U.S. Presidential race - Republican Discussion

[Laize]

Fair enough, as an opinion.

It just seems illegal to me, with so few states signed on. I'd accept it unequivocally if all 50 were on board.

It's not illegal.

It's a rather interesting example of states putting the members of other states ahead of their own interests.

[Kalyyn]

Your state as well.

Question: How would you feel if your state voted red, but the popular vote was blue, so your vote went blue. (using generic terms, not specific to THIS election, on purpose; I also realize it's highly unlikely your state votes red to begin with).

Since the popular vote winner should win regardless, I'd be okay with it.

[Laize]

I'm not sure why you think I don't understand what you're saying.

If I act like a condescending ass too will you stop?

It doesn't even matter because asking half the states to give up their levels of representation via amendment is like asking women to give up their right to vote by holding a referendum.

It's just not going to happen.

[belfpala]

It's not illegal.

It's a rather interesting example of states putting the members of other states ahead of their own interests.

Ok, illegal was the wrong word.

How about: Jersey just cancels voting, and waits to see what the rest of the country does. Then assigns its electoral votes. That won't happen, obviously, but it was along the lines of what I meant by so few states signed on.

[Laize]

Ok, illegal was the wrong word.

How about: Jersey just cancels voting, and waits to see what the rest of the country does. Then assigns its electoral votes. That won't happen, obviously, but it was along the lines of what I meant by so few states signed on.

The compact states that it only goes into effect once the compact has a majority of the electoral votes.

Once they do, they wait for the popular vote results and throw their votes toward that candidate.

It's basically states agreeing to vote in Presidential elections the way the majority of the people want to vote. In a sense it turns Presidential elections from a republic into a direct democracy.

[oblivionx]

No, because that gives way too much power to low population states like Wyoming, Montana, Alaska, and the Dakotas. The Electoral College, even as screwed up as it is, would be more favorable than this. To make the Electoral College favorable would be to not do winner takes all, but you get a number of votes based on how many votes you got in the state, this would make the Electoral College work better, but would still leave some problems here and there.

The only true fair method would be to just count total votes across the country, then everyone's vote counts that same.

---------- Post added 2012-09-01 at 10:23 PM ----------



More like Mountain, which would probably be Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and Idaho (although Idaho may be consider Pacific Northwest).

It's about as far a leap as trying to make the election a popular vote. It's also something way in favor of my side, just like this nonsense is to yours.

A fairer way of doing it would be to require states to award their electorate proportionately to the popular vote in the state instead of the all or none methods.

---------- Post added 2012-09-01 at 11:10 PM ----------

It doesn't even matter because asking half the states to give up their levels of representation via amendment is like asking women to give up their right to vote by holding a referendum.

It's just not going to happen.

Not only is it not going to happen, the dems don't even have the 2/3 majority to even allow a vote to take place. If they somehow get to 2/3 they still need 3/4 to vote for it and ratify.

[Dendrek]

Let's just make the vote for president how many states you carry.

Fair enough?

I assume that was a joke. That's kind of the exact opposite of what everyone here except Laize is arguing for. Laize might be for that though? Idk.

[oblivionx]

I assume that was a joke. That's kind of the exact opposite of what everyone here except Laize is arguing for. Laize might be for that though? Idk.

Exactly. It's about as unfair as what the bulk of people are arguing for.

It's so crazy I wouldn't even ask for it, but for some reason it's diametric point is argued for like it's a right.

[Dendrek]

And people in state legislatures have come up with a solution to the problem of the electoral college.

It's called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Basically, states agree to put their electoral votes towards the national popular vote winner. It only goes into effect once there are 270+ electoral votes in the Compact... so if you're interested, write your state legislatures!

California is even a member. It would be interesting to see them vote red for once.

Not this year, because fuck Romney. But maybe in a future year where Chris Christie decides to run.

Based on his inflated and expectedly dishonest speech at the RNC, I feel no compulsion to think he's better than any other candidate.

[cubby]

I'm just leave this here to prove how Mitt Romeny is in touch with the average voter. And to disspell all these rumors that he's not.

Mitt Romney To Flood Victim: 'Go Home And Call 211'


Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney launched the final leg of his quest for the White House by visiting storm-battered Louisiana on Friday. He drove through a town that was flooded by Hurricane Isaac in part because it's still outside the vast flooding protection system built with federal funds after Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans.

Romney and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) spent close to an hour meeting with first responders and local officials. Romney shook hands with National Guardsmen outside the U.S. Post Office and talked with a local resident, Jodie Chiarello, 42, who lost her home in Isaac's flooding.

"He just told me to, um, there's assistance out there," Chiarello said of her conversation with Romney. "He said, go home and call 211." That's a public service number offered in many states.

Chiarello said she will likely seek some other shelter because her home was submerged in the flooding. She expressed frustration about the town's lack of flood protection.

"We live outside the levee protection that's why we get all this water because they close the floodgates up front and all they're doing is flooding us out down here," she said. "It's very frustrating, very. We go through Katrina and Rita and now we're going through Cindy, Lee and now Isaac."

Romney's last-minute visit, announced less than 12 hours after he became the Republican nominee, took him to the disaster area ahead of his Democratic rival, President Barack Obama. The president was following with his own visit to Louisiana on Monday, the White House announced.

Romney went at Jindal's invitation, his campaign said. Jindal, a Republican, told reporters Romney had been in touch several days ago to ask how he could help with storm relief and Jindal suggested Romney come down and see the damage for himself. He said he had extended an invitation to Obama as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...ef=mostpopular

I'm stunned that you think this is what you think it is. I mean, what a load of horseshit. What the fuck could a private citizen do? The idiot Republican who called Mittens, should have, I don't know, maybe called someone who had some authority to bring in more relief.

What a fucking political stunt. Just like Mittens, all bluff and no substance.

[Tahapenes]

It's about as far a leap as trying to make the election a popular vote. It's also something way in favor of my side, just like this nonsense is to yours.

A fairer way of doing it would be to require states to award their electorate proportionately to the popular vote in the state instead of the all or none methods.

Reading comprehension maybe?

No, because that gives way too much power to low population states like Wyoming, Montana, Alaska, and the Dakotas. The Electoral College, even as screwed up as it is, would be more favorable than this. To make the Electoral College favorable would be to not do winner takes all, but you get a number of votes based on how many votes you got in the state, this would make the Electoral College work better, but would still leave some problems here and there.

The only true fair method would be to just count total votes across the country, then everyone's vote counts that same.

I guess you missed the part I listed there in bold.

[oblivionx]

Reading comprehension maybe?



I guess you missed the part I listed there in bold.

Can't read everything ;p

[Laize]

Based on his inflated and expectedly dishonest speech at the RNC, I feel no compulsion to think he's better than any other candidate.

Try being in New Jersey and saying that.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...-peaks-in-n-j/

The majority of New Jersey voters don't really care what he SAYS because his actions have done nothing but good here.

[Dendrek]

Try being in New Jersey and saying that.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...-peaks-in-n-j/

The majority of New Jersey voters don't really care what he SAYS because his actions have done nothing but good here.

I'm not seeing this as a compelling reason to think he's good. His score on a popularity poll tells me nothing of his policies or how he'll act as president [edited]. If he's a Romney, a Ryan or a Bush, I'm not interested.

[Laize]

I'm not seeing this as a compelling reason to think he's good. His score on a popularity poll tells me nothing of his policies or how he'll act as president [edited]. If he's a Romney, a Ryan or a Bush, I'm not interested.

Well look at his policies then. It's not like they're a government secret.

He basically runs a campaign of fiscal responsibility where he works with (or, more accurately, attempts to work with) public employee unions to reduce government spending while trying to make the state a better environment for all taxpayers.

[belfpala]

He basically runs a campaign of fiscal responsibility where he works with (or, more accurately, attempts to work with) public employee unions to reduce government spending while trying to make the state a better environment for all taxpayers.

Do they still forbid me from pumping my own gas?

[Laize]

Do they still forbid me from pumping my own gas?

Yeah... I dont get it either... but our gas is cheaper than the surrounding area so whatever.

[Holtzmann]

Well look at his policies then. It's not like they're a government secret.

He basically runs a campaign of fiscal responsibility where he works with (or, more accurately, attempts to work with) public employee unions to reduce government spending while trying to make the state a better environment for all taxpayers.

There's a bit of dissonance going on here. Why does someone with such a good record doing stuff do a speech like that one?

I mean, I'm obviously an outsider but I like following American politics (it's fun!). I was following the whole campaign trail back in 2008, and back then I had the distinct feeling John McCain took a hard swing right when he was put in the spotlight after starting as the scrappy candidate. It seems to be happening all over the place over there: someone is doing alright, applying fairly reasonable policies, making well-grounded and mild speeches... then the presidential campaign starts and the tack changes completely. Happened to McCain, happened to Romney... this is weird as all hell from where I'm standing. Are politics really that important to people that they sacrifice so much of their original principles for the sake of their parties?

[Wells]

Its an environmental thing. People spill a surprising amount of gas when they operate a pump. I have no idea what the studies on the issue are.

[belfpala]

Yeah... I dont get it either... but our gas is cheaper than the surrounding area so whatever.

Right. When I lived in NYC, I'd fairly often drive to Paramus if I had to do a significant amount of shopping (yo, Ikea!) then fill up on the way back. Worth it if I saved more than the Washington bridge toll + my time.