0
billvon

Russia swayed US election

Recommended Posts

jakee

***There's nothing to understand from your point of view. We are not a democracy! We are a republic. Big difference. One person one vote doesn't count the way you would like it to in this case. Trump won get over it.



If the electoral college had decided to vote for Clinton instead of Trump, as they were perfectly entitled to do, would you say the same thing?

Yes. Because I educated myself about it.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rushmc

There's nothing to understand from your point of view. We are not a democracy! We are a republic. Big difference. One person one vote doesn't count the way you would like it to in this case. Trump won get over it.



One of the reasons we need the Electoral College is that we have no real way of knowing what the popular vote was. People can put numbers to it all they want but the truth is that what we have are numbers from 50 states plus DC based on what thousands of precincts have told them. The election for POTUS isn't nationalized, the states do the counting.
And I really hate the idea of hearing four more years of people spouting Not My President like we've heard for the last 16. It makes us sound like some third world shithole. My policy is to give a new president the first two years no matter who they are. I think they deserve the benefit of the doubt. I even did it with Obama, so I really do mean anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob_Church

One of the reasons we need the Electoral College is that we have no real way of knowing what the popular vote was.



While I appreciate your take on it, the reason has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact the numbers are too large or difficult to add properly.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quade

***One of the reasons we need the Electoral College is that we have no real way of knowing what the popular vote was.



While I appreciate your take on it, the reason has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact the numbers are too large or difficult to add properly.

I don't believe that's what he meant
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quade

***One of the reasons we need the Electoral College is that we have no real way of knowing what the popular vote was.



While I appreciate your take on it, the reason has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact the numbers are too large or difficult to add properly.

The reason is that if we accept a popular vote we have to assume that 50 states and Washington DC have not screwed up their count through ineptitude or dishonesty. It's not a matter of high numbers, but where those numbers come from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And I agree with the poster who said that every state going with proportional electoral votes would make more sense. That is, if 60% voted Trump and 40% Clinton then that's how the EVs would be allocated. I've never heard the reason so many states choose not to. I suspect it has something to do with a fear of diluting their influence, but that's just a guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob_Church

******One of the reasons we need the Electoral College is that we have no real way of knowing what the popular vote was.



While I appreciate your take on it, the reason has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact the numbers are too large or difficult to add properly.

The reason is that if we accept a popular vote we have to assume that 50 states and Washington DC have not screwed up their count through ineptitude or dishonesty. It's not a matter of high numbers, but where those numbers come from.

If you don't accept the vote counts as reputable and trustworthy, then why accept the Electoral college votes based on them? It's another level of abstraction.

It's like saying you won't trust the numbers of a thermometer to tell you the raw data, but you'll fully accept it saying you have a fever. It just doesn't make sense.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob_Church

******One of the reasons we need the Electoral College is that we have no real way of knowing what the popular vote was.



While I appreciate your take on it, the reason has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact the numbers are too large or difficult to add properly.

The reason is that if we accept a popular vote we have to assume that 50 states and Washington DC have not screwed up their count through ineptitude or dishonesty. It's not a matter of high numbers, but where those numbers come from.

What exactly do you mean?

If the states can't get their counts right, it doesn't matter if we go with a direct popular vote or with the EC.

Besides, we just had a recount here in Wisconsin.

Despite claims of inaccuracy and tampered machines giving false counts, the count was pretty damned accurate. 1800 votes changed out of over 3 million cast. Net change of around 160.

I may hate the end result, but I have no doubts that the election was fair and accurate.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If a state "finds" ten million votes for its favorite son it doesn't affect the election results. This favorite son would have already won all of the electoral votes anyway.
Each state, and dc, conduct their own polling. And so, each state can only control the EVs that they have. If they have sloppy counts or dishonest counts or anything else they can only affect their own EVs. The United States has allotted a certain amount of influence to each state via the EV. It's up to that state to determine who gets its EVs. A state cannot have more influence despite the number of ballots it claims to have or how it claims those ballots were determined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob_Church

"Besides, we just had a recount here in Wisconsin. "

If people trust the system so much then why did you have a recount?



Because Jill Stein paid for it.

She made claims about the accuracy (or lack of it) of the machine counts. She raised the (approx) $3.5 million to have the recount done.

I found it rather funny that Trump supporters sued to stop it, when Trump himself had said he might not accept the results of the election.
The lawsuit failed.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

>I've spent enough time around the "educated" to know I prefer the deplorables.

So you'd prefer to hang out with people who burn black churches and paint "VOTE TRUMP" on the side? Paint swastikas on Jewish homes? Switch to Nazi salutes? Attack children who look Muslim?

OK then; I guess you have different tastes in friends than I do. Fortunately there are still places in the south where you'd be welcomed with open arms.



Oh Bill...stick with that depiction of the right and you'll see more of what you saw in 2018. BTW...just got back from 4 days in Mountain View. I see all too clearly why you disdain folks from the South.
Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jakee

***I may be in the minority here but I agree with the point of the electoral college as it relates to balancing against the popular vote. It's a pretty fundamental principle of protecting the minority from the mob.



No it isn't, it has nothing to do with that. If you're saying the minority needs to be protected from the majority in a presidential election then you're saying the minority needs to be protected from the president. Well guess what - you get a president either way. So you've just swapped inflicting an unwanted president onto the minority for inflicting an unwanted president on the majority.

So who the fuck are you protecting?

Quote

You can't have every state in the country affected by only what a couple of states want.



A) You would never that in a popular vote.

B) You have more of that with the EC than with the popular vote.

C) Why is it about states instead of people? Why is one American's opinion less valid because they live within an arbitrarily created political division that has lots of people in it?

