It's official, President Trump takes over.

[Wyrt]

... No, that's not how Congress is supposed to be. Congress is a set number. There is a limited amount of people allowed to be Congressmen at a given time. Therefore, California cannot have 66 representatives because it would have to either A. Increase the size of Congress to unstable levels or B. Take away other states representation.

Balance of power is between the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of Government. The legislative and executive branches were designed so that smaller states would still have a strong voice compared to larger states, buddy. That's how it has worked since we signed the constitution, and it wasn't an accident.

Nope. Congress did not have a seat cap until 1911.

- - - Updated - - -

Get over it as in, "Get over losing the election due to the electoral college which is apart of the bedrock of this democracy." I don't care if you oppose Trump, stop crying about losing the election due to the electoral college. It works like that for a reason. Don't alienate half the country and maybe you'll win next time.

But it's ok to alienate and devalue the other half of the country because you don't like them?

[Thepersona]

I'm glad they use it to be honest. We won't, and we shouldn't get over it of course. And keeping saying "get over it" implies they are utterly unprepared for the resistance Donald Trump faces, expecting it all to go away.

Boy are they in for a shock.

The burning legion is woefully unprepared for (spoilers) the srnies of legionfall invasion on argus. This will be aroun the same. We are the legionfall (of the legion of imbeciles)

[Fugus]

@Therionn, the Electoral College is currently all kinds of fucked up no matter what position you take on it.

If you try and claim it is to offset the power of the more populated states, you would be wrong as that was never it's intended purpose as anything but a minor compromise at best as its founders made it because they feared a direct democracy and that allowed the public a vote with the Electoral Colleges purpose being to have the final say to keep buffoons and con men out by having the final say coming to a group of educated members to make the final say. Their original intent was specifically to stop someone like Trump from getting elected and Clinton too given her cheating but as of the last election they proven they aren't even willing to do their job in that regards.

And as far as it giving more power to the voters in the smaller states it doesn't even do that right as 48 of the states are winner take all which disenfranchises the voters in all states big and small to a larger extent than a straight popular vote would have been to those smaller states. Whether the candidate won that state by 51% or 89% they got 100% of the electoral college votes which disenfranchised the other 49% to 11% of the voters who voted against them at the national level.

If you wanted the Electoral College to have any real semblance of fairness or function to it, it either needed to perform its originally intended goal which would have blocked both Clinton and Trump which only 7 of the electors were willing to do that job or to abolish Winner-Take-All and have all the electoral college votes mandated to be spread according to the popular vote of that state so all its voters votes counted and not just the majority vote within that state with the rest thrown in the trash like now.

[Deleted]

Nope. Congress did not have a seat cap until 1911.

- - - Updated - - -



But it's ok to alienate and devalue the other half of the country because you don't like them?

They created the seat cap to avoid unstable levels of congressmen. Lol, it's pretty obvious that you do not understand how our Government works, buddy.

No, that's not okay. That's literally why you guys lost, lmfao.

[Thepersona]

They created the seat cap to avoid unstable levels of congressmen. Lol, it's pretty obvious that you do not understand how our Government works, buddy.

No, that's not okay. That's literally why you guys lost, lmfao.

How i can put this to you in order to make it understandable... trump won the electoral college in the swing states by less than 100k votes in all of them combined. And lost the popular vote. If it was a popular vote democracy, he would have lost. If it was a electoral college system without a winner take all method (so a proportional one) he would have lost too. He won with the minority, not because they were alienated but because it was easier to fool them with empty promises

[Wyrt]

They created the seat cap to avoid unstable levels of congressmen. Lol, it's pretty obvious that you do not understand how our Government works, buddy.

No, that's not okay. That's literally why you guys lost, lmfao.

All I'm seeing is people that want to devalue and disenfranchise American citizens because of an archaic system. It is a wholly undemocratic system.

[Dextroden]

I'm glad they use it to be honest. We won't, and we shouldn't get over it of course. And keeping saying "get over it" implies they are utterly unprepared for the resistance Donald Trump faces, expecting it all to go away.

Boy are they in for a shock.

It actually makes perfect sense after Obama.

People being babies in the street need to accept their new president.

[Daethz]

How i can put this to you in order to make it understandable... trump won the electoral college in the swing states by less than 100k votes in all of them combined. And lost the popular vote. If it was a popular vote democracy, he would have lost. If it was a electoral college system without a winner take all method (so a proportional one) he would have lost too. He won with the minority, not because they were alienated but because it was easier to fool them with empty promises

If he won by landmass (countys) he wound have won with a 91%

[Skroe]

This was not normal, not even for all your enthusiasm in politics. Radicals do not win elections in the US even if they win nominations. When Goldwater won the Republican nomination he was swiftly and brutally crushed by Johnson. When McGovern won the Democratic nomination he was annihilated by Nixon, and then the US rid itself of Nixon ( who actually for all his crooked actions left one of the most enduring legacies in America ).

The balance of powers of your country was designed to specifically stop something like this from happening. It failed.

It's not just Trump either, consider Sanders, another radical who barely was beaten by the Democrats but it cost them their entire DNC leadership and infuriated his voters, who then turned to Trump. Without Sanders running there would be no Trump in the White House, and no this is not to blame Sanders or his voters.

People like Trump and Sanders don't get to where they did in a normal election. It wasn't Russia, something's far more broken then that. You elected the modern equivalent of Goldwater. That's unfathomable and I see Trump in the Oval office I cannot process, it's beyond my mind that someone like him is sitting in that chair, it's surreal to even wake up and think about it.

Sanders and Donald Trump reflect something entirely different I've talked about before.

The Bush Administration, followed by the Obama Administration, looted and pillaged the bench of talent of their respective parties, leaving the pathway open only to C-list cranks like Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum, or old (litterally) faces like Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders.

Historically it was a key job of administrations to act as incubators for the next generation of American leaders. The State level does this as well. Both Administrations strip minded every level of government for the best talent they could, and did little to replentish it and build careers. Both Administrations put the objectives of the Administration, and particularly in Obama's case, the "legacy", over medium and long term building of party infrastructure. They burned through too much talent, from too many places, and didn't build up enough careers.

THe rise of the Tea Party in 2010, for example, was a direct result of would-be next generation of Bush-era Republicans getting wiped out in 2006 and 2008, and the rest leaving government all together for the private sector. Obama inherited a lot of Clinton people in the first term, but those were largely replaced by Biden's people in the second, and others drawn from the national and state parties. It all served as a talent drain, without any real work being put into replentishment.

This is a historically new thing. Clinton and Reagan/ George H.W. Bush were excellent career and bench builders. Reagan / Bush figures showed up in George W. Bush's Administration. Clinton people formed the core of the 2000s era Democratic leadership, through to the Present day (but they're all graying).

Donald Trump got through, because both benches are in a sorry state. That's not a crisis. That's an emergent property from how the Presidency has been run for the past 16 years. A key job of Hillary Clinton would be to build a Democratic bench had she been elected. In fact, the Clinton's were uniquely gifted AT doing such a thing.

I've been talking about this thing above long pre-Trump. How does it get fixed? Time and money. No other way. Democrats maybe will be ready by 2020. Maybe not until 2024. Republicans however... Trump bailed them out by getting them the White House, but their bench is horriffically thin too and its masking it. They're having deep troublign filling all exceutive branch posts.

The country, for its part, went through this twice in the last 50 years. The first time was the transition from the Eisenhower / Nixonian Republicans to the Goldwater Republicans. The bench got smaller and smaller for the former and grew and grew for the latter. That process took 10 years. The second time was when New Deal Democrats began their long descent starting the 1968 Democratic Primary, made worse by one-term-Democrat Jimmy Carter, flailing in the 1980s, replaced by the late-1980s / early 1990s New Democrats, with Clinton at the helm. The final execution of that process took 12 years.

Democrats and Republicans will be just fine and will have benches in the 2020 with a lot of talent. In the arc of history, whats 8 years but a blip. Hopefully they manage it better.

[Deleted]

Therionn, the Electoral College is currently all kinds of fucked up no matter what position you take on it.

If you try and claim it is to offset the power of the more populated states, you would be wrong as that was never it's intended purpose as anything but a minor compromise at best as its founders made it because they feared a direct democracy and that allowed the public a vote with the Electoral Colleges purpose being to have the final say to keep buffoons and con men out by having the final say coming to a group of educated members to make the final say. Their original intent was specifically to stop someone like Trump from getting elected and Clinton too given her cheating but as of the last election they proven they aren't even willing to do their job in that regards.

And as far as it giving more power to the voters in the smaller states it doesn't even do that right as 48 of the states are winner take all which disenfranchises the voters in all states big and small to a larger extent that a straight popular vote would have been to those smaller states. Whether the candidate won that state by 51% or 89% they got 100% of the electoral college votes which disenfranchised the other 49% to 11% of the voters who voted against them at the national level.

If you wanted the Electoral College to have any real semblance of fairness or function to it, it either needed to perform its originally intended goal which would have blocked both Clinton and Trump which only 7 of the electors were willing to do that job or to abolish Winner-Take-All and have all the electoral college votes mandated to be spread according to the popular vote of that state so all its voters votes counted and not just the majority vote within that state with the rest thrown in the trash like now.

https://www.congress.gov/resources/d...alistPapers-10

Read the federalist papers, pal. Of course, what you say is partially true, but it is not even close to being the full truth. The electoral college wasn't designed just for one reason, but a major reason for it's design was to insure that small states would sign the constitution. Otherwise they wouldn't have, and America as we know it would not exist today.

They're designed to be winner take all because if not the liberal cities (which exist in all states) would have substantially more power than the rural areas. You're right though, in a way, but how that works is up to the individual states. Any state, including liberal states like California and New York, could change their winner take all rules. They don't though, because the state does not want a divided voice on the selection of the President.

[Thepersona]

If he won by landmass (countys) he wound have won with a 91%

And that doesnt even make any fucking sense. Landmass doesnt vote, people do.
Oh wait i get it, its because russia has the biggest landmass, it can dictate how the puss*es on the US behaves, right?

[Deleted]

Sanders and Donald Trump reflect something entirely different I've talked about before.

The Bush Administration, followed by the Obama Administration, looted and pillaged the bench of talent of their respective parties, leaving the pathway open only to C-list cranks like Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum, or old (litterally) faces like Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders.

Historically it was a key job of administrations to act as incubators for the next generation of American leaders. The State level does this as well. Both Administrations strip minded every level of government for the best talent they could, and did little to replentish it and build careers. Both Administrations put the objectives of the Administration, and particularly in Obama's case, the "legacy", over medium and long term building of party infrastructure. They burned through too much talent, from too many places, and didn't build up enough careers.

THe rise of the Tea Party in 2010, for example, was a direct result of would-be next generation of Bush-era Republicans getting wiped out in 2006 and 2008, and the rest leaving government all together for the private sector. Obama inherited a lot of Clinton people in the first term, but those were largely replaced by Biden's people in the second, and others drawn from the national and state parties. It all served as a talent drain, without any real work being put into replentishment.

This is a historically new thing. Clinton and Reagan/ George H.W. Bush were excellent career and bench builders. Reagan / Bush figures showed up in George W. Bush's Administration. Clinton people formed the core of the 2000s era Democratic leadership, through to the Present day (but they're all graying).

Donald Trump got through, because both benches are in a sorry state. That's not a crisis. That's an emergent property from how the Presidency has been run for the past 16 years. A key job of Hillary Clinton would be to build a Democratic bench had she been elected. In fact, the Clinton's were uniquely gifted AT doing such a thing.

I've been talking about this thing above long pre-Trump. How does it get fixed? Time and money. No other way. Democrats maybe will be ready by 2020. Maybe not until 2024. Republicans however... Trump bailed them out by getting them the White House, but their bench is horriffically thin too and its masking it. They're having deep troublign filling all exceutive branch posts.

The country, for its part, went through this twice in the last 50 years. The first time was the transition from the Eisenhower / Nixonian Republicans to the Goldwater Republicans. The bench got smaller and smaller for the former and grew and grew for the latter. That process took 10 years. The second time was when New Deal Democrats began their long descent starting the 1968 Democratic Primary, made worse by one-term-Democrat Jimmy Carter, flailing in the 1980s, replaced by the late-1980s / early 1990s New Democrats, with Clinton at the helm. The final execution of that process took 12 years.

Democrats and Republicans will be just fine and will have benches in the 2020 with a lot of talent. In the arc of history, whats 8 years but a blip. Hopefully they manage it better.

Republicans are thin? They had more than 3x the number of candidates for President than the Democrats did, and each of those candidates seemed to offer something different. Other than Jeb Bush

Donald Trump is the result of people feeling ignored and disregarded. He faced some extremely tough political rivals and still came out on top. It's not wise to continue to disregard it, you're only setting yourself up for more defeat.

[Wells]

the electoral college which is apart of the bedrock of this democracy

Hey we agree.

- - - Updated - - -

Republicans are thin? They had more than 3x the number of candidates for President than the Democrats did, and each of those candidates seemed to offer something different. Other than Jeb Bush

You confuse depth with numbers. Half those guys were up there to sell books.

- - - Updated - - -

People being babies in the street need to accept their new president.

What exactly does this look like to you?

[Skroe]

Get over it as in, "Get over losing the election due to the electoral college which is apart of the bedrock of this democracy." I don't care if you oppose Trump, stop crying about losing the election due to the electoral college. It works like that for a reason. Don't alienate half the country and maybe you'll win next time. Next time, choose a candidate who doesn't think that everyone that doesn't agree with them is "deplorable." Obama won because he tried to unite people, or at least seemed like he wanted to during his elections. Clinton lost because she stayed in a bubble and disregarded and insulted everyone else. Two examples of the electoral college working as intended.

Right now it's about 32% of Americans. You know... not about half.

I can deal with alienating 32% of Americans.

On my side we got time, demographics, distribution, technology, money, the truth, a cause, and of course, Donald Trump's fat mouth.

On your side... you have what exactly? That fucking frog that a bunch of alt-right shitstains think is hilarious? Sean Picer and Kellyanne Conway? Aging and declinging demographics?

I like our odds.

The America that the deplorables voted for is dead, and it's not coming back. That's a good thing. The world is changed for the better and THEY didn't change with it. That is THEIR failure.

[Dextroden]

Republicans are thin? They had more than 3x the number of candidates for President than the Democrats did, and each of those candidates seemed to offer something different. Other than Jeb Bush

Meanwhile, the air in the Democrat party was "Pick Hillary, no matter what you think of her" thanks to having no talent whatsoever and putting all their eggs in that basket.

- - - Updated - - -

Hey we agree.

- - - Updated - - -



You confuse depth with numbers. Half those guys were up there to sell books.

- - - Updated - - -



What exactly does this look like to you?

What it looked like in 2008/2012.

Really sad the people that demanded acceptance can't do it themselves.

[Wells]

What it looked like in 2008/2012.

8 years of unconsolable anger then, gotcha.

[Deleted]

How i can put this to you in order to make it understandable... trump won the electoral college in the swing states by less than 100k votes in all of them combined. And lost the popular vote. If it was a popular vote democracy, he would have lost. If it was a electoral college system without a winner take all method (so a proportional one) he would have lost too. He won with the minority, not because they were alienated but because it was easier to fool them with empty promises

Cool. I already know he lost the popular vote. We are not a popular vote democracy. The electoral college is not supposed to represent popular vote, it wasn't an accident, that's on purpose.

[Wyrt]

What it looked like in 2008/2012.

Really sad the people that demanded acceptance can't do it themselves.

lol

Conservatives are still bitching about Obama.

[Dextroden]

Right now it's about 32% of Americans. You know... not about half.

I can deal with alienating 32% of Americans.

On my side we got time, demographics, distribution, technology, money, the truth, a cause, and of course, Donald Trump's fat mouth.

On your side... you have what exactly? That fucking frog that a bunch of alt-right shitstains think is hilarious? Sean Picer and Kellyanne Conway? Aging and declinging demographics?

I like our odds.

The America that the deplorables voted for is dead, and it's not coming back. That's a good thing. The world is changed for the better and THEY didn't change with it. That is THEIR failure.

That frog is serious shit since it apparently needed to be called out by Hillary and was deemed a white supremacist symbol.

That shit will be on my list for Democrats for life.

1. Voted yes on DOMA
2. Ran Hillary Clinton as a good politician
3. Fell for and lost to pepe.

[Thepersona]

Cool. I already know he lost the popular vote. We are not a popular vote democracy. The electoral college is not supposed to represent popular vote, it wasn't an accident, that's on purpose.

The purpose of the EC is to prevent a demagogue to rise to power. It failed. And a winner takes all system is stupid, because it makes a republican vote in cali or ny worthless, the same of a dem vote on texas or utah