60 percent think Biden won in post debate poll

Dutch Uncle said:
Why? You and I both know over 90% of them have "3 million votes" in them somewhere. None that I've seen have suggested a rigged election. All whined about the Electoral College.
Click to expand...

They've been whining about the Russians, and still are. And yes, they wined about the Electoral College, and they still are (as noted above).

Do you think the Russians had anything to do with our election, other than maybe a few facebook entries? Do you think they "convinced" anyone?
 
Dutch Uncle said:
The Founders disagree. Populism is the reason we have Trump. Your solution will only ensure Populists win every Presidential election instead of a fluke because the opposing candidate was more deplorable.
Click to expand...

My reponse is this: the founders were men of vision, but they were also wrong about a lot of stuff: legalized slavery, no votes for women, second class status for tenet farmers and those without property, third class status of indigenous peoples.

I happen to agree that the type of 21st century liberal democracy we have now was not appropriate for the 18th century. A functioning democracy requires an educated, informed, literate public. Universal public education did not even exist in USA until the liberal reforms of the late 19th century.
 
Cypress said:
But for the record, I have always been against the archaic electoral college and have always viewed it as thwarting the will of the people, regardless of political party.

In the weeks running up to the 2000 election, there were indications Gore was going to win the EC while losing the popular vote. I was not happy about that, considered it unfair, and I would have supported a constitutional amendment at any time to eliminate the EC
Click to expand...

Translation: I want 3 or 4 most populated states to elect the president. Fuck all the smaller populated states.
 
RB 60 said:
They've been whining about the Russians, and still are. And yes, they wined about the Electoral College, and they still are (as noted above).

Do you think the Russians had anything to do with our election, other than maybe a few facebook entries? Do you think they "convinced" anyone?
Click to expand...

Yes, the Russians have repeatedly attempted to influence the election as proved by both the DNI and Mueller reports. I fail to see why you think that is political fiction.

If someone takes a shot at me and misses, do I have a right to go after them? Short answer: Yes, I do. Yes, as proved by the reports, Russia has and continues to influence US elections through hostile cyber actions. Mainly disinformation campaigns. Again, I fail to see why you contest this to be true.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Yes, the Russians have repeatedly attempted to influence the election as proved by both the DNI and Mueller reports. I fail to see why you think that is political fiction.

If someone takes a shot at me and misses, