It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democratic analysts say they need Trump voters to win, I just don't understand their strategy

page: 5
22
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: chr0naut

Because this isn't only about the people. It is also about the states themselves as political entities.


The EC election is for a role which is national and federal, not state. Nor does the EC election decide anything that affects state rights or resource distribution. Just because a state elects someone to federal office, doesn't mean that the official has any special duty to the electing state. The reason given for the existence of the EC, is invalid.


Each state is its own separate entity co-equal in the grand scheme, no matter how many or few live within its borders. This is why the Representatives of the House are apportioned according to population and selected by the actual people of the country (and states), and it's why the Senate is governing body of two Senators for each state, and they used to be selected by the governing bodies of each state, not selected by a direct vote of the people. That had to be changed by an amendment because the COTUS did not originally have them elected that way. They were intended to represent the voices of the state governments.


So there is already political process in Congress and Senate, aside from the EC, which grants states rights and powers.

The EC is unnecessary.

It complicates something that can easily be simpler and, because such a small amount of votes actually elect the President, it opens up the possibility of corruption.

Consider that a single faithless elector in the EC vote can mess with the voting outcome of nearly millions of citizens within their state.

The fines for voting faithlessly are trivial and the amounts of money changing hands due to electoral outcomes is potentially in the billions. This means that someone can successfully bribe an EC voter and win the election through graft.

Even if they fine the voter, the faithless elector still comes out of it better off than someone who votes according to their conscience and to state dictates. And, as we have seen, you'd have to establish that a bribe was paid and go through the impeachment process to remove a President, you can't prosecute them otherwise.

If someone distributed $270 million to 270 EC electors, in bribes, the corrupt candidate would win without doubt or contest. 270 votes is the absolute majority required to win. But, because of the system, and the fact that most of the votes in a fair system would be fairly reasonably matched, you would actually require far-far less financial outlay to ensure a win in the EC vote. You can 'buy' the US Presidency because of the EC.


For this reason, each state gets two electors to represent its voice as a governed entity co-equal with all others.

In that sense, there is no difference between Wyoming and California. So each gets two electors to signify that equality of status.

Then each gets electors in proportion to population. But if a voter in Cali feels all butt hurt about it, nothing stops them from moving to Wyoming to make their vote "more important", but I'm sure voters in Wyoming would find that laughable.


I'd find it laughable too. When ever you try and discuss issues with the American political system, people try and illustrate their point by comparisn to laughably irrational and impossible scenarios.

If you refuse to see something is broken, you will never undertake to fix it.

edit on 14/2/2020 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: The2Billies
a reply to: chr0naut


Since you aren't a US citizen, you don't have skin in the game.

You write and talk like a US far left radical liberal Democrat.

But from your other comments you appear to have trouble understanding the importance of the electoral college and how it actually works. I have seen this several times in your writings.

As a non-citizen you are trying to tell another country how to run their affairs - it comes off to me as ultra-left liberal condescension and arrogance. A sort of "we know better how you should run your affairs then you do" "So I'll tell you the correct way to run your country because I am smarter and know better how you should run your life than you do".

As someone who is trying to tell another nation how to run it's affairs, I think your comments are basically, condescending and arrogant - to think you know better what a nation half a world away from you should do then the citizens themselves.

Therefore, I will use the current liberal practice of "you are cancelled" as far as I am concerned. Why? Because you are saying how you think people who are half a world away should run their affairs which is clearly an attitude which mirrors those of a 1600-1700's colonial overlords or missionaries to Hawaii who were determined to "civilize" the natives and change the way they ran their lives.


I wasn't telling you how to fix the system.

I wasn't telling you how to vote.

I'm not a turn of last century missionary.

Perhaps I am arrogant, but nowhere near as arrogant as one of your specific countrymen.




posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: chr0naut

Ok.

WE GET IT.

YOU DON'T LIKE OUR COUNTRY.

But we're not going to crap our Constitution just because you, as an anti-American foreigner, don't like it.

It doesn't work that way.

Now AS an American, I'm actually a defender of rights and free speech. So I would only encourage you as an anti-American foreigner, to speak up and enjoy a right you are probably trying to deny.


I love many things American. I'm not anti-American at all.

I think your Constitution is a great bit of legislation, especially for its time.

I just happen to think that the modified Westminster system is superior in a modern world and that a lot of legal exceptions and changing times have weakened all our countries systems governmental systems especially since the 50's. There needs to be a way to refresh without violence and without loosing the good things of the past.

Systematic decay has ended every great political system. There has to be a way to stop that.

edit on 14/2/2020 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Maybe I refuse to see it as broken because it isn't.



posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 09:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Muninn
a reply to: chr0naut

We don't care what you think of our EC.




Well that's obvious.

Do you think, that I think, anything I say here will change the American political system one iota?

That would be absurd.




posted on Feb, 14 2020 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

You understand that when the system was designed the same types of population disparities between states existed as exist today? The EC system was designed with such population imbalances in mind and low population states only signed on to the COTUS in part because the system was put in place because they didn't want to be governed by their more populated neighbors in national politics.

It was designed explicitly to balance that imbalance of population, to shift with the population changes as people moved over time, and it exists to protect the minority voice in American politics and at the picking of the President who should represent all parts of the nation, not just the preferences of the two or three most populated states.



posted on Feb, 16 2020 @ 08:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Muninn
a reply to: chr0naut

We don't care what you think of our EC.




Well that's obvious.

Do you think, that I think, anything I say here will change the American political system one iota?

That would be absurd.



Thank God you are correct.

