Riots breaking out all over US due to Trump winning

[Wells]

82% of the time you are outside in the rain, you need your windshield wipers. It's a meaningless triviality. If 300,000,000 lived in California, and only 30,000,000 lived in whole rest of the country, should California's vote decide for California? Or should it decide for everyone else too? If you think the latter, then you really, from the ground up, don't understand the point of anything that was being sought in having founded the country in the first place from a political/juridical standpoint.



You aren't really disproving my point. You not getting it is the fault of many people prior to you coming to this thread about it. You don't get federalism, you don't get the premise that the "United States" is so named because it is, was, and ever shall only be a union of sovereign states. Should the house on the street where 12 people live always win every issue before votes of your HOA, because only 10 people live in the other houses combined? Or is your house just as important as any other, with its own priorities, it's own problems?

You keep trying to argue with me about the way the system does work when I'm arguing how is should work.

The Senate exists to treat every state equally. A overly high abandonment of federalism only serves to reduce the degree to which 80% of the country enjoys the right of self governance.

[Stormdash]

Yes, that's what the senate and house are for.

And the electoral college. Has it occurred to you that the electoral college IS the Congress? That it's a single-purpose proxy Congress? The only reason the Congress doesn't choose the President itself is for checks and balances, but the framers realized that the make-up of the Congress, all the rationale for why they designed it the way they did, that that is the perfect body to elect the head of the federal government -- so they designed a system whereby every election cycle, this ad hoc extra Congress was convened to do just that?

I'd submit if you think the electoral college is that stupid, you can't also think there's any reason to have struck the compromise that led to a bicameral legislature, and have retroactively adopted Virginia's argument for how to build the Congress.

[Wells]

Maybe if they all had jobs to go to the next day, they wouldn't have time for this nonsense.

God this meme is tedious.

- - - Updated - - -

And the electoral college.

You keep trying to argue with me about the way the system does work when I'm arguing how is should work.

Don't make me repeat myself.

[Stormdash]

You keep trying to argue with me about the way the system does work when I'm arguing how is should work.

And I"m saying that if anybody had ever bothered to drill down and explain why it works the way it does, you'd understand that it's the way it should. Kids should have this down cold by the time they get to high school.

[ovm33]

God this meme is tedious.

- - - Updated - - -





Don't make me repeat myself.

But oh so true.

[alexkeren]

Yes, that's what the senate and house are for.

The smaller states should have a say in the popular vote in proportion to their population. Right now if you live in Wyoming your vote is more powerful than if you live in CA, and that's bullshit.

- - - Updated - - -



I did say they were ok. I said they were preferably to a false peace.

Also, paraphrasing MLK.

Such a hypocrite, since the EC is formed by combining the number of senate and HoR votes.

[The Stormbringer]

Eh, it could be worse. They could be as bad as Brazilians after a huge soccer/futbal game.

I kid... mostly. Those Brazilians take their sports hella seriously.

[Tierbook]

You keep trying to argue with me about the way the system does work when I'm arguing how is should work.

The Senate exists to treat every state equally. A overly high abandonment of federalism only serves to reduce the degree to which 80% of the country enjoys the right of self governance.

By this logic shouldn't we just allow The House of Representatives to vote in the president since that'd offer a fair representation of the population?

[Wells]

But oh so true.

You have shit all way of knowing that beyond your own preconceived biases. You're no better here than the liberal that assumes every Trump voter was a racist.

And I"m saying that if anybody had ever bothered to drill down and explain why it works the way it does, you'd understand that it's the way it should. Kids should have this down cold by the time they get to high school.

You assume ignorance because it lets you retain an appeal to tradition.

- - - Updated - - -

By this logic shouldn't we just allow The House of Representatives to vote in the president since that'd offer a fair representation of the population?

Were we to remove gerrymandering and ensure accurate representation I wouldn't lose sleep over such a system.

[Macaquerie]

By this logic shouldn't we just allow The House of Representatives to vote in the president since that'd offer a fair representation of the population?

It's sometimes argued that the founders intended for the Electoral College to end up in stalemate most of the time, so that it would be left up to the House to decide the outcome of most elections.

[alexkeren]

You keep trying to argue with me about the way the system does work when I'm arguing how is should work.

The Senate exists to treat every state equally. A overly high abandonment of federalism only serves to reduce the degree to which 80% of the country enjoys the right of self governance.

Yet the big population centers only make up about 50% of the US pop.

[Powermonger]

Yes, that's what the senate and house are for.

The smaller states should have a say in the popular vote in proportion to their population. Right now if you live in Wyoming your vote is more powerful than if you live in CA, and that's bullshit.

- - - Updated - - -



I did say they were ok. I said they were preferably to a false peace.

Also, paraphrasing MLK.

You don't seem to understand something... UNITED STATES. Each state has a say in everything. Have you ever personally voted for a federal law? Nope, did not think so. So why should you personally vote for the federal head office? Each state tally's up it's votes and passes those on to it's people that can do that.

[Wells]

Yet the big population centers only make up about 50% of the US pop.

Roughly 80% of the US population is urban the last time I checked. Not much point to quibbling about numbers.

You don't seem to understand something... UNITED STATES.

This is a literal fight that was concluded over 150 years ago.

Have you ever personally voted for a federal law? Nope, did not think so. So why should you personally vote for the federal head office?

This is specious af.

[darkwarrior42]

You aren't really disproving my point. You not getting it is the fault of many people prior to you coming to this thread about it. You don't get federalism, you don't get the premise that the "United States" is so named because it is, was, and ever shall only be a union of sovereign states. Should the house on the street where 12 people live always win every issue before votes of your HOA, because only 10 people live in the other houses combined? Or is your house just as important as any other, with its own priorities, it's own problems?

Your question can just as easily be turned around: if there's 11 houses on the street, and the vote comes up 5-6, how is that any more fair if the 5 houses have twice the people living in them?

You view it as more fair because you are, obviously, a strong proponent of state's rights. That is how the US was founded after all, and it's not like we've had any major incidents since our founding that might have changed that.... like, say, a civil war fought largely over the issue of the right of states to govern themselves free of outside influence?

The fact is, the more time passes, the more different areas will bleed into each other. Interstate commerce isn't an optional thing, it's a reality of life for virtually everyone. People move all the time, companies and organizations easily cross state lines and have employees working all over the country.

This issue was compromised in the legislative branch specifically because no matter which way you choose, it's unfair to one side. Give every person a single vote, the smaller states lose out. Give every state equal votes, the people living in larger states lose out.

And to answer your question rhetorical question about HOAs (that you tried very hard to frame in as biased a fashion as possible): I don't think either solution is good, and would rather see a system that takes both house and occupancy into account (perhaps 1 vote per house, plus 0.5 votes per adult occupant beyond the first? Would need a lot more time to figure out a good system). Then again, I'm looking at the validity of the system, not just whichever model gets me the most influence.

[Tierbook]

Roughly 80% of the US population is urban the last time I checked. Not much point to quibbling about numbers.


This is a literal fight that was concluded over 150 years ago.


This is specious af.

Urban areas are basically just areas with populations of 50k or more. Democrats tend to do better in the million + category which make up a smaller portion of the population.

[darkwarrior42]

And the electoral college. Has it occurred to you that the electoral college IS the Congress? That it's a single-purpose proxy Congress? The only reason the Congress doesn't choose the President itself is for checks and balances, but the framers realized that the make-up of the Congress, all the rationale for why they designed it the way they did, that that is the perfect body to elect the head of the federal government -- so they designed a system whereby every election cycle, this ad hoc extra Congress was convened to do just that?

I'd submit if you think the electoral college is that stupid, you can't also think there's any reason to have struck the compromise that led to a bicameral legislature, and have retroactively adopted Virginia's argument for how to build the Congress.

Not quite. That's not how math works.

The states have an equal voice in the Senate because every state has the same number of votes. Simply adding up the total number of senators + representatives does not maintain that equal voice.

[Wells]

Urban areas are basically just areas with populations of 50k or more. Democrats tend to do better in the million + category which make up a smaller portion of the population.

Sure, but we're just quibbling over definitions. Your vote shouldn't count for less just because you live somewhere where lots of other people do too.

And really, a straight popular vote would have a seriously good improvement on how campaigns run. Imagine, no more "swing" states. Every voter equally worth appealing too. Having your vote count even when you're in a minority.

[alexkeren]

80% of the country lives in urban areas.

So yeah, I want that 80% of the population being the primary factor in selecting the president.

Rural people have this bizarre idea that they should be special just because they're rare.

Except by using the US Census Bureau definition you're forgetting that a lot of that 80% really is rural and republican. You need to look at the map they use for that and apply the red/blue to it to realize that number is' just the coast or just large cities.

[Stormdash]

Not quite. That's not how math works.

The states have an equal voice in the Senate because every state has the same number of votes. Simply adding up the total number of senators + representatives does not maintain that equal voice.

They made the EC to act in the place of a joint session of Congress. What's the disconnect? If Congress itself were to do it, the President would be subordinated to it, but the formula of the Congress' make-up is still bang-on for choosing the national executive, so they invented a spare, basically. And all they did was say it was up to the states to determine how their electors were chosen. Minnesota could have Elector Paintball Hunger Games and decide its electors that way if it chose, and their citizens get no direct say at all, and that would be 100% constitutional.

[Wells]

Except by using the US Census Bureau definition you're forgetting that a lot of that 80% really is rural and republican. You need to look at the map they use for that and apply the red/blue to it to realize that number is' just the coast or just large cities.

Again, you're quibbling a number without addressing my point.