering on a national level and other kinds of vote manipulation, vote suppression, etc, it’s bound to happen quite more often in the near future. For some reason, it’s always the Republicans making the news for this. Hear me now, quote me later.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...s-working.html
https://thinkprogress.org/2016-a-cas...n-258b5f90ddcd
https://www.salon.com/2016/10/18/its...goes-way-back/
https://www.thenation.com/article/th...story-of-2016/
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...r_america.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/28/u...ppression.html

Just gonna say, when you link a Washington Post opinion piece that cites a book written by a guy from Salon.com.....heavy duty eye roll.


I skimmed it. Looks like Karl Rove wasn't shy about advertising the plan. If you don't like it, get out and vote.

It’s an opinion yes. Hinted at by the “opinion” at the top of the page. Just like the Forbes page I linked to a while back.


However, if your votes gets systematically nullified or “partisanified”, why get out to vote? When you alienate people because they see and feel that no matter how they vote their district’s votes go to one party anyway, that “winner-takes-all” system at the heart of a two-party system, people are discouraged to vote. And then the problem keeps on going.


An explanation as to how this works, given to you from the animal kingdom side (since you “eyeroll” opinions)

What about the other parties??? Dude....they ran a pothead!!! Seriously man, there are plenty of conservatives with not-great opinions of Trump. Gary Johnson still got single digits. If a third party couldn't make a mark in THIS election....then yeah, they can go suck dick.

That was my point. It doesn’t matter who they ran, the results would be inconsequential nonetheless.




PS.


“Pothead”? I assume you are against marijuana legalization as well?

[BananaStand]

The relevant fact was that the gallup poll itself showed that 63% of Americans wanted to do away with that system. I thought that in a democracy, when two-thirds of a country wants something, it was time to have a cold hard look at that thing.

Bad news bro. 63% is less than 2/3.

It’s not working. Legitimizing it because it worked this time for your purposes is a completely illogical argument made on clouds.

Why isn't it working? Objecting to the electoral college has got to be one of the most intellectually lazy arguments a person can make. You can't lose a game you're not playing. If the goal was to win the popular vote, the campaign would have looked alot different. You would have seen Trump spend more time in California, New York and Illinois, and you wouldn't' see any candidates in Maine, Rhode Island, or Montana. Are you starting to see why we don't do that?

When you say "it worked out this time", it's like you're implying that Hillary would most definitely have won a popular vote contest, and that is a completely illogical argument made on clouds.

However, if your votes gets systematically nullified or “partisanified”, why get out to vote? When you alienate people because they see and feel that no matter how they vote their district’s votes go to one party anyway, that “winner-takes-all” system at the heart of a two-party system, people are discouraged to vote. And then the problem keeps on going.

So you're describing the quandry of conservatives in California, New York, Massachussetts, and other places. go back to the article you linked. 10 states have more than half the electoral votes. That's what's even keeping democrats viable. I hate to break it to you man, but I think Republicans would decimate Democrats if we played the 'majority rules' game with our elections.

“Pothead”? I assume you are against marijuana legalization as well?

I can support de-criminalization, but outright legalization is not something I support. Full disclosure, I put away about an ounce a month myself. I have no trouble getting it. I use it in my own home, privately, when my kids aren't there. Also on backcountry hikes and camping trips, miles from any other person. The one time in 20 years that I got pulled over in a hot-boxed car, the cop just let me go with a ticket for 'improper lane change'. I think that's enough progress for weed. Any further than that and we have presidential candidates asking "What is Aleppo?" on television.