2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP - Page 2410

Astros19 · 11-07-2020, 01:22 PM

I'd also bet if the shoe were on the other foot none of you would have a problem understanding the necessity if the EC.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Astros19 · 11-07-2020, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Each state gets two votes in the US Senate. Each state chooses who to send to Washington to cast those votes on their behalf. But the votes belong to the states, not the people...meaning no matter how many people live in a state, it still gets exactly two votes.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

Who gets to place those votes is determined by the people though Rachel.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

OscarOne · 11-07-2020, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marl1220

So true. And I've got nothing against Trump supporters.

Yea, there "F*** Your Feelings, Trump 2020" shirts were classy. The flags too. Really going to miss seeing those during the Friday night Trump caravans we had out here. Good people, those Trump supporters.

Jopeal · 11-07-2020, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ray27Ray52

Because there are people in those states with different life experiences than those in the big cities. They want their voice to be heard. If the election comes down to California and New York where does that leave them? In an ideal world you are looking for a candidate that is willing to listen to the opinions of those who are different and is willing to work for the good of all US citizens, not just the big city populations who determined the election.

Why would the election come down to New York & California when the Democratic candidate already gets 100% of the Electoral votes from those states?

It anything, it would give more representation to voters in all 50 states to have their voices heard by both prospective candidates.

JustRachel · 11-07-2020, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Astros19

Who gets to place those votes is determined by the people though Rachel.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Sure.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

JustRachel · 11-07-2020, 01:27 PM

The point here is that without the compromise between both sides of the debate (split Congress and electoral college) we would not have one nation of fifty states. Maybe we'd have like 20 states or maybe we would still be ruled by England.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

mike1498 · 11-07-2020, 01:27 PM

If we did it solely based on the population, the cities would determine the election every time. The purpose of the electoral college is meant to give a little more power to areas that don't have the population that cities do. It's obviously not big enough to really have a dramatic change to the election but we need to be aware of diversity of America. Like Rachel stated, there's a reason there is a house and senate.

Ray27Ray52 · 11-07-2020, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jopeal

Why would the election come down to New York & California when the Democratic candidate already gets 100% of the Electoral votes from those states?

UH, that's precisely the point.

Edited to add- My opinion about the EC certainly wouldn't change if NY and Cali went Republican consistently.

JustRachel · 11-07-2020, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike1498

If we did it solely based on the population, the cities would determine the election every time. The purpose of the electoral college is meant to give a little more power to areas that don't have the population that cities do. It's obviously not big enough to really have a dramatic change to the election but we need to be aware of diversity of America. Like Rachel stated, there's a reason there is a house and senate.

No...well, maybe...but if we didn't make that compromise 240 years ago, we would not have a union. We would not have become one country. No colony would've wanted to leave England because of lack of representation to join the US while being underrepresented here too. The rural areas simply never would've become Americans in the first place.

Take that away now and states like Wyoming wouldn't want to be Americans for the same reason that Virginians didn't want to be English.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

NeedChapmans · 11-07-2020, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zonacats8

Biden would commute his sentence immediately, knowing if Trump gets put in jail after the years of his cries to put his opponents in jail, his die hard supporters would cause all sorts of problems, it would make this summer's riots look like child's play.

This is just fantasy. All of it (especially the last part).

I want everyone on here to show me the riots and protests from the right now that Biden has been declared the winner. Let's see all the Trump supporters on the streets.

I think we know what reality will show.

GOWIFB · 11-07-2020, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Astros19

Explain to me how this would be different than the popular vote.
Betcha can't.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I am not saying to give large populous states more overall votes than they have now and less populous states less votes. Those would still stay the same. But if you split up the votes within the states you have a better chance at candidates needing to go everywhere. I mean yes you would still have some areas where you know a democrat has no chance or a republican has no chance, but it will be less than you have now. It may also encourage more people to vote. Right now Republicans know they have no chance in deep blue states and Democrats know they have no chance in deep red states so many may not even bother.

Astros19 · 11-07-2020, 01:40 PM

Maybe somebody can explain something to me that correlates with the EC and has always had me confused.
Typically conservatives lean towards states rights where as liberals lean towards federal rights.
It would seem to me that the liberal cities/states would want more states rights as that would fit in with their belief in the popular vote.
What am I missing?
It's probably something simple that I haven't given consideration.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Astros19 · 11-07-2020, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GOWIFB

I am not saying to give large populous states more overall votes than they have now and less populous states less votes. Those would still stay the same. But if you split up the votes within the states you have a better chance at candidates needing to go everywhere. I mean yes you would still have some areas where you know a democrat has no chance or a republican has no chance, but it will be less than you have now. It may also encourage more people to vote. Right now Republicans know they have no chance in deep blue states and Democrats know they have no chance in deep red states so many may not even bother.

But the vote, either by total population or percentages of the total population, would not change one iota.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

JustRachel · 11-07-2020, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GOWIFB

I am not saying to give large populous states more overall votes than they have now and less populous states less votes. Those would still stay the same. But if you split up the votes within the states you have a better chance at candidates needing to go everywhere. I mean yes you would still have some areas where you know a democrat has no chance or a republican has no chance, but it will be less than you have now. It may also encourage more people to vote. Right now Republicans know they have no chance in deep blue states and Democrats know they have no chance in deep red states so many may not even bother.

I see your point. It's done in two states that way, sort of.

The problem we run into this was is state sovereignty. States have the right to choose how they determine their electoral votes. 48 of them chose a winner-take-all format.

I don't think it's the place of the federal government to tell the states how to divvy up their electoral votes. If states chose to do it, well then that's their right.

The Federalist in me is coming back out, I know. But balance between federal and local governments requires allowing the states to decide for themselves how to cast their electoral votes.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

CJsHockeyCards · 11-07-2020, 01:43 PM

Wow! Look at all these super spreader events happening nationwide! What happened to COVID?

GOWIFB · 11-07-2020, 01:45 PM

I am watching the news stations right now and see alot of celebrating going on. I think it is kind of funny that you see all these people celebrating someone's loss rather than someone's win. However I wish they would still realize we are still in the middle of a pandemic and think twice about doing this. I hope Biden addresses this tonight and thanks them for their support but encourages them to act more responsibly.

JustRachel · 11-07-2020, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Astros19

Maybe somebody can explain something to me that correlates with the EC and has always had me confused.
Typically conservatives lean towards states rights where as liberals lean towards federal rights.
It would seem to me that the liberal cities/states would want more states rights as that would fit in with their belief in the popular vote.
What am I missing?
It's probably something simple that I haven't given consideration.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

They already have this. States decide themselves how to determine electoral votes. If California wanted to split electoral votes to mirror the popular vote, it is California's right to do so. They chose winner-take-all.

Edit to add: What you would need in your liberal scenario is for California to be able to tell other states how to determine their electoral votes. This is the opposite of states' rights...which indeed is a liberal concept.

discostu · 11-07-2020, 01:46 PM

I'll be ready for it to be over...January 20th.

Until then, I think we're in for a wild ride.

How many faithless electors? Final vote tallies? Lawsuits filed? Cases heard?

Etc.

Until the 20th, it's going to be ugly.

Thanks for the parting gift to the nation Mr. President. Florida is beckoning for their "Florida Man."

DegaBama · 11-07-2020, 01:47 PM

The amount of people freaking about about mass lockdowns. They aren't happening. Just because Biden is the president doesn't mean much.

GOWIFB · 11-07-2020, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustRachel

I see your point. It's done in two states that way, sort of.

The problem we run into this was is state sovereignty. States have the right to choose how they determine their electoral votes. 48 of them chose a winner-take-all format.

I don't think it's the place of the federal government to tell the states how to divvy up their electoral votes. If states chose to do it, well then that's their right.

The Federalist in me is coming back out, I know. But balance between federal and local governments requires allowing the states to decide for themselves how to cast their electoral votes.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

Oh yes, I agree that these are states rights to determine how the electoral votes are divided. The states would have to agree to do it the way I am proposing and I never see that happening. Would take a constitutional amendment. Plus like I said, you then still run into the problem of gerrymandering which is a huge problem right now when it comes to representation within the state.

discostu · 11-07-2020, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJsHockeyCards

Wow! Look at all these super spreader events happening nationwide! What happened to COVID?

Covid is over.

No more masks in California, LAUSD is welcoming all 700,000 students back on campus on Monday.

The crackpots were right. It would be gone by the election.

Glory be!

JustRachel · 11-07-2020, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GOWIFB

Oh yes, I agree that these are states rights to determine how the electoral votes are divided. The states would have to agree to do it the way I am proposing and I never see that happening. Would take a constitutional amendment. Plus like I said, you then still run into the problem of gerrymandering which is a huge problem right now when it comes to representation within the state.

Yep.

The EC system is far from perfect. But I've never heard of any other system that embodies the compromise and is better at the same time. Nobody thinks it's perfect for them, but everybody can live with it.

Onepocketj · 11-07-2020, 01:51 PM

Well Trump's advisors have told him the lawsuits are hopeless. Doubt that has any impact on him though.

discostu · 11-07-2020, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GOWIFB

Oh yes, I agree that these are states rights to determine how the electoral votes are divided. The states would have to agree to do it the way I am proposing and I never see that happening. Would take a constitutional amendment. Plus like I said, you then still run into the problem of gerrymandering which is a huge problem right now when it comes to representation within the state.

The states to not have equal interest in changing the electoral process.

California counts a lot less than Wyoming (per resident), so why would Wyoming cede any ground here?

The states could all decide to deliver electoral votes based on the popular vote, completely bypassing any Constitutional Amendment. But they won't.

Until then, a vote in Wyoming has over 3 times more electoral weight than a vote in California.

discostu · 11-07-2020, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onepocketj

Well Trump's advisors have told him the lawsuits are hopeless. Doubt that has any impact on him though.

The sane ones have, the crazy ones are forging ahead, full bore.

View Poll Results: Who wins these elections? (you can pick multiple)
Donald Trump	44	53.66%
Joe Biden	38	46.34%
Trump Wins Florida	44	53.66%
Biden Wins Florida	16	19.51%
Trump Wins Georgia	44	53.66%
Biden Wins Georgia	12	14.63%
Trump Wins Ohio	43	52.44%
Biden Wins Ohio	16	19.51%
Trump Wins Pennsylvania	27	32.93%
Biden Wins Pennsylvania	34	41.46%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 82. You may not vote on this poll

11-07-2020, 01:27 PM	#60232
mike1498 Member Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: Baltimore Posts: 7,448 college_beer_money	If we did it solely based on the population, the cities would determine the election every time. The purpose of the electoral college is meant to give a little more power to areas that don't have the population that cities do. It's obviously not big enough to really have a dramatic change to the election but we need to be aware of diversity of America. Like Rachel stated, there's a reason there is a house and senate. __________________ Check out my cards! https://www.instagram.com/college_beer_money/

11-07-2020, 01:45 PM	#60241
GOWIFB Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 5,867	I am watching the news stations right now and see alot of celebrating going on. I think it is kind of funny that you see all these people celebrating someone's loss rather than someone's win. However I wish they would still realize we are still in the middle of a pandemic and think twice about doing this. I hope Biden addresses this tonight and thanks them for their support but encourages them to act more responsibly. __________________ Collecting 2007 Sweet Spot Classic Patches and anything Wisconsin! My photobucket: http://s451.photobucket.com/albums/qq239/GOWIFB/

11-07-2020, 01:46 PM	#60243
discostu Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 7,990	I'll be ready for it to be over...January 20th. Until then, I think we're in for a wild ride. How many faithless electors? Final vote tallies? Lawsuits filed? Cases heard? Etc. Until the 20th, it's going to be ugly. Thanks for the parting gift to the nation Mr. President. Florida is beckoning for their "Florida Man." __________________ Every day I start to ooze.

11-07-2020, 01:22 PM	#60226
Astros19 Member Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 5,994	I'd also bet if the shoe were on the other foot none of you would have a problem understanding the necessity if the EC. Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

11-07-2020, 01:27 PM	#60231
JustRachel Member Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 5,663	The point here is that without the compromise between both sides of the debate (split Congress and electoral college) we would not have one nation of fifty states. Maybe we'd have like 20 states or maybe we would still be ruled by England. Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

11-07-2020, 01:40 PM	#60237
Astros19 Member Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 5,994	Maybe somebody can explain something to me that correlates with the EC and has always had me confused. Typically conservatives lean towards states rights where as liberals lean towards federal rights. It would seem to me that the liberal cities/states would want more states rights as that would fit in with their belief in the popular vote. What am I missing? It's probably something simple that I haven't given consideration. Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

11-07-2020, 01:43 PM	#60240
CJsHockeyCards Member Join Date: Jan 2017 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 640	Wow! Look at all these super spreader events happening nationwide! What happened to COVID?

11-07-2020, 01:47 PM	#60244
DegaBama Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Location: Alabama Posts: 4,569	The amount of people freaking about about mass lockdowns. They aren't happening. Just because Biden is the president doesn't mean much.

11-07-2020, 01:51 PM	#60248
Onepocketj Member Join Date: Mar 2017 Posts: 22,725 jeflave-0 onepocketj	Well Trump's advisors have told him the lawsuits are hopeless. Doubt that has any impact on him though.