People who live half a world away who spend their lives criticizing countries that are not their own - should not influence the politics of another nation. Russians should not attempt to interfere, neither should Australians, New Zealanders, the Chinese or any other foreign nationals.

Especially when they insist they know how people where they don't live should run their lives and country. It is none of their business to comment on, let alone through social media attempt to influence or change the culture and way of life (politics) of another country.
That would be like the white colonialists who took over South Africa and tried to run and then take over another country from half a world away, that ended well didn't it (not).

Someone who deems themselves superior to others by telling others how they should live their lives, should not make one iota of difference in another countries business from half a world away, since they are truly ignorant about the daily lives and daily politics of that country.

Phew! Something we can all agree on.




edit on 2/16/20 by The2Billies because: addition format



posted on Feb, 16 2020 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Democrats: Everyone who voted for Trump is a racist, sexist, islamophobe, Nazi, Religious nutjob, hater, ignorant, mouth breather, hillbilly, red neck, racist, moron, sexist, hater!

Democrats: Please vote for our guy.


.................and Trump voters shop at Walmart..........along with the 260 lb, greasy haired, Birkenstock wearing, lib hausfraus stuffed like over-stuffed sausage in leggings.



posted on Feb, 16 2020 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut


- In the 21st Century, modern transport has made delivery just about anywhere across the US, pretty much same day. They can refrigerate it, too, so it doesn't go off. Wow!

- In the 21st Century, people from all the states share the same syndicated radio, TV and internet connection.

- No longer is there any major cultural or lifestyle differences between states.

- Most of the infrastructure is already in place to support the population, even in 'remote' areas, which means that living costs are no longer vastly different, as it was way back then.


I think I am now understanding your confusion on why the EC is still relevant today in the 21st century. I have a feeling that you have not taken a tour across our country, state by state. There are major and extreme differences in culture, lifestyles and vastly different living costs.

Having access to global technologies or Internet information does not mean that you toss aside your own unique culture or lifestyles and are instantly all the same globally. it simply means that you can be more conscious of differences and strengthens your determination to appreciate and retain such uniqueness.

While this is understandable that a foreigner would be ignorant of this, it is saddening that many of our own democratic citizens have this same fallacy of belief. They live in their own bubbles and are clueless that not everyone thinks or wants what they do.



posted on Feb, 16 2020 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

Libs don't smell bad, didn't you know that?


Here is the origin of smelly walmart voters:



On August 26, 2016, FBI official Peter Strzok told Page he went to a Walmart in southern Virginia and he could “SMELL the Trump support"
www.usmessageboard.com...


FBI agent Peter Strzok was grilled Thursday about his text messages and personal views on President Donald Trump's supporters before a joint House committee hearing, at one being asked whether he believed the president's base were "hillbillies" and to describe what "Trump support" smelled like...."So let's discuss a text that hits home for me," Goodlatte said. "On August 26, 2016, you texted Ms. Page 'Just went to a Southern Virginia Walmart. I could smell the Trump support.' And smell is in capital letters, all capital letters. What does Trump support smell like Mr. Strzok?"..."So earlier you had texted Ms. Page, that another part of Virginia, Loudoun County, which I think is northern Virginia, was 'still ignorant hillbillies.' Is that what you meant? Do you consider Trump supporters to be ignorant hillbillies?"
www....newsweek.com/peter-strzok-trump-smell-hillbillies-1020892



edit on 2/16/20 by The2Billies because: addition



posted on Feb, 16 2020 @ 09:47 AM
link   
originally posted by: CynConcepts
a reply to: chr0naut


chr0naut
In the 21st Century, modern transport has made delivery just about anywhere across the US, pretty much same day. They can refrigerate it, too, so it doesn't go off. Wow!

- In the 21st Century, people from all the states share the same syndicated radio, TV and internet connection.

- No longer is there any major cultural or lifestyle differences between states.
...

CynConcepts
Having access to global technologies or Internet information does not mean that you toss aside your own unique culture or lifestyles and are instantly all the same globally. it simply means that you can be more conscious of differences and strengthens your determination to appreciate and retain such uniqueness.

While this is understandable that a foreigner would be ignorant of this, it is saddening that many of our own democratic citizens have this same fallacy of belief. They live in their own bubbles and are clueless that not everyone thinks or wants what they do.


Tossing aside one's culture is a basic tenant of today's progressive/liberalism around the world. Today's liberal believes that social justice and fairness and equality can only be achieved through the creation of a mono-cultural-one world culture.

That is why progressive/liberals are lightening fast to jump on "cultural appropriation"

to the point where it is socially verboten for a person or group to honor a culture that is not their own.

Just like when some a student wanted to dress in mariachi outfit for Halloween, and they were forbidden from for wearing the outfits, because it was cultural appropriation (ie offensive, rude, mean) Even though, the students had borrowed the outfits from their fathers who played in a mariachi band. libertyunyielding.com...

This sort of punishing people for the slightest hint of mentioning or doing something another culture does, that they admire. (i.e. wearing a hairstyle that ones finds pretty, but it is a typical hairstyle, sort of national hairstyle for another culture/country) fashionista.com... (or wearing an outfit that the person thinks is beautiful, but happens to be modeled after the national dress of another culture) www.bbc.com...

This whole socially or actually punishing people for things like the above clearly demonstrate that progressive/liberals want to erase what makes cultures unique and severely limit who can express what.

The liberals insist that one can only honor a unique culture only if one is a member of the first generation or current generation of who are native to, and who actually live in that culture. No one else is allowed to express any form of admiration for that culture by emulating a hairstyle or form of dress or anything they like and admire about that culture.




edit on 2/16/20 by The2Billies because: addition format



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join