This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
And if you take out the angry bigot vote Clinton wins in a landslide. But as it turns out, both angry bigots and California are a big part of America.
But then we really arent a nation made up of pseudo-independent states.
Unfortunately I think the only serious EC reform we'd see is a move to make electors bound to the state results. Republicans aren't going to willingly hand over the mechanism that has won them two of the last five elections. Getting to a national popular vote is going to be a long battle.
Well see that's the problem. Let's revisit the HOR limiting law, that was under Woodrow Wilson.
Harahan is hilarious by the way. Their city council is trying to pass an ordinance to get Redflex cameras in while the CEO is going to prison.Xactly.
A president Pence or Republican TBD will probably do a lot of things that are counter to my liberal beliefs. A president Trump is a serious threat to the Constitution and institutions the US depends on. There are tail risks with a Trump presidency that have very bad outcomes. He is unfit to be president and dangerous.
Why? Because the head of the executive branch is elected by popular vote? That doesn't follow.
Good thing Trump has a sense of humor. If he had tweaked the Clintons like this he probably would have "committed suicide" or been killed by a mugger a long time ago.
This is the thing. If you have a cause for reform, argue it all the time, not just when you're getting your hat handed to you.
This is my only point- the bolded is wrong. The electors are part of the rules too. I'm not saying they should break with the states. I'm just saying that it's wrong to accept one and a legitimate part of the process but reject the other as illegitimate. They're both part of the "rules laid out."
We forget that the Electoral College was designed, in part, to placate the slave states.
Linda McMahon got SBA because she was able to get Nikolai Volkov booked to sign the CCCP anthem at the inauguration.
The slave states made Hillary go to WI exactly one less time than Jay Cutler, run commercials in New Orleans & Chicago, and order the SEIU to go to work in Iowa instead of Michigan.
It's true. She incompetently lost PA, MI, & WI. All considered not in play because of Obama's margins in 2012. She just holds these, and it's not even a blip discussion. Instead she got crushed in the battlegrounds. I still support the EC, and the fact that they have to go win the states. She banked all her votes at home, ran up the score in CA and NY. That shouldn't make a president necessarily either.
It's pretty hilarious that the Trump team is that desperate for talent for the inauguration. Gotta be tough for a booker to convince anyone to play the event.
No, but they made those things matter more than the collective will of the people.
Well, less than Hillary, but that's neither here nor there.
It was rural Wisconsin, Michigan, and PA that elected Trump. None of them were "slave states" and they all went for Obama just four years ago.
No, Wisconsin, Michigan, and PA added up to a total of 46 electoral votes. He needed 270.
It's just too bad that these jerks decided to turn from working class families to uneducated whites...some day they will just shut-up and do what those urban-folk know is best for them...
It's a good thing straw is so light, otherwise you might hurt yourself building that monster.
We were talking about the relative vote representation for president with the electoral college, and how the "slave" states were placated with it, and I made a tongue in cheek statement about how we don't call them "slave" states anymore. Wisconsin, Michigan, and PA don't really fall into any part of that discussion, but let's take the most rural of them and break it down with what I'm concerned with in the EC:
It's part of the expensive private school education we all get thanks to our wealthy parents. The freedom afforded by our luxurious lifestyles help too. I came up with that one in the back of the limo on my way to the opera while the au pair cared for my children.
It's not surprising urban liberals get bitter, they cling to Putin or racism or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-rural sentiment or anti-religion sentiment as a way to explain their frustration.
The margin in those three states was less than 100,000 combined, and while she didn't campaign in WI or MI she did quite a bit in PA. She lost Florida by a bit over 100,000 and was all over the state. Not to totally excuse the Clinton team but I think the criticism over the campaign strategy has gone a little overboard with hindsight bias. I think the more important questions are why both internal and public polling was so far off in those states, and how policy and messaging needs to be adjusted to reach rural voters who clearly are feeling disconnected both socially and economically - and not without cause.
So rural vs urban centers, same as it ever was. We've all seen the mostly red county maps in even blue states. This is played out from Sacramento to Burlington.