Hey Jakee, just wondering here. What percentage of the popular vote did the current PM of Britain receive in the last election? Zero perhaps?
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hey Jakee, just wondering here. What percentage of the popular vote did the current PM of Britain receive in the last election? Zero perhaps?



Yep, zero. Same as the one before and the one before that, all the way back. We vote for a party and that party appoints a leader.

CJP

Gods don't kill people. People with Gods kill people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quade

***C) Why is it about states instead of people? Why is one American's opinion less valid because they live within an arbitrarily created political division that has lots of people in it?



Because of the original sin of the US, slavery. Pure and simple, that IS the reason. That IS how the "electoral college" came to be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_CompromiseIt seems strange that we no longer accept that one person is worth only 3/5 of another person based on skin color, but many people are happy with a system where one person is worth 1/5 of another based on where they live.

Don
_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob_Church

The reason is that if we accept a popular vote we have to assume that 50 states and Washington DC have not screwed up their count through ineptitude or dishonesty. It's not a matter of high numbers, but where those numbers come from.



But if a state screws up the count and awards its electoral votes the wrong way, it's ok to accept those? Mistaken electoral college votes don't matter?
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hey Jakee, just wondering here. What percentage of the popular vote did the current PM of Britain receive in the last election? Zero perhaps?



Right. We also don't have an Executive branch of government in the same way as the States, and the PM is not an analogue for the Pres.

That said, the UK election is another great example of why first past the post systems suck at representing people. First, the Tories got only 37% of the vote but ended up with a true majority with over 50% of MPs in the House.

Second, Scotland. Oh good lord, look at Scotland. The SNP took exactly 50% of the vote across all of Scotland, and ended up with 56 MPs out of a possible 59 constituencies. 50% of the vote translated in 95% of the representation in government! Across all of Britain, the SNP polled 1.5M votes total and those 56 MPs. The Lib Dems polled 2.5M votes and elected only 8 MPs. 70% more votes, 7 times fewer MPs.

That is how political power gets concentrated into certain regions - with first past the post systems like the UK parliament or the Electoral College.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DJL

I may be in the minority here but I agree with the point of the electoral college as it relates to balancing against the popular vote. It's a pretty fundamental principle of protecting the minority from the mob. You can't have every state in the country affected by only what a couple of states want. If that were the case then the problem of pandering to a couple of states would only get worse.



But it's OK for a minority mob to hold sway over the majority? Explain how that is better.

I don't see that tyranny of the minority is a good thing at all.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob_Church

And I agree with the poster who said that every state going with proportional electoral votes would make more sense. That is, if 60% voted Trump and 40% Clinton then that's how the EVs would be allocated. I've never heard the reason so many states choose not to. I suspect it has something to do with a fear of diluting their influence, but that's just a guess.



It's not "every" state. It's 'each' state. Each individual state has the ability to do that. Who's going to go first? If California legislated it and no one else, do you still think the 'usual' crowd would applaud them?

They might? if they philosophically believe in the system but want to move to closer to something analogous to a popular vote result. But I don't think so, they want to force all 50 states to do it at once rather than let each choose for themselves.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Continuing about Electoral College vote weighting.

I'll put it like this. Let's say you're the states of New Georgia, East Kansas, Left Bernistan and you you have a low population density despite the fact that you're the same size of the post apocalytical coastal states of West Virginia, East Tennesee etc. They want you to join the Republic of Trumptopia (After a few name changes, cough - Bernistan) but they have 18 million voters to your measely 2 million. Now, if you just go by a popular vote then all you'll ever do is work by the whim of the Eastern Coastal States. When the candidates come along some support rebuilding Atlantic shipping and other support Mississippi Sea Lane shipping you'll want actual leverage as to how that balance is reached. So there you have why population density should not dictate every decision.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rehmwa

***And I agree with the poster who said that every state going with proportional electoral votes would make more sense. That is, if 60% voted Trump and 40% Clinton then that's how the EVs would be allocated. I've never heard the reason so many states choose not to. I suspect it has something to do with a fear of diluting their influence, but that's just a guess.



It's not "every" state. It's 'each' state. Each individual state has the ability to do that. Who's going to go first? If California legislated it and no one else, do you still think the 'usual' crowd would applaud them?


Uh, Maine in 1972 was first with split electoral votes.
Nebraska in 1992 was second.
It is about who will go third.
"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DJL

Continuing about Electoral College vote weighting.

I'll put it like this.



Yes, you'll ignore the fact that your real life example worked in the exact opposite way to what you intended, and instead will make up some hypothetical situations where every factor has been described in such a way that it supports your argument.... if real life actually mirrored that same situation. Which it doesn't.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maine and Nebraska have already adopted state level rules that allow for split voting and this year that happened. I prefer awarding the votes based on voting in each Congressional district over a winner take all approach if we have to stay within the confines we have today. It makes more of the country actually have a say since there are many red districts in California and several Blue districts in Texas that would suddenly be worth campaigning for and getting policies and opinions from those areas also.

I would much rather see the number of representatives properly adjusted to reflect the current census numbers so that every citizen has their representative have the same amount of weight in general congress. There was no real logic as to why 435 was chosen and locked in as the number of representatives in the 1911 since it was prior to several states having their statehood and it only serves to not proportionately change the number of voters each representative stands for in Congress. The number changed to 437 when Alaska and Hawaii were added but then other states lost reps to take that number back to 435.
Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

if they philosophically believe in the system but want to move to closer to something analogous to a popular vote result. But I don't think so, they want to force all 50 states to do it at once rather than let each choose for themselves.



By 'the usual crowd' do you mean the people arguing against the Electoral College? By 'the system' do you mean the Electoral College?

If so, then I'm not sure why you're suggesting that the usual crowd philosophically believes in the system. I think it's pretty clear that the whole point of the usual crowd's argument is that they don't philosophically believe in the system.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0