rushmc 18 #1 Posted March 21, 2019 https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-clinton-counties-won/ The fact that Snopes says it was not so one-sided is a damned joke at best Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #2 March 21, 2019 (edited) Kansas, with 1/13th of the population of California, has nearly twice the number of counties. Texas, with under 3/4 of the population of California, has more than 4x the number of counties. By that logic, Romney won by nearly the same landslide. Edited March 21, 2019 by headoverheels Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yoink 321 #3 March 21, 2019 10 minutes ago, headoverheels said: Kansas, with 1/13th of the population of California, has nearly twice the number of counties. Texas, with under 3/4 of the population of California, has more than 4x the number of counties. You’re onto a loser here. Rush has no interest in relative ratios or comparative mathematics and has only ever cherry picked figures that support his trolling. Pointing out the flaws in the numbers or argument will only ever get a ‘lol!’ or similarly pointless response before he moves the goalposts yet again to generate yet more responses. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #4 March 21, 2019 Since when did government of the people by the people for the people become government of the people by arbitrarily bounded geographic areas for the people? Rush has posted some really stupid things over the years but this one is a winner. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,400 #5 March 21, 2019 One acre, one vote! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #6 March 21, 2019 9 hours ago, headoverheels said: Kansas, with 1/13th of the population of California, has nearly twice the number of counties. Texas, with under 3/4 of the population of California, has more than 4x the number of counties. By that logic, Romney won by nearly the same landslide. And yet you can’t even admit Trump won the country by a landslide. A popular vote election would see Iowa and the rest of middle rural America ignored. This is exactly why the electoral college will never be ended. As the founders intended Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #7 March 21, 2019 12 hours ago, rushmc said: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-clinton-counties-won/ The fact that Snopes says it was not so one-sided is a damned joke at best Could you clarify the point you're trying to make? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #8 March 21, 2019 Since I live in a state with a lot of green land and clean lakes (I literally have a lakefront home), with a couple, or 3 shithole cities that have high crime and are led by DEMOCRATIC mayors, I'd be offended if I was being told how to live by heavily populated high crime city DEMOCRATIC elites who can't get their shit together. Speaking of which, what's up with NYC mayor Bill De Blasio's wife being unable to account for $1.6 billion, or is it $1.8 billion, that she was given for her mental health initiative or whatever the fuck it was? https://nypost.com/2019/02/28/de-blasio-and-co-mayor-wife-have-wasted-1-8b-of-taxpayer-money/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #9 March 21, 2019 3 hours ago, rushmc said: And yet you can’t even admit Trump won the country by a landslide. A popular vote election would see Iowa and the rest of middle rural America ignored. This is exactly why the electoral college will never be ended. As the founders intended What the founders intended is explained clearly in Federalist #68, and is NOT that a small bunch of rural farmers should tell tens of millions of city dwellers how they should be governed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #10 March 21, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, BillyVance said: Since I live in a state with a lot of green land and clean lakes (I literally have a lakefront home), with a couple, or 3 shithole cities that have high crime and are led by DEMOCRATIC mayors, I'd be offended if I was being told how to live by heavily populated high crime city DEMOCRATIC elites who can't get their shit together. Edit: Wups,that was an alphabetical list. Here's violent highest Violent Crime: Missouri St. Louis 310284 2082.29 66.07 93.14 626.52 1296.55 6041.24 1011.33 4155.55 874.36 64.78 Michigan Detroit 670792 2056.67 39.80 103.91 393.42 1519.55 4540.60 1231.08 2093.79 1215.73 129.55 Maryland Baltimore 613217 2027.01 55.77 62.29 958.71 950.23 4928.11 1311.28 2773.57 843.26 42.56 Tennessee Memphis 652765 2003.32 27.73 90.38 529.59 1355.62 6297.83 1460.25 4224.49 613.08 55.92 Missouri Kansas City 484948 1724.31 30.93 91.76 383.13 1218.48 4543.79 960.52 2670.39 912.88 41.45 Wisconsin Milwaukee 595168 1597.36 19.83 72.92 490.45 1014.17 3792.04 927.13 1940.29 924.61 52.59 Ohio Cleveland 385351 1556.76 27.77 128.97 699.88 700.14 4916.04 1518.87 2516.15 881.01 65.65 California Stockton4 309566 1414.56 17.77 49.75 390.22 956.82 3627.34 691.29 2274.15 661.89 67.19 New Mexico Albuquerque 561375 1369.14 12.47 84.26 521.93 750.48 7365.84 1246.23 4750.84 1368.78 Indiana Indianapolis Edited March 21, 2019 by DJL Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,260 #11 March 21, 2019 4 hours ago, rushmc said: And yet you can’t even admit Trump won the country by a landslide. Because he didn’t, as was explained in the post you just replied to. There is no ‘and yet’. It makes literally no sense as a reply. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,260 #12 March 21, 2019 3 hours ago, BillyVance said: Since I live in a state with a lot of green land and clean lakes (I literally have a lakefront home), with a couple, or 3 shithole cities that have high crime and are led by DEMOCRATIC mayors, I'd be offended if I was being told how to live by heavily populated high crime city DEMOCRATIC elites who can't get their shit together. Don’t you think all those people living in those cities should be offended that you and your much smaller number of friends want the power to tell them what to do? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #13 March 21, 2019 3 hours ago, BillyVance said: Since I live in a state with a lot of green land and clean lakes (I literally have a lakefront home), with a couple, or 3 shithole cities that have high crime and are led by DEMOCRATIC mayors, I'd be offended if I was being told how to live by heavily populated high crime city DEMOCRATIC elites who can't get their shit together. I live very close to the border, and we're being told how to deal with border problems by a REPUBLICAN president in a shithole who is clueless about the risks the border presents, doesn't know where illegal immigrants come from and lies on average 15 times a day. Yet you support that. So perhaps deal with the beam before dealing with the mote. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #14 March 21, 2019 13 hours ago, ryoder said: One acre, one vote! And if you have less land, or are the wrong color, maybe you can have 3/5ths of a vote. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,150 #15 March 21, 2019 22 minutes ago, billvon said: And if you have less land, or are the wrong color, maybe you can have 3/5ths of a vote. Oh no, after lobbying, it'll be based on a combination based on dollar worth of abode, with acreage coming in second. All those rich people wouldn't want to be disenfranchised. It'd keep out the urban poor, though, so that'd be to the good Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,400 #16 March 21, 2019 1 hour ago, wmw999 said: Oh no, after lobbying, it'll be based on a combination based on dollar worth of abode, with acreage coming in second. All those rich people wouldn't want to be disenfranchised. It'd keep out the urban poor, though, so that'd be to the good And if you are a landlord and rent to someone of color, you are allocated an additional 3/5 of a vote for each member in their family! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 340 #17 March 21, 2019 2 hours ago, ryoder said: And if you are a landlord and own someone of color, you are allocated an additional 3/5 of a vote! Fixed to reflect the actual intent of the electoral college. People should be ashamed to depend for their power on a system that was created to allow the slave states to count slaves towards their representation in Washington while at the same time denying those slaves the most basic of human rights. The electoral college is a vestige of slavery, and like slavery it should be buried deep enough to conceal its stink. Don 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,260 #18 March 21, 2019 6 minutes ago, GeorgiaDon said: People should be ashamed to depend for their power on a system that was created to allow the slave states to count slaves towards their representation in Washington while at the same time denying those slaves the most basic of human rights. Is that how the cause and effect worked? Sure slavery and 3/5ths had a huge impact on how the EC worked, but that doesn't mean it was why it exists. 3/5ths had a huge impact on representation in the House and levels of taxation as well, but that doesn't mean Congress and Federal taxes are vestiges of slavery. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yoink 321 #19 March 22, 2019 10 hours ago, BillyVance said: Since I live in a state with a lot of green land and clean lakes (I literally have a lakefront home), with a couple, or 3 shithole cities that have high crime and are led by DEMOCRATIC mayors, I'd be offended if I was being told how to live by heavily populated high crime city DEMOCRATIC elites who can't get their shit together. Speaking of which, what's up with NYC mayor Bill De Blasio's wife being unable to account for $1.6 billion, or is it $1.8 billion, that she was given for her mental health initiative or whatever the fuck it was? https://nypost.com/2019/02/28/de-blasio-and-co-mayor-wife-have-wasted-1-8b-of-taxpayer-money/ I love that you capitalize DEMOCRATIC. It makes me think that you don't actually give a shit about the functioning of the electoral college and would be fine if it were REPUBLICAN elites who can't get their shit together telling you what to do, but the fact that it's the other team's party means that you just have to oppose it otherwise your brain will fizzle out in a mouth frothing frenzy of apoplexy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #20 March 22, 2019 The electoral college is working exactly as designed. If you really look at the population there are only six or seven states in the whole nation that have more population than one county in California. It was never the intent to have large population areas elect the president of the United States. Hence the electoral college. And it would take a constitutional amendment to get rid of it which would require ratification by the states which we all know will never happen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #21 March 22, 2019 12 minutes ago, rushmc said: The electoral college is working exactly as designed. If you really look at the population there are only six or seven states in the whole nation that have more population than one county in California. It was never the intent to have large population areas elect the president of the United States. Hence the electoral college. And it would take a constitutional amendment to get rid of it which would require ratification by the states which we all know will never happen You really should read Federalist #68 before fabricating reasons for the EC. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,147 #22 March 22, 2019 (edited) 15 minutes ago, rushmc said: It was never the intent to have large population areas elect the president of the United States. Hence the electoral college. Do you have any evidence or article indicating that this was the stated intent of the Electoral College? My understanding is that the thought process was more that a presidential election through Congress would make a president to beholden to the states. Further, there was a sense that the people could not be trusted to make the right decision, they either aren't smart enough, or too easily duped. Lastly, the sense was that a truly national election wasn't possible (at that time). The concept of the Electoral College was the compromise. I haven't read anything that would suggest that the intent was to counter urban vs rural population concentrations. Edited March 22, 2019 by SkyDekker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,260 #23 March 22, 2019 2 hours ago, rushmc said: It was never the intent to have large population areas elect the president of the United States. Hence the electoral college. Very true. The intent of the Electoral College is to have the President of the United States chosen by the Deep State. (I'm not even joking, that's the literal truth.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,353 #24 March 22, 2019 20 minutes ago, jakee said: Very true. The intent of the Electoral College is to have the President of the United States chosen by the Deep State. (I'm not even joking, that's the literal truth.) Yup. In both theory and practice, the EC follows the 'will of the people' and elects the one who got the most votes. For the most part. The idea that they could be 'smarter than the people' and refuse to elect a demagogue, blatant con man or someone clearly unfit for the office was one good reason for their existence. The fact that they failed miserably the last time, when we had a wannabe dictator and con man and someone who failed to meet the constitutional requirements (emoluments clause, anyone?) and still put him into office kinda throws the whole 'Deep State" conspiracy idea out the window. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #25 March 23, 2019 The only failure was Democrats who believed the MSM and decided not to go to the polls and then feigned shock and dismay. Your side fucked up...you need to own that shit. Still makes me chuckle... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites