On 04-08-19 16:02, Bob Ackley <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: Gibraltar <=-
Definitely. The people of Puerto Rico are American citizens, albeit
without representation in the Congress.
I don't think they get to vote for president, either, unless they have
an official residence in a state and can vote absentee there
albeitOn 04-08-19 16:02, Bob Ackley <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: Gibraltar <=-
Definitely. The people of Puerto Rico are American citizens,
they havewithout representation in the Congress.
I don't think they get to vote for president, either, unless
toan official residence in a state and can vote absentee there
That is unfortunately true. I've heard that many of them are moving
Miami so that they can vote in the next presidential election.
The reason is that the president is elected by the states, not by the people, and that's why the Electoral College is set up the way it is
The reason is that the president is elected by the states, not by the at>BA> people, and that's why the Electoral College is set up the way it is
And nobody has ever complained until recently.
There have been remarks in the past as well but by people who do not understand
the full meaning of the system.
Basically, if they "fix the system," they know that they can pretty much fix every Presidential election from here on out so that they never lose.
My opinion is that the Presidency needs to be redefined.
I don't think that today it is what the founding fathers intended.
by theThe reason is that the president is elected by the states, not
it ispeople, and that's why the Electoral College is set up the way
And nobody has ever complained until recently.
election.There have been remarks in the past as well but by people who do not understand
the full meaning of the system.
The last time I remember it having any vigor was after the 2000
The sore losers were from the same side as this time, and were soequally
confident that they could win without trying that they were alsobeside
themselves with disbelief when they lost.pulled
The difference between last time and this time was that last time was followed fairly shortly by 9/11. The country forgot the election and
back together. This time, they've just kept on in disbelief andtrying to
come up with ways to fix something that is not broken.much
Basically, if they "fix the system," they know that they can pretty
fix every Presidential election from here on out so that they neverlose.
pretty muchBasically, if they "fix the system," they know that they can
never lose.fix every Presidential election from here on out so that they
My opinion is that the Presidency needs to be redefined.
I don't think that today it is what the founding fathers intended.
theThe reason is that the president is elected by the states, not by
because they thought that Hillary had it, all wrapped up...people, and that's why the Electoral College is set up the way it is
And nobody has ever complained until recently.
I don't think that today it is what the founding fathers intended.
not by theThe reason is that the president is elected by the states,
way it ispeople, and that's why the Electoral College is set up the
And nobody has ever complained until recently.
because they thought that Hillary had it, all wrapped up...
vote.Hillary Clinton received almost 3 million votes more than
Bush lost the popular vote against Al Gore, but still won the electoral
Why was everyone ok with that? (for the most part?)
Is that what we want? To have an archaic system that simply
does not work, and fails to reflect the needs and wants of a modern democracy?
It DOES work.
If she only focuses on New York State, California, and Chicago, like
Clinton did, she will indeed likely lose.
I still cannot believe that there are people who are so dumb that they think the electoral college is why Clinton lost. She only did any
She didn't debate well. At least Obama used and abused his slogan, fooling many people into thinking it was a deliverable promise.
Trump crushed her in the debates - but I wish he didn't promise the wall because that's a very difficult one to accomplish.
LL> >>MP>If she only focuses on New York State, California, and Chicago, like
LL> >>MP> Clinton did, she will indeed likely lose.
LL> >
LL> >>Those are states where keywords like "sue," "smoke weed," and
LL> >>"gansta rap" are winners.
LL> >
LL> >Also places the Democrats are near guaranteed to win. If she wants
to wi
LL> >she will need to campaign in the swing/"purple" states a lot harder than
LL> >Clinton did.
I know I know! I ashamed to say I live in New York but what can I do??! I'm
outnumbered 10-1. I'm STUCK!
If she only focuses on New York State, California, and Chicago, like Clinton did, she will indeed likely lose.
If they change to a straight popular vote the left will win every
election, and need only carry the Washington-Boston corridor, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles - all of which are bastions of Corruptocrats
The Corruptocrats screamed bloody murder - and, of course, wanted to do away with the Electoral College (the left has wanted to do that for at least thirty years).
If she only focuses on New York State, California, and Chicago, like Clinton did, she will indeed likely lose.
If they change to a straight popular vote the left will win every
election, and need only carry the Washington-Boston corridor, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles - all of which are bastions of Corruptocrats
Perfect example of how the Electoral College does work. Back then, I guess it would have been NYC and Philly. It is set up, in part, so that the candidates cannot ignore large swaths of the country. HRC did that and the Electoral College did its job by keeping her out of office.
to doThe Corruptocrats screamed bloody murder - and, of course, wanted
away with the Electoral College (the left has wanted to do that for at least thirty years).
That sounds like their style.
What do you think about the electoral college?
erasing it? (Besides swamp-monsters becoming commanders?)
People don't understand that the president/veep are elected by the
states, not by the people. I think that the states that now require that their electors vote for the candidate with the highest *nationwide* vote total - even if that candidate received precisely zero votes in their
state - are dumber than the proverbial box of rocks - and, of course,
they're defeating the purpose of the EC. The Founders didn't trust the voters - at the time rich, property owning, white males - to directly
elect the president
to doThe Corruptocrats screamed bloody murder - and, of course, wanted
away with the Electoral College (the left has wanted to do that
for at least thirty years).
What do you think about the electoral college?It's the method the Founders decided upon that allows the STATES to elect the president/veep.
What would be the drawback of
erasing it? (Besides swamp-monsters becoming commanders?)The president/veep would be elected by the Boston-DC corridor, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco (Bay Area), Los Angeles and, maybe, Dallas. Everyplace else in the country safely could be ignored. All of those
to doThe Corruptocrats screamed bloody murder - and, of course, wanted
away with the Electoral College (the left has wanted to do that forat
least thirty years).
That sounds like their style.
What do you think about the electoral college?
It's the method the Founders decided upon that allows the STATES to elect
the president/veep.
What would be the drawback of
erasing it? (Besides swamp-monsters becoming commanders?)
The president/veep would be elected by the Boston-DC corridor, Chicago, >Seattle, San Francisco (Bay Area), Los Angeles and, maybe, Dallas.
Everyplace else in the country safely could be ignored. All of those
places (except, maybe, Dallas) are bastions of the Corruptocrats
The candidates would campaign differently, and visit more places.
The electoral college process is far more limiting, resulting in
much fewer campaign stops for candidates.
IOW, the electoral college process is nothing more than a polite
fiction. A means to con the electorate into believing it is taking
part in a fair election.
The only times it has been "unfair" is when a Democrat has not managed to win it.
IOW, the electoral college process is nothing more than a polite
fiction. A means to con the electorate into believing it is taking
part in a fair election.
When put in its proper perspective, i,e, the President is chosen by the States
and not by the people, it makes perfect sense.
Our head of government, i.e. the Prime Minister, is not elected either and I >think that's true for about every other country around here.
The difference, I think, lies in the amount of power the head of state gets.
The candidates would campaign differently, and visit more places.
The electoral college process is far more limiting, resulting in
much fewer campaign stops for candidates.
No, you have that wrong. Remember, that is what Hilarious tried (fewer >stops) and it DID NOT WORK. If there was no electoral college, what she did >would have worked. She would only need to campaign and play to the areas >that Bob listed. She'd never visit Kentucky or any state that surrounds it >(except maybe Northern Virginia). She'd certainly have gotten away with >ignoring Wisconsin and Michigan.
IOW, the electoral college process is nothing more than a polite
fiction. A means to con the electorate into believing it is taking
part in a fair election.
The only times it has been "unfair" is when a Democrat has not managed to
win it.
IOW, the electoral college process is nothing more than a polite >LL>fiction. A means to con the electorate into believing it is taking >LL>part in a fair election.
But it works great when it gets Indonesians elected :)
When put in its proper perspective, i,e, the President is chosen by the
States
and not by the people, it makes perfect sense.
Correct.
Our head of government, i.e. the Prime Minister, is not elected either and
I
think that's true for about every other country around here.
The difference, I think, lies in the amount of power the head of state
gets.
Or maybe the perceived amount of power. I don't think that the President
has as much power as we citizens perceive the position to have. They get >blamed, and credited, for a lot of things they don't really have much true >participation in.
Your Hole Is Our Goal
Your Hole Is Our Goal
You're QWK reader does Democrat taglines? :)
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 285 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 69:51:05 |
Calls: | 6,488 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 12,096 |
Messages: | 5,275,482 |