Republicans plot to Outright Steal Kentucky Gov. Election

[San Lumen]

De Gaulle was objectively a good boy though.

De Gaulle was the best.

not the topic

[Totally Not OEP]

OEP outright called for the legislature to overturn the election. If Bevin wants a recount fine but he has to pay for it. Its very doubtful a 5000 vote lead will be overturned via recount. The issue here isn the legislature is openly talking about overturning the election result.

OEP is a literal right-wing authoritarian, so... He objects to allowing liberals to govern on principle.

I would think people by this point would understand this.

[United Muscovite Nations]

with less than 1% and without a total majority, your argument is invalid. You act like Republicans can't issue a recount, but oh God the Dems DESERVE a recount in Georgia. Who the fuck are you to say what is and is not democratic, you fucking hypocrite?!

There was evidence of possible fraud. Here there is not. And you didnt answer my question. You made arguments against democracy saying it was unfair urban areas get their fair share of representation and we should give more to farms because dirt. You also said it wasn't fair a vote in a city counts the same as of someone in a farmhouse.

It is actually unfair, because it means that those in rural areas don't have representation and can be ignored, which was exactly the issue that was meant to be stopped by the electoral college and constitution. It's not fair either way, and what should be done is to just dismantle unified government because such large conglomerates are going to be unfair to some minority no matter what.

[New Sukberia]

De Gaulle was the best.

not the topic

Sorry, got carried away.

[Fahran]

Because you've yet to explain why dirt should matter more than actual votes other than claim it's unfair.

Because simple rule by the majority is often tyrannical and myopic, and, beyond that, does not give ample consideration to voters in regions of the country that have widely divergent interests compared to those voters residing in cities. Short of adopting corporatism, this constitutes a fail-safe against rural policies that favor urban areas and getting railroaded on every issue. Suburban voters still get their majority, but it's tempered a bit.

That said, this subject has next to nothing to do with the gubernatorial elections in Kentucky.

[Totally Not OEP]

Yes, your point?

Why is it ok for Republicans to do it?

Ideally I'd like an actual Far Right party than them, but at least in some ways they're better than the Democrats.

[Bear Stearns]

Because you've yet to explain why dirt should matter more than actual votes other than claim it's unfair.

Because simple rule by the majority is often tyrannical and myopic, and, beyond that, does not give ample consideration to voters in regions of the country that have widely divergent interests compared to those voters residing in cities. Short of adopting corporatism, this constitutes a fail-safe against rural policies that favor urban areas and getting railroaded on every issue. Suburban voters still get their majority, but it's tempered a bit.

That said, this subject has next to nothing to do with the gubernatorial elections in Kentucky.

Just wait until the US gets post-colonial style "majority rule" after 2044.

[Munkcestrian Republic]

I don't think its hysteria. The Senate President strongly hinted at flouting the results. If they want their state to be torn apart by unrest and mass protests this is a great way to do it.

This nearly happened in 1899 with William Goebel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1899_Kent ... l_election

Goebel was shot the day before his inauguration and is to date the only Governor in US history to have been assassinated.

Well we wouldn't have wanted a 19th century Democrat winning, now would we?

someone didn't even bother to do the most basic reading about the election, I see.

[New Sukberia]

The New York Times just said that the AP declared that the "race is too close to call"

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... ction.html

I couldn't find it however, so i've found this:

https://apnews.com/b29352c2c9594e68a4a944e8c2bd4abb

[San Lumen]

There was evidence of possible fraud. Here there is not. And you didnt answer my question. You made arguments against democracy saying it was unfair urban areas get their fair share of representation and we should give more to farms because dirt. You also said it wasn't fair a vote in a city counts the same as of someone in a farmhouse.

It is actually unfair, because it means that those in rural areas don't have representation and can be ignored, which was exactly the issue that was meant to be stopped by the electoral college and constitution. It's not fair either way, and what should be done is to just dismantle unified government because such large conglomerates are going to be unfair to some minority no matter what.

yeah lets give Louisville only a seat or two and have their votes count less for statewide office because there are more farms and cattle in most of Kentucky

Because you've yet to explain why dirt should matter more than actual votes other than claim it's unfair.

Because simple rule by the majority is often tyrannical and myopic, and, beyond that, does not give ample consideration to voters in regions of the country that have widely divergent interests compared to those voters residing in cities. Short of adopting corporatism, this constitutes a fail-safe against rural policies that favor urban areas and getting railroaded on every issue. Suburban voters still get their majority, but it's tempered a bit.

That said, this subject has next to nothing to do with the gubernatorial elections in Kentucky.

Whats your solution urban areas get shafted out of their fair share of representation and their votes count less for statewide office?

