what's next lefties?

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: ketsuko

Can we start gerrymandering the state borders like they do within the states so this or that party can have an advantage in the congressional elections??
Maybe a few decades of having to rewrite envelopes because we cant keep up with what state we are in will get us to realize just how crazy we've allowed things to get.

People want to actually.

Haven't you heard about the movements to split California into several different states, or the people in parts of Northwestern Colorado who want to split from the rest of it (or maybe that's northeastern Colorado), the Florida Keys are forever declaring their independence from the rest of the country, both Texas and California have threatened secession during the past two administrations, where do you think West Virginia came from, aren't you aware that much of Illinois wants to divest itself from Cook County and Chicago?

What are those if not attempts to rewrite state boundaries in an attempt to feel like the political voice of a region within a currently existing state is made manifest in some way?

a reply to: ketsuko

What do you consider to be the “Reddest” American state Ketsuko?

a reply to: Gryphon66

That's because people are short-sighted.

States with smaller populations are minorities as entities, and the current system as designed is to protect them.

People in those states should not be governed the same way people in more populous states are. The US is too large to adopt that strategy and have it work out well.

The current system evens out the weight of all the states somewhat. As it is, it still takes a grand coalition of the heartland voting in concert to overthrow the will of a state like California anyhow, so California does have an outsize impact in the process even if it's not popular vote heavy.

The only reason we hear this whining is because this is one time the left didn't get what it wanted out of the election.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ketsuko

What do you consider to be the “Reddest” American state Ketsuko?

I have no idea, and I really don't give a flying rat's ass, my dear. It's the left who slapped those labels on us, not me. It's a popular pejorative to use anytime they don't get what they want and need to blame people so they use it and look down on us while they step over feces and needles in their streets.

a reply to: ketsuko

No, the current system is not designed to protect smaller states. That’s either a common misconception or a prevalent dishonesty.

The Constitution sets up the EC as directly equal to the proportions of the State’s representation in Congress. Thus every State has two electors, and the remainder is based on the number of people.

The Constitution leaves the matter up to the States as to how their Electors will be chosen. Three states allow proportional representation which is the only fair way.

The only whining I hear is from folks who continually misrepresent the facts of the matter. The reality is that the EC peculiarities of “first past the post” disenfranchises up to half the given population of voters.

The only benefit to that system is to keep the two-party system in power.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ketsuko

What do you consider to be the “Reddest” American state Ketsuko?

I have no idea, and I really don't give a flying rat's ass, my dear. It's the left who slapped those labels on us, not me. It's a popular pejorative to use anytime they don't get what they want and need to blame people so they use it and look down on us while they step over feces and needles in their streets.

LOL. Is it ironic that you complain about labels as you slap labels on others ...

Let’s say it’s the State of Alabama for a reference point. Pretty danged Red.

SO in 2016, 1,318,255 Alabamans voted for Trump and 729,547 voted for Clinton.

That’s about a 60/30 split.

All 729,547 who voted for Clinton had their votes nullified by the FPTP system favored by the Republcian-Democrat hegemony.

What’s the big problem in letting 6 of AL’s nine votes go to Trump and 3 go to Clinton? Are you guys so afraid of what Americans really want?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes and No.

The original intention was that the electors would be one group of people for that state. Not a group for the Republicans and a separate group for the Democrats, with the decision of which group to send to be determined. Just as all Senators were to be sent by the State Legislature with the Governor having the option to veto, but could be overridden.

But like all great ideas, there are those that think that they can do better. So some states followed the EC and others did not until they all did not.

a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk

They're not though. I'm not sure why you are under this impression. The DNC itself is terrified of Sanders, AOC, et al. That's why they keep exhuming the corpses of their oldest heroes to run against "the socialism." They have already dug up their own pet billionaire (Bloomberg) and they would reanimate the Klint-Ton if they get desperate enough.

The truth (as far as I have been able to ascertain) is what the establishment DNC (the neo-lib side of the elites referenced in my previous post) are terrified of is medicare for all. That's the "socialism" that's got key DNC leaders performing necromancy on their own dead.

a reply to: ketsuko

Umm. Well in that case, I would encourage the younger people to buy a nice map and put is away.. and keep buying one with every change as the states morph into a senseless mess resembling a scribbling done by a kindergartner.
Pass them down to your kids.. in a few generations, when sanity returns they might be worth a small fortune.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ketsuko

What do you consider to be the “Reddest” American state Ketsuko?

I have no idea, and I really don't give a flying rat's ass, my dear. It's the left who slapped those labels on us, not me. It's a popular pejorative to use anytime they don't get what they want and need to blame people so they use it and look down on us while they step over feces and needles in their streets.

LOL. Is it ironic that you complain about labels as you slap labels on others ...

Let’s say it’s the State of Alabama for a reference point. Pretty danged Red.

SO in 2016, 1,318,255 Alabamans voted for Trump and 729,547 voted for Clinton.

That’s about a 60/30 split.

All 729,547 who voted for Clinton had their votes nullified by the FPTP system favored by the Republcian-Democrat hegemony.

What’s the big problem in letting 6 of AL’s nine votes go to Trump and 3 go to Clinton? Are you guys so afraid of what Americans really want?

so in this scenario, what happens to the % of votes that don't go to Trump/Hillary? The electoral college gives EC votes to the 3rd party candidates?

Also FYI California was a 60/30 split. So you want 33 EC votes for Hillary and 22 to Clinton?

originally posted by: dawnstar
Ummm... what's next???
I imagine the people vote. How the people judge the evidence will probably play a role in the voting booth. If the see a nothingburger like the republicans seem to want them to believe, not only will the dem pres candidate probably have less of a chance but also the congressional candidates. If they decide that the nothingburger was something that warranted investigation and impeachment, the republicans will take the hit.
But, at least the voters will have the information and allowed to decide for themselves.

Even with all
This impeachment nonsense, Trump’s rallies are massive.

a reply to: jjkenobi

Yes to both.

I have to ask. When this current impeachment/coup attempt fails, and Trump win's another election, what will you do then?

Same thing they've done for the last three years.

LIE,CHEAT,STEAL and will not be held accountable for it.

a reply to: Oraculi

Except there's no there "there" with the current Impeachment.

I'll provide this, in case you want to read the facts of the case from a true legal standpoint...

Common Sense Central

Py

originally posted by: pyguy
a reply to: Oraculi

Except there's no there "there" with the current Impeachment.

I'll provide this, in case you want to read the facts of the case from a true legal standpoint...

Common Sense Central

Py

A right-wing radio host? LOL.

originally posted by: jjkenobi

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ketsuko

What do you consider to be the “Reddest” American state Ketsuko?

I have no idea, and I really don't give a flying rat's ass, my dear. It's the left who slapped those labels on us, not me. It's a popular pejorative to use anytime they don't get what they want and need to blame people so they use it and look down on us while they step over feces and needles in their streets.

LOL. Is it ironic that you complain about labels as you slap labels on others ...

Let’s say it’s the State of Alabama for a reference point. Pretty danged Red.

SO in 2016, 1,318,255 Alabamans voted for Trump and 729,547 voted for Clinton.

That’s about a 60/30 split.

All 729,547 who voted for Clinton had their votes nullified by the FPTP system favored by the Republcian-Democrat hegemony.

What’s the big problem in letting 6 of AL’s nine votes go to Trump and 3 go to Clinton? Are you guys so afraid of what Americans really want?

so in this scenario, what happens to the % of votes that don't go to Trump/Hillary? The electoral college gives EC votes to the 3rd party candidates?

Also FYI California was a 60/30 split. So you want 33 EC votes for Hillary and 22 to Clinton?

Assuming you meant Hillary vs. Trump above.

It is interesting.

This electoral map of 2016 allows you to see the results of various alternate electoral college systems, including assigning votes per district vs. winner take all.

I believe Gryphon66's suggestion is for "Congressional District Majority" CDM Where each elector votes in keeping with their district vs. the popular vote of their state.

You can test it out here: www.270towin.com...

a reply to: network dude

Translation of your post: I'm personally offended at liberals for trying to hold the president accountable for breaking the law and I'm so arrogant and delusional that I can't even imagine Trump losing, because he talks a strong game LOL. What a childish premise for a thread. Come and talk after Trump wins or loses.

FYI, disenfranchised liberals WILL vote in 2020. They didn't in 2016 because the Democratic party went against their base and nominated a moderate republican Hillary when the people wanted Bernie. Dems just need to appeal to their base instead of all these compromise candidates who are basically centrists / moderate repubs. You don't see republicans appealing to centrists and moderates, they keep going as far right as you can go. Dems better learn from that and move the party back left or it really won't matter.

a reply to: network dude

Well, providing Trump wins in 2020

I expect 4 more years of Democrats doing everything they can to prevent him from accomplishing any of his goals. I expect investigations, drama, obstruction and resistence every step of the way.

I wouldn't be surprised at an assassination attempt or two either. I'm frankly surprised this hasn't happened already.

Then, when the Democrats get into power I expect them to quickly enact laws that will make it impossible for them to ever lose power again and then they will begin to take away our rights or essentially nerf them into oblivion and turn us into a communist/socialist country like they have wanted to do for a long time. Not the modeate ones mind, you, but the progressives and enlightened ones.

Hopefully the Republicans and right can stave it off until I croak. I'm counting on you guys. Do it for The Gipper.

This site is amusing. People post as if literally people on this site and in America somehow are trying to impeach Trump, and gee.. if they fail, what will they do?! An anonymous whistle blower followed protocol to report what they thought was improper behavior from Trump, which kicked off the impeachment inquiry. It has nothing to do with people on this site, or anyone else in the country who doesn't care for Trump. Sure, they may want a certain result, but they have no say at all in the outcome, nor did they initiate it.

Same with the Russian interference. Nothing to do with citizens you are targeting, and acting as if they had ANYTHING to do with the investigation.

What will people do if Trump wins? Probably what they are doing now - not much, but voicing their complaints when they have them. Actual people other than voting for POTUS (and not even really then), can do much about who is in office, or what they do while in office.

Also again, because Trump keeps confusing people, the impeachment proceedings is not a coup. It's not even remotely similar to a coup. Why do you keep using that term? Because it makes Trump (and his followers) feel more like victims?

a reply to: Barcs

Which law did he actually break because if you'll notice, that keeps changing.

First it was colluding with a foreign power to influence the election. Then it obstruction of justice for getting in the way of the investigation into that charge. Then when that charge turned out to have been nothing all along, they suddenly turned to quid pro quo, but now they're off of quid pro quo and starting to talk about bribery and extortion.

So which law is it that the president actually broke because they can't seem to make up their minds or are they trying on charges until they find one that seems to best fit the dirt they've scraped together?