MAGAThread XIV: All persons born or naturalized ...

[Internationalist Bastard]

Oh Buddha thank you
Yes it would also improve business as it’d be cleaner

In an actual brothel, yes. Street prostitution would be eliminated overnight.

Preferably yes
It’s terribly dangerous to be a street prostitute, although I doubt it’d eliminate all business outside of brothels

[Givienci]

Well, Alaska actually has 3 EC votes which is the minimum. On a population adjusted basis, Alaska gets more representation than California because alaska effectively gets 1 EC vote per ~246k people vs 1 EC vote per ~719k people in California. In a sense, it helps act as an equalizer.

Mixed it up with Arizona. That i'll concede.
Your correction only shows to prove that your equalizer does jack shit. 5% would still be overwhelmed by the 95%.

I'm not saying that a candidate only needs to focus on Alaskan issues or that they'd win a national election doing that. I'm saying that the EC is about appealing to a plurality of views, which will differ nationally but regionally tend to homogenize. If you as a presidential candidate take a pro-gun stance, you'll lose people with an exclusively urbanite view on the issue in large metro areas and their associated states (e.g. New York, Illinois, California), but gain people in states with wildlife problems (Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, etc.) or a notable hunting culture (Northwest and the South). Most issues transcend state lines and a lot of states will have populations with overlapping interests, needs, and attitudes. Because of that, the equalizer actually does work. For instance, taking a more protectionist/nationalist stance on trade will appeal to people living in the rust belt states especially--that adds up to a lot of potential EC votes, so appealing to the region is worthwhile.

In a simple majority system, there's virtually no reason to spend any time canvasing outside NYC, Miami, Chicago, Seattle, LA, SF, and other places like that--that's where you get the bang for your buck. But, believe it or not, there's a life and even people outside the odorous metro areas and their viewpoints and concerns are no less valid than the urbanite's.

Anyway, I'm going to go. I've been at this long enough already. All of this was already duly considered hundreds of years ago, so if you want to study why we have the EC system, I'll point you towards the Federalist Papers and Jon Stuart Mill's On Liberty,

[Uiiop]

Mixed it up with Arizona. That i'll concede.
Your correction only shows to prove that your equalizer does jack shit. 5% would still be overwhelmed by the 95%.

I'm not saying that a candidate only needs to focus on Alaskan issues or that they'd win a national election doing that. I'm saying that the EC is about appealing to a plurality of views, which will differ nationally but regionally tend to homogenize. If you as a presidential candidate take a pro-gun stance, you'll lose people with an exclusively urbanite view on the issue in large metro areas and their associated states (e.g. New York, Illinois, California), but gain people in states with wildlife problems (Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, etc.) or a notable hunting culture (Northwest and the South). Most issues transcend state lines and a lot of states will have populations with overlapping interests, needs, and attitudes. Because of that, the equalizer actually does work. For instance, taking a more protectionist/nationalist stance on trade will appeal to people living in the rust belt states especially--that adds up to a lot of potential EC votes, so appealing to the region is worthwhile.

In a simple majority system, there's virtually no reason to spend any time canvasing outside NYC, Miami, Chicago, Seattle, LA, SF, and other places like that--that's where you get the bang for your buck. But, believe it or not, there's a life and even people outside the odorous metro areas and their viewpoints and concerns are no less valid than the urbanite's.

Anyway, I'm going to go. I've been at this long enough already. All of this was already duly considered hundreds of years ago, so if you want to study why we have the EC system, I'll point you towards the Federalist Papers and Jon Stuart Mill's On Liberty,

That would been a fair point if you unpacked your whole no true urban argument. The fact your using the rust belt as an example of the non-urban makes your definitions shaky.
The word Urban is flawed yes but ones you listed aren't the majority of "urban" areas. The exact flaws of the words would make that strategy very flawed. There is a big distinction to made between the majority of non-urban areas and the vacation spots.

You never quite answered how state majority mechanisms is not oppression. "But everyone in a region agrees already." is not enough to justify majority vote and one may only look at the 2016 results to shut down that generalization. All the electoral college seems to do on this is decentralize this oppression in my eyes.

Also it seems you implicitly misrepresent the positions of Mill and Hamilton. They didn't intend and/or want the EC to be the rubber stamps you and practically speaking the nation de facto treat it as.
If it worked like how Hamilton wanted it we would gotten at least Mcmullen or Johnson.

[Uiiop]

Just for the record....i did screw my math there on some of it but the issues of within state majority oppression, the most populous state still having too much power , and what non-urban means reamin intact IMHO.

Just keeping it real y'all

[Telconi]

I don't see the difference.

What's rent on a one bed room flat your way?

eh, about 500 a month if you can tolerate meth addicts and about twenty thousand six-legged roommates.

[Internationalist Bastard]

What's rent on a one bed room flat your way?

eh, about 500 a month if you can tolerate meth addicts and about twenty thousand six-legged roommates.

500 a month? Where was this?

[Vassenor]

Mixed it up with Arizona. That i'll concede.
Your correction only shows to prove that your equalizer does jack shit. 5% would still be overwhelmed by the 95%.

I'm not saying that a candidate only needs to focus on Alaskan issues or that they'd win a national election doing that. I'm saying that the EC is about appealing to a plurality of views, which will differ nationally but regionally tend to homogenize. If you as a presidential candidate take a pro-gun stance, you'll lose people with an exclusively urbanite view on the issue in large metro areas and their associated states (e.g. New York, Illinois, California), but gain people in states with wildlife problems (Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, etc.) or a notable hunting culture (Northwest and the South). Most issues transcend state lines and a lot of states will have populations with overlapping interests, needs, and attitudes. Because of that, the equalizer actually does work. For instance, taking a more protectionist/nationalist stance on trade will appeal to people living in the rust belt states especially--that adds up to a lot of potential EC votes, so appealing to the region is worthwhile.

In a simple majority system, there's virtually no reason to spend any time canvasing outside NYC, Miami, Chicago, Seattle, LA, SF, and other places like that--that's where you get the bang for your buck. But, believe it or not, there's a life and even people outside the odorous metro areas and their viewpoints and concerns are no less valid than the urbanite's.

Anyway, I'm going to go. I've been at this long enough already. All of this was already duly considered hundreds of years ago, so if you want to study why we have the EC system, I'll point you towards the Federalist Papers and Jon Stuart Mill's On Liberty,

You do realise that even if you win 100% of the vote in all 100 of the largest cities in the U.S. that's not even 20% of the voting public, right?

[Uiiop]

I'm not saying that a candidate only needs to focus on Alaskan issues or that they'd win a national election doing that. I'm saying that the EC is about appealing to a plurality of views, which will differ nationally but regionally tend to homogenize. If you as a presidential candidate take a pro-gun stance, you'll lose people with an exclusively urbanite view on the issue in large metro areas and their associated states (e.g. New York, Illinois, California), but gain people in states with wildlife problems (Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, etc.) or a notable hunting culture (Northwest and the South). Most issues transcend state lines and a lot of states will have populations with overlapping interests, needs, and attitudes. Because of that, the equalizer actually does work. For instance, taking a more protectionist/nationalist stance on trade will appeal to people living in the rust belt states especially--that adds up to a lot of potential EC votes, so appealing to the region is worthwhile.

In a simple majority system, there's virtually no reason to spend any time canvasing outside NYC, Miami, Chicago, Seattle, LA, SF, and other places like that--that's where you get the bang for your buck. But, believe it or not, there's a life and even people outside the odorous metro areas and their viewpoints and concerns are no less valid than the urbanite's.

Anyway, I'm going to go. I've been at this long enough already. All of this was already duly considered hundreds of years ago, so if you want to study why we have the EC system, I'll point you towards the Federalist Papers and Jon Stuart Mill's On Liberty,

You do realise that even if you win 100% of the vote in all 100 of the largest cities in the U.S. that's not even 20% of the voting public, right?

Every city is basically the same so that doesn't matter. /s

[Big Jim P]

What's rent on a one bed room flat your way?

eh, about 500 a month if you can tolerate meth addicts and about twenty thousand six-legged roommates.

