Posts: 15351
Threads: 118
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
117
RE: Why is the Democratic Party against the only person who could save them?
June 1, 2017 at 1:35 am
Of course the electoral college is broken.
He literally stated that the electorate vote is what you need, not the popular vote. Those are the same thing.
Changing the system, once again, requires that you win with the current rules. Complaining that the rules suck after you lost is a bit hollow. 40 some odd percent of the electorate didn't vote. The electoral college is a red herring.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Posts: 23136
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: Why is the Democratic Party against the only person who could save them?
June 1, 2017 at 1:35 am
(This post was last modified: June 1, 2017 at 1:38 am by Thumpalumpacus.)
(June 1, 2017 at 1:31 am)Khemikal Wrote: @Twice now in the last two decades
Both of which being republican candidates. Gosh, it's almost like they're gaming the system or something?
Golly, that had never occurred to me!
(June 1, 2017 at 1:35 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: The electoral college is a red herring.
It is also the problem. Dismissing his point because of semantics is not very convincing. He was obviously referring to the EC.
Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
259
RE: Why is the Democratic Party against the only person who could save them?
June 1, 2017 at 1:39 am
Quote:We've had two instances of popular votes being overridden by EC stratagems in the last 20 years.
Actually its twice in 16 years which covers only 5 elections so the EC fuck-up rate is running at 40% if you want to look at current streaks.
Posts: 23136
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: Why is the Democratic Party against the only person who could save them?
June 1, 2017 at 1:42 am
(June 1, 2017 at 1:39 am)Minimalist Wrote: Quote:We've had two instances of popular votes being overridden by EC stratagems in the last 20 years.
Actually its twice in 16 years which covers only 5 elections so the EC fuck-up rate is running at 40% if you want to look at current streaks.
Yeah, I was rounding off.
Posts: 15351
Threads: 118
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
117
RE: Why is the Democratic Party against the only person who could save them?
June 1, 2017 at 1:44 am
(This post was last modified: June 1, 2017 at 1:45 am by SteelCurtain.)
(June 1, 2017 at 1:35 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: (June 1, 2017 at 1:35 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: The electoral college is a red herring.
It is also the problem. Dismissing his point because of semantics is not very convincing.
It is a problem, it is not the problem.
I would love to see it changed, but if the system can be gamed, both sides can do it.
And I don't believe a complete lack of understanding of what an electorate is qualifies as semantics.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Posts: 23136
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: Why is the Democratic Party against the only person who could save them?
June 1, 2017 at 1:46 am
(June 1, 2017 at 1:44 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: And I don't believe a complete lack of understanding of what an electorate is qualifies as semantics.
No, but chiding him for writing "electorate" rather than "electoral college" does. His meaning was clear ... for once.
Posts: 15351
Threads: 118
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
117
RE: Why is the Democratic Party against the only person who could save them?
June 1, 2017 at 1:47 am
(June 1, 2017 at 1:46 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: (June 1, 2017 at 1:44 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: And I don't believe a complete lack of understanding of what an electorate is qualifies as semantics.
No, but chiding him for writing "electorate" rather than "electoral college" does. His meaning was clear ... for once. If you say so.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Posts: 67243
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Why is the Democratic Party against the only person who could save them?
June 1, 2017 at 1:49 am
(This post was last modified: June 1, 2017 at 1:51 am by The Grand Nudger.)
(June 1, 2017 at 1:44 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: I would love to see it changed, but if the system can be gamed, both sides can do it. idk.......the dems might find it a little bit harder to systematically disenfranchise the average republican voter, don't you think? Sure, microtargeting blacks can slip by, engineering districts such that the vote of dems is mooted can slip by....for as long as it needs to in order to be effective.....but try to pull that shit on a middle aged white christian male who consistently votes republican?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 23136
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: Why is the Democratic Party against the only person who could save them?
June 1, 2017 at 1:49 am
(This post was last modified: June 1, 2017 at 1:50 am by Thumpalumpacus.)
(June 1, 2017 at 1:44 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: It is a problem, it is not the problem.
I would love to see it changed, but if the system can be gamed, both sides can do it.
Well, that is the problem, isn't it? Inserting another layer between the will of the electorate and the elected?
(June 1, 2017 at 1:47 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: (June 1, 2017 at 1:46 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: No, but chiding him for writing "electorate" rather than "electoral college" does. His meaning was clear ... for once. If you say so.
Pat answer, kid. You should be better than this. Did you honestly not know what he was trying to say?
Posts: 15351
Threads: 118
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
117
RE: Why is the Democratic Party against the only person who could save them?
June 1, 2017 at 2:04 am
(June 1, 2017 at 1:49 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: (June 1, 2017 at 1:44 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: It is a problem, it is not the problem.
I would love to see it changed, but if the system can be gamed, both sides can do it.
Well, that is the problem, isn't it? Inserting another layer between the will of the electorate and the elected?
Globally, yes. Specific to what we were talking about in the thread, namely this election, no.
(June 1, 2017 at 1:49 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: (June 1, 2017 at 1:47 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: If you say so.
Pat answer, kid. You should be better than this. Did you honestly not know what he was trying to say?
I knew what he was trying to say. I want, for once, for him to be able to write a full sentence that is coherent and doesn't require decoding. He has no idea what he's talking about, so I point out his ignorance.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
|
