- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Senate Democrats to introduce constitutional amendment
Posted on 4/1/19 at 5:28 pm to tarzana
Posted on 4/1/19 at 5:28 pm to tarzana
quote:
So what's fair, or moral, about the Electoral College? It should be abolished, like, back before the Y2K election.
Then you've never taken the time to study it. Honestly.
I used to be against it when I was younger until I sat down and really looked at. It's genius.
The irony here is the party of the minority is trying to abolish a law that was put in place to protect the minority states....
1
Posted on 4/1/19 at 5:30 pm to LSUDVM1999
The EC is an ingenious system that allows lesser populated states to collectively serve as a counterweight against hegemony by heavily populated states.
It’s called the United States for a reason. It is a collection of 50 states that form a union.
It’s not 5 dominant states and 45 vassal states.
It’s called the United States for a reason. It is a collection of 50 states that form a union.
It’s not 5 dominant states and 45 vassal states.
Posted on 4/1/19 at 5:32 pm to TigerintheNO
quote:
so what happens if no candidate gets 50% of the vote?
Presidents who had less than 50% of the popular vote.
1824 - John Quincy Adams (30.9%)
1844 - James Polk (49.5%)
1848 - Zachary Taylor (47.3%)
1856 - James Buchanan (45.3%)
1860 - Abraham Lincoln (39.8%)
1876 - Rutherford B. Hayes (47.9%)
1880 - James Garfield (48.3%)
1884 - Grover Cleveland (48.9%)
1888 - Benjamin Harrison (47.8%)
1892 - Grover Cleveland (46.0%)
1912 - Woodrow Wilson (41.8%)
1916 - Woodrow Wilson (49.2%)
1948 - Harry Truman (49.6%)
1960 - John F. Kennedy (49.7%)
1968 - Richard Nixon (43.4%)
1992 - Bill Clinton (43%)
1996 - Bill Clinton (49.2%)
2000 - George W. Bush (47.9%)
2016 - Donald Trump (46.1%)
That's 19 out of 58 Presidential elections, or 32.8%.
Basically nearly 1 out of every 3 elections results in the winning candidate having less than 50% of the popular vote.
Posted on 4/1/19 at 5:44 pm to thejudge
quote:
The irony here is the party of the minority is trying to abolish a law that was put in place to protect the minority states....
They FEELS like they are the majority.
They honestly believe they are the majority.
It was collusion...
Posted on 4/1/19 at 5:53 pm to BamaNixon
quote:
BamaNixon
Hey Einstein ,
I will agree to abolish the Electoral College , if you agree to , only people who pay Federal Income Tax can vote.
I know you won't agree to this. Republicans would be in the White House forever.
Prove me wrong , it's a deal right !
Posted on 4/1/19 at 5:54 pm to BamaNixon
quote:
What I hate is the primary system that keeps stupid shite like corn/ethanol subsidies around because Iowa is one of the first primary states for both parties.
It's terrible. So stupid that Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina play such a massive role in determining the nominee.
The primary should be in all 50 states on the same day.
Posted on 4/1/19 at 5:57 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
AggieHank86
Liberal ?
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:06 pm to GeorgePaton
quote:
Democracy is 51% of the people taking...
Thomas Jefferson never said or wrote this. It’s earliest appearance in print was 15 years ago and no one knows where it came from. He did however equate democracy with mob rule.
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:09 pm to 93and99
quote:libertarian.quote:Liberal ?
AggieHank86
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:09 pm to LSUDVM1999
it's real. no fools day joke...
quote:they only want to abolish it if they lose power.
The proposed amendment to change the way presidents are elected won't become law anytime soon, but it will keep the issue in the 2020 conversation.
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:16 pm to LSUDVM1999
It won’t even get out of the Senate.
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:21 pm to LSUDVM1999
Over emotional children
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:23 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
libertarian.
Voted for both Bushs. Thinks neither are neocons
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:26 pm to 225bred
Exactly
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:27 pm to BamaNixon
Which is it dipshit? are you mad we always agree with him and follow him blindly like a bunch of dumb trumpkins... or are you mad we disagree with him? pick an outrage, por favor.
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:35 pm to tarzana
quote:
How could a candidate lose when she got 3,000,000 more votes than the winner?
I'm guessing .............................................................................The Electoral College?
The real question is how many of those 3,000,000 were fraudulent?
This post was edited on 4/12/19 at 11:18 pm
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:48 pm to tarzana
quote:
How could a candidate lose when she got 3,000,000 more votes than the winner?
Because the majority if not all of those votes come from heavily populated Dem states. And the President runs the whole country. We don’t need a president decided by two states wishes. Sorry.
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:49 pm to SSpaniel
quote:Just exactly like the 3, three, times CA voted to go so far as Amend the State Constitution to ban Gay Marriage and Lib Courts ruled against the actual vote results.
So... taking away the rights of the majority is unfair and immoral. Sort of like when the majority of voters pass a law mandating restrictions on abortion or gay marriage or laws requiring voter registration or something... and a liberal court overturns. I guess that's unfair and immoral as well, huh? I mean, it has to be, right?
Every minority loses their voice in a true Democracy. It literally becomes divide and conquer to win a majority over minorities (plural). Just pit the minorities against each other so they cannot coalesce into a majority.
Talk about White Privilege.
Posted on 4/1/19 at 6:52 pm to Magician2
quote:People on the Hard Right use the term “neocon” like they use “liberal” and “RINO” ... incorrectly.
Voted for both Bushs. Thinks neither are neocons
All three terms get hurled as an insult at anyone who disagrees with them on any matter. Very insular group of people.
Posted on 4/1/19 at 7:03 pm to AggieHank86
I hardly hurl insults on this board. My post history backs this up.
In fact I’ve prided myself on not resorting to call posters: cucks, leftists, insert whatever stupid term to inflame other people.
I’m also not even remotely classified as “far right”. I’d prefer possible mixture of libertarian and paleo conservative.
I’ve actually gone to bat for some lefty posters on here in terms of getting them unbanned. I don’t think restricting them helps this board. I also don’t mind your posting one bit, I think it’s funny how much you’re in the head of many posters. I also think it’s funny how you critique this board so much yet continually post.
Both Bush’s are by the definition neoconservatives. Please dispute how they are not.
In fact I’ve prided myself on not resorting to call posters: cucks, leftists, insert whatever stupid term to inflame other people.
I’m also not even remotely classified as “far right”. I’d prefer possible mixture of libertarian and paleo conservative.
I’ve actually gone to bat for some lefty posters on here in terms of getting them unbanned. I don’t think restricting them helps this board. I also don’t mind your posting one bit, I think it’s funny how much you’re in the head of many posters. I also think it’s funny how you critique this board so much yet continually post.
Both Bush’s are by the definition neoconservatives. Please dispute how they are not.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News