Gods I am glad to live in a small Texas town. Here a two bedroom apartments in a good neighborhood are less that that.

[Telconi]

eh, about 500 a month if you can tolerate meth addicts and about twenty thousand six-legged roommates.

500 a month? Where was this?

Central California

[Internationalist Bastard]

500 a month? Where was this?

Central California

My first apartment was a shithole and that was 750

[Nekokuni]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 1895108609

I feel sorry for the Prime Minister every time he has to visit Trump. Wonder what random historical event involving Japan that the president will remember this time.

[Petrasylvania]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1043995561895108609

I feel sorry for the Prime Minister every time he has to visit Trump. Wonder what random historical event involving Japan that the president will remember this time.

"Didn't we drop nukes on you guys here?"
"What do you do every time Godzilla shows up?"
"Why do you need our military when you have Power Rangers?"

[Zurkerx]

So, apparently Rosenstein will either resign or be fired today.

Well, let's see if the Mueller Probe survives, or will Trump be full steam ahead.

Edit: White House has accepted his resignation.

[Petrasylvania]

So, apparently Rosenstein will either resign or be fired today.

Well, let's see if the Mueller Probe survives, or will Trump be full steam ahead.

Edit: White House has accepted his resignation.

Donnie will fire Mueller, then get a bootlicker to start investigation Hillary Clinton. Possibly with Saturday Night Massacre 2.0.

[Senkaku]

So, apparently Rosenstein will either resign or be fired today.

Well, let's see if the Mueller Probe survives, or will Trump be full steam ahead.

Edit: White House has accepted his resignation.

Can we just skip to the tanks in the streets part I'm getting bored with all this dicking around

[Valrifell]

So, apparently Rosenstein will either resign or be fired today.

Well, let's see if the Mueller Probe survives, or will Trump be full steam ahead.

Edit: White House has accepted his resignation.

Can we just skip to the tanks in the streets part I'm getting bored with all this dicking around

I hate when I can't fast forward the boring parts of a movie.

[Cannot think of a name]

In another episode of don’t read the comments, the nyt comments section blames the nyt for this by reporting on Rosenstien.

[Senkaku]

Can we just skip to the tanks in the streets part I'm getting bored with all this dicking around

I hate when I can't fast forward the boring parts of a movie.

for REAL tho like goddamn let's get to the explosions and shit

[Vassenor]

If you’re just joining us, Rod Rosenstein has resigned but also hasn’t resigned yet and is going to the White House in order to resign and also to be fired and also he’s already BEEN fired and is already gone and also isn’t resigning or getting fired.

[Cannot think of a name]

If you’re just joining us, Rod Rosenstein has resigned but also hasn’t resigned yet and is going to the White House in order to resign and also to be fired and also he’s already BEEN fired and is already gone and also isn’t resigning or getting fired.

I feel like the headline should just be “There’s a doin’s a goin on”

[The Black Forrest]

What's rent on a one bed room flat your way?

eh, about 500 a month if you can tolerate meth addicts and about twenty thousand six-legged roommates.

Here it's about 2000 on average. Recently read a room in a house was going for 1800.

[Ifreann]

I feel like the headline should just be “There’s a doin’s a goin on”

[watch this space for doins as they go on]

[Zurkerx]

If you’re just joining us, Rod Rosenstein has resigned but also hasn’t resigned yet and is going to the White House in order to resign and also to be fired and also he’s already BEEN fired and is already gone and also isn’t resigning or getting fired.

I literally had to read this a few times before I understood what was being fully said here. Now it appears Rosenstein will meet Trump on Thursday. I wonder how that will go.

[Cannot think of a name]

If you’re just joining us, Rod Rosenstein has resigned but also hasn’t resigned yet and is going to the White House in order to resign and also to be fired and also he’s already BEEN fired and is already gone and also isn’t resigning or getting fired.

I literally had to read this a few times before I understood what was being fully said here. Now it appears Rosenstein will meet Trump on Thursday. I wonder how that will go.

Enough time for every republican running for office or trying to confirm a Supreme Court Justice to call and scream “are you out of your goddamn mind?”