Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by TheChatch, Apr 8, 2015.
no comment .
Both take advantage of the poor by using Religion and fear while also working to keep the status quo the same?
Because if we're going to marginalize a population, we'd rather it be anyone but rural whites
Because it’s actually feasible and it would show that voter representation is actually the purpose instead of the way it looks right now which is to ensure democrats win.
Actually you never did say "how?" You just told me I should move in with them(inexplicably?)
How? ISIS would blush at the amount of death and human despair Republicans have introduced to the world. Shit, Republicans are partially responsible for the formation of ISIS. You can literally draw direct lines between republican-led initiatives in the middle east and central America and the current refugees crises in those areas. Not to mention the compounding influence climate change(that Republicans refuse to acknowledge) has had on those situations. It's really no contest. Republicans are certifiably worse than ISIS.
This is complete bullshit. More people voted for Donald Trump in California than even voted at all in 39 other states.
Because it isn’t a fucking democracy and it never has been nor was it intended to be.
I,m back jack .
Please explain how the popular vote is not just as feasible as the electoral college.
And the second part of your sentence makes no sense.
Then why are we weighting 'part' of the government in a Democratic manner? And why is that a 'good thing' if it flies in the face of what you think it was intended to be. Contradictions everywhere.
There is no point in any political party allowing that to happen in their state until all other states agree. There’s already bills pending/passed in multiple states trying to do an end around on the electoral college by pledging all of their votes to the national popular vote winner if they get enough other states to agree.
The movement is out there. You are just ignoring it for no logically defensible reason.
You can reach a lot more voters per dollar in rural areas than you can in high population urban areas. Once again, you are disproving your own argument.
We are a representative democracy
Yep. As a party they’re totally keeping people against their will, wanting a caliphate, suppressing women, lopping heads off, burning people alive, etc. I offer the same challenge to you. Go live with different Republicans for a month and go live with ISIS and report back on your findings.
Because “part” of a representative republic has democratic aspects. We elect our representatives and they have more or less power depending on their level of government.
Guys its real simple: you know how every country that has a democratically elected government totally collapses into oblivion? It's because they don't disenfranchise their brown voters. I can't believe these other chowderheads don't understand this, Talking Head, but I understand, man.
So if trump wins the national vote next go around California is gonna send all its votes to him huh?
Gtfo. Those states aren’t dumb enough to completely nullify its citizens votes nor should they. Primarily because they’d get their asses tossed out of office.
Alecock, in your infinite wisdom, explain to me what a true democracy is.
We’re a representative republic.
I guess technically you could say we’re a constitutional republic.
If all states did it would they get their asses tossed out of office?
They have internment camps for children that were forcibly separated from their parents.
What is the war on Christmas, "we're a Christian nation", anti-choice movement, religious freedom council, if not a systemic attempt to establish legally enforced Christian supremacy
I legitimately can't believe you even thought this was a valid talking point. We're just talking matters of degrees here.
Yemen wouldn't be happening were it not for our military support
The United States is a federal republic and a constitutional representative democracy.
West Virginia voters actually have the most power in the House. The gap is (obviously) less than the Senate but it still exists.
It's where everyones vote carries equal value, and because of that they all end up getting gay married to trangender anime characters and standing in bread lines, so they have something they can trade for heroin, and the race mixing is totally out of control. Sometimes women even get elected. It's a dystopian nightmare.
I’m pretty sure the majority of Alabama would be pretty pissed if all it’s votes went to Hillary.
It would be a huge part of the next election and whatever legislation allowed that to happen in the first place would be tossed.
At least you can’t get pissed about split electoral votes as a voter.
so are u a socialist or capitalist ?
Why would all its votes go to Hillary? (I'm talking about electoral votes being split by each state representatively of the votes within that state)
None of the laws have gone into effect because they haven’t gotten enough state legislators to agree, but yes California has agreed to do exactly that.
No it’s where there are no elected officials and the people vote on every single issue. Every one.
I’m pretty sure old people with nothing else to do would be dominating your dumb ass in that system.
as u walk over toes and feet of homeless .
And the next state election will be 100% based on abolishing that legislation if trump wins the popular vote. It’s dumb and short sighted.
OH NO WHAT I HAVE I DONE? Lmfao, you fucking clown.
That's a direct democracy, we have an indirect democracy.
I’m fine with that. I thought you were talking about AlternativeFactsRule ’s proposition about sending all votes to the winner of the popular vote.
Sorry, it’s hard having five conversations at once with you people.
I was asking alecock to describe a true direct democracy since he is clearly retarded and doesn’t understand any of this.
I can see why the republican party focuses on just racist whites
And again there is no functional difference between a democratic republic and a representative democracy. And an important quote from the article you chose to defend your stance.
It won’t matter at all until enough states agree to it. This probably won’t happen before the 2020 presidential election. No state is committed to the process until enough states join in.
Actually you said a "true democracy", color me shocked at you continuing to be totally full of shit.
What's even funnier is that I literally never advocated for direct democracy or "true democracy", whatever the fuck that is.
The article you linked to educate us all points out that not even the founding fathers agreed with your definition. Let alone people of today.
I can see why the Democratic Party focuses on dog piling people with racist claims until they just give up.
Well ISIS is a conservative, religious and extremest group, so me sitting down with them, compared to a standard Republican group is a little unfair for your hyperbole experiment. However, if I sat down with a conservative, religious, and extremist group in America, they would be Republicans and they would have a lot of the same views of ISIS. And who impacts us more in America, ISIS, or that extremist side of the Republicans?
That’s not my proposition. That’s an idea other people came up with. The point is that lots of people recognize the electoral college is outdated and a disservice to the notion of “one man, one vote.”
I was asked about the house. I said it is the most democratic wing of our federal government. He asked why aren’t the others more democratic and I told him why.
You’re right, we’re just gonna get into a pissing match over words. We all know it has democratic aspects but isn’t a democracy nor was it ever intended to be one.
It was intended to be an indirect democracy. Definitions matter. Not all democracies are direct democracies.
Do you actually read the articles you link? From that same article: