Oof. Ya got me.
Guess I'm done being a Monarchist. *shrug*
Advertisement
by Salus Maior » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:49 pm
by Ors Might » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:50 pm
by Bread Herbert » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:50 pm
by Kowani » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:50 pm
by Saiwania » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:51 pm
by Ors Might » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:51 pm
by Bread Herbert » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:52 pm
Saiwania wrote:The poll is biased. There's a please explain for no but not so for yes. Hinting that people should vote yes. Fortunately this isn't decided by polls like this. The people that want the electoral college gone effectively want just the big urban areas like Los Angeles county to decide every election as opposed to the 50 states, and overlook that the majority of the time, the electoral college matches the popular vote anyways. So it isn't broken.
by Salus Maior » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:52 pm
by Kowani » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:53 pm
Saiwania wrote:The poll is biased. There's a please explain for no but not so for yes. Hinting that people should vote yes. Fortunately this isn't decided by polls like this. The people that want the electoral college gone effectively want just the big urban areas like Los Angeles county to decide every election as opposed to the 50 states, and overlook that the majority of the time, the electoral college matches the popular vote anyways. So it isn't broken.
by Ors Might » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:53 pm
Bread Herbert wrote:Saiwania wrote:The poll is biased. There's a please explain for no but not so for yes. Hinting that people should vote yes. Fortunately this isn't decided by polls like this. The people that want the electoral college gone effectively want just the big urban areas like Los Angeles county to decide every election as opposed to the 50 states, and overlook that the majority of the time, the electoral college matches the popular vote anyways. So it isn't broken.
They don't always match and most Americans live in urban areas.
by Bread Herbert » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:54 pm
by Kowani » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:55 pm
by Ors Might » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:55 pm
Kowani wrote:Saiwania wrote:The poll is biased. There's a please explain for no but not so for yes. Hinting that people should vote yes. Fortunately this isn't decided by polls like this. The people that want the electoral college gone effectively want just the big urban areas like Los Angeles county to decide every election as opposed to the 50 states, and overlook that the majority of the time, the electoral college matches the popular vote anyways. So it isn't broken.
This meme again?Ors Might wrote:That’s kind of what “lost the popular vote in every single presidential election” implies.
Perhaps they should get better policies.
by Ors Might » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:56 pm
by New haven america » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:58 pm
by Pacomia » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:00 pm
by Kowani » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:00 pm
by Ors Might » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:02 pm
Pacomia wrote:Ors Might wrote:I’m gonna regret the shit show this line of discussion will evolve into but fuck it.
So what if they do?
If more people want a candidate, that candidate is elected. It ain’t the city-dwellers’ fault that there aren’t many people in rural Oklahoma. Of course, some of this could conceivably be fixed by switching to ranked voting and moving away from a two-party system.
Anyway, if there’s more people in urban areas than in rural areas, they should get more representation. A person shouldn’t have more voting power than someone else just because they live in a podunk in Wyoming.
by Salus Maior » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:03 pm
by Ors Might » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:03 pm
Kowani wrote:Ors Might wrote:I don’t necessarily think that the Republicans have good policies but basing the quality of policies based on their popularity relies upon the majority having a good methodology for determining quality.
True. But. Every time we’ve had a minority president, they’ve been in between shit and mediocre. There have obviously been terrible majority presidents. But a 100% failure rate would suggest that something is fucking wrong.Ors Might wrote:Depends on the democracy. Some democracies see fit to give minority groups certain protections and powers in order to give them a louder voice.
When the minority can override the majority despite a major difference in numbers, you have a broken democracy.
by Kowani » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:04 pm
Salus Maior wrote:Kowani wrote:Yes. Because monarchism worked so much better.
Wait, no.
In some places it does and did.
Look, I'm not going to be swayed by your whinging about "muh monarchy is bad", and you're coming off as childish.
If you actually want to discuss something, discuss it. If not, at least don't half ass it with annoying posts.
by Arlenton » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:04 pm
Ors Might wrote:Pacomia wrote:If more people want a candidate, that candidate is elected. It ain’t the city-dwellers’ fault that there aren’t many people in rural Oklahoma. Of course, some of this could conceivably be fixed by switching to ranked voting and moving away from a two-party system.
Anyway, if there’s more people in urban areas than in rural areas, they should get more representation. A person shouldn’t have more voting power than someone else just because they live in a podunk in Wyoming.
Why not though? Its not like evening the playing field for numerically inferior groups is exactly a new concept. For fucks sake, it’s legally permissible to gerrymander on racial grounds to benefit black folk.
by Salus Maior » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:04 pm
by Pacomia » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:06 pm
Ors Might wrote:Pacomia wrote:If more people want a candidate, that candidate is elected. It ain’t the city-dwellers’ fault that there aren’t many people in rural Oklahoma. Of course, some of this could conceivably be fixed by switching to ranked voting and moving away from a two-party system.
Anyway, if there’s more people in urban areas than in rural areas, they should get more representation. A person shouldn’t have more voting power than someone else just because they live in a podunk in Wyoming.
Why not though? Its not like evening the playing field for numerically inferior groups is exactly a new concept. For fucks sake, it’s legally permissible to gerrymander on racial grounds to benefit black folk.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Grinning Dragon, New haven america, Shrillland, Singaporen Empire, Stellar Colonies, The Black Forrest, The Huskar Social Union
Advertisement