- 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: Should state elections go by electoral college?
Posted on 10/9/24 at 10:49 am to the808bass
Posted on 10/9/24 at 10:49 am to the808bass
quote:
You’re posting to him like he isn’t just a partisan shill.
I know, but if decades long coma patients can one day awaken, Mickey Goldmill can one day start using the brain God gave him to actually think for himself.
0
Posted on 10/9/24 at 10:49 am to troyt37
quote:
uote:
Why should it matter if someone lives in Nola vs Denham Springs when voting for Governor of Louisiana?
East and West LA have many differences. Obviously the East is more in line with Texas values and the East well, its the East.
North and South are different worlds IMO.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 10:54 am to jizzle6609
quote:
East and West LA have many differences. Obviously the East is more in line with Texas values and the East well, its the East.
North and South are different worlds IMO.
Which is precisely why the governor should represent all of them, not just the population centers.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 10:54 am to Ebridg3
Many states sorta used to, but the federal government eliminated those systems one by one via the voting rights act as most of those systems gave more electoral power to rural white voters and diluted minority urban votes. In reality, most of these systems were similar to the U.S. senate vs House of Representatives, where half of the legislature was strictly based on population whereas the other house was based on regionalism. This was meant to balance the demands of rural communities vs cities. Voting Rights Act found this setup Unconstitutional.
Now, even if states have bicameral legislatures, both houses are districted based on equal population distribution, just one tends to have fewer seats (i.e. larger districts each representing more citizens) than the other.
Now, even if states have bicameral legislatures, both houses are districted based on equal population distribution, just one tends to have fewer seats (i.e. larger districts each representing more citizens) than the other.
This post was edited on 10/9/24 at 10:56 am
Posted on 10/9/24 at 11:02 am to troyt37
quote:
Because the interests, values, and principles of the person in Denham Springs is diminished by virtue of where they live. The candidate doesn't have to give a shite about what the people of Denham Springs want, as long as they have the Nola voters in their back pocket.
It's a pretty simple concept. You don't want Los Angeles or New York choosing the laws you live by or your representation in government. People in Denham Springs don't want Nola choosing the laws they live by or their representation in government.
Where does that stop though? Statewide democracy is too big for you apparently, and it needs to be more like a republic. Is Parish/County also too big? City?
You elect Mayors, City/Parish Councils, and Legislators for those exact reasons.
This post was edited on 10/9/24 at 11:05 am
Posted on 10/9/24 at 11:05 am to troyt37
quote:
Which is precisely why the governor should represent all of them, not just the population centers.
Should, but it won't happen.
It's one of two of the most poorly run states in the entire country.
The state employs far too many people and what people don't realize is after 7 years those folks will never be off the hook as long as they don't cash out before retirement age.
The leaders in many of the parishes and cities are underqualified, incompetent or flat-out crooks. They will issue contracts to family and friends. I've even seen items on a budget that one parish could surely part ways with, but it remains a budgeted and paid item. Why? Because someone knows someone and although this is completely wasteful spending, we will continue to do it because I know them.
These are the type of people running your state. This is their mentality. It has nothing to do with it citizens, its simply furthering their agenda.
Not everyone is like this, but this is the large majority of LA and why its in the position it is in now. LA was also been cucked by Texas long ago to hold their plants to pollute away from where the big cats reside.
People ask how you can make this assertion and its simple, the talent this state has produced in the white collar realm for the most part has left for Texas or another state that is worth their dime.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 11:09 am to sabanisarustedspoke
quote:
We are a republic of states.
You're 100% correct in stating this. Unfortunately, the dumb-masses don't understand the difference between a state and a province. Nor do they understand the difference between a federal government and a national government. It's something that isn't really taught in public schools these days, and whatever time in the classroom is spent on it simply glosses over the very real distinction.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 11:14 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Where does that stop though? Statewide democracy is too big for you apparently, and it needs to be more like a republic. Is Parish/County also too big? City?
Do you similarly oppose Maine and Nebraska apportioning their electoral votes or you’re fine with that because it give the Dems one more reliable electoral vote?
You don’t. You’re dishonest. You’re “might makes right.” You have no guiding principle except power.
This post was edited on 10/9/24 at 11:15 am
Posted on 10/9/24 at 11:19 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Where does that stop though?
I said for governor in my first post.
quote:
Statewide democracy is too big for you apparently, and it needs to be more like a republic.
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. It is the tyranny of the majority.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 11:23 am to the808bass
quote:
Do you similarly oppose Maine and Nebraska apportioning their electoral votes or you’re fine with that because it give the Dems one more reliable electoral vote?
You don’t. You’re dishonest. You’re “might makes right.” You have no guiding principle except power.
The two situations are not the same at all. That is for President of the United States (for the Republic). Regardless, they even out because Maine has 1 red district that Trump won twice.
You may be surprised to hear that I also don't support a national popular vote even though that would greatly benefit democrats. We are a Republic.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 11:24 am to burger bearcat
I've never seen anything that openly requires states to have democratic elections, but then again, I've never read the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The Constitution says states have to appoint electors. It's always been my understanding that how they choose to do that is entirely up to them. It just so happens that all states choose to have elections determined by the popular vote.
The Constitution says states have to appoint electors. It's always been my understanding that how they choose to do that is entirely up to them. It just so happens that all states choose to have elections determined by the popular vote.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 11:26 am to burger bearcat
quote:
But I believe alot of the 1960s Civil Rights laws and ammendments basically changed this, and stripped states of their 10th Ammendment rights.
Pretty sure any state specifically named in the amendment and certain other counties / municipalities have special rules until the VRA restrictions get lifted. Not all states.
The problem is that these restrictions have now been in place for about 60 years and Dems are in no hurry to release them because most areas subject to them are now GOP strongholds.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 12:16 pm to SportTiger1
quote:
population are shifting away from metro areas man.
You've got it backwards.
They don't put illegals in the country. They put them in cities and towns.
This post was edited on 10/9/24 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 10/9/24 at 12:20 pm to Ebridg3
I'm all for electoral votes in the states.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News