[Repubblica Fascista Sociale Italiana]

There was evidence of possible fraud. Here there is not. And you didnt answer my question. You made arguments against democracy saying it was unfair urban areas get their fair share of representation and we should give more to farms because dirt. You also said it wasn't fair a vote in a city counts the same as of someone in a farmhouse.

It is actually unfair, because it means that those in rural areas don't have representation and can be ignored, which was exactly the issue that was meant to be stopped by the electoral college and constitution. It's not fair either way, and what should be done is to just dismantle unified government because such large conglomerates are going to be unfair to some minority no matter what.

Getting a democratic government to be fair on the scale of the US is like mapping a globe onto a flat surface

You always get some things wrong

[Nakena]

It is actually unfair, because it means that those in rural areas don't have representation and can be ignored, which was exactly the issue that was meant to be stopped by the electoral college and constitution. It's not fair either way, and what should be done is to just dismantle unified government because such large conglomerates are going to be unfair to some minority no matter what.

Getting a democratic government to be fair on the scale of the US is like mapping a globe onto a flat surface

You always get some things wrong

What would you suggest as alternative?

[United Muscovite Nations]

It is actually unfair, because it means that those in rural areas don't have representation and can be ignored, which was exactly the issue that was meant to be stopped by the electoral college and constitution. It's not fair either way, and what should be done is to just dismantle unified government because such large conglomerates are going to be unfair to some minority no matter what.

yeah lets give Louisville only a seat or two and have their votes count less for statewide office because there are more farms and cattle in most of Kentucky

No, get rid of the state government and get rid of the federal government.

[Samadhi]

Meh democracy is violence anyway.

[Aureumterra]

That’s what we do down here in Georgia. If no candidate wins an outright majority then another election takes place so that a candidate has an outright majority.

Exactly that's why our last election had little miss AOC rip-off making up voter suppression and crapp to try and have a re election and hope she got more votes. God bless Governor Kemp!
Don't you love democracy?

Don’t compare Abrams to AOC, AOC is just a different level of insanity

[San Lumen]

yeah lets give Louisville only a seat or two and have their votes count less for statewide office because there are more farms and cattle in most of Kentucky

No, get rid of the state government and get rid of the federal government.

Anarchy worked out great for Somalia.

[Fahran]

Whats your solution urban areas get shafted out of their fair share of representation and their votes count less for statewide office?

Suburban voters will still amass majorities in most cases. This policy simply serves to temper their majority and bring in more locally representative elected officials. It's not as though California becomes unimportant simply because Wyoming has a disproportionate number of votes relative to its population.

[Repubblica Fascista Sociale Italiana]

Getting a democratic government to be fair on the scale of the US is like mapping a globe onto a flat surface

You always get some things wrong

What would you suggest as alternative?

Look at my flag

[Fahran]

No, get rid of the state government and get rid of the federal government.

Anarchy worked out great for Somalia.

Somalia wasn't an example of the anarchist model UMN supports. Arguably, it was more an example of multiple competing would-be states murdering one another's officials and citizens.

[San Lumen]

Whats your solution urban areas get shafted out of their fair share of representation and their votes count less for statewide office?

Suburban voters will still amass majorities in most cases. This policy simply serves to temper their majority and bring in more locally representative elected officials. It's not as though California becomes unimportant simply because Wyoming has a disproportionate number of votes relative to its population.

and what's the policy shafting urban areas out of representation they are entitled too and having their vote count less for statewide office?

[Fahran]

Getting a democratic government to be fair on the scale of the US is like mapping a globe onto a flat surface

You always get some things wrong

What would you suggest as alternative?

Judging by his name, Corporate Fascism.

[Totally Not OEP]

Because simple rule by the majority is often tyrannical and myopic, and, beyond that, does not give ample consideration to voters in regions of the country that have widely divergent interests compared to those voters residing in cities. Short of adopting corporatism, this constitutes a fail-safe against rural policies that favor urban areas and getting railroaded on every issue. Suburban voters still get their majority, but it's tempered a bit.

That said, this subject has next to nothing to do with the gubernatorial elections in Kentucky.

Just wait until the US gets post-colonial style "majority rule" after 2044.

I kinda feel like the U.S. has too much an ingrained culture to go down without a fight like the Rhodies or Boers.

[Aureumterra]

yeah lets give Louisville only a seat or two and have their votes count less for statewide office because there are more farms and cattle in most of Kentucky

No, get rid of the state government and get rid of the federal government.

Thee only thing worse than a dictatorship is an anarchy

[United Muscovite Nations]

No, get rid of the state government and get rid of the federal government.

Anarchy worked out great for Somalia.

That's not what anarchism is. What I propose is a federation composed of agricultural communes which voluntarily trade among themselves and which are highly individualistic and lack coercive government.

[New Sukberia]

AP also gives the 49.2% - 48.8% result, and a 5.100 vote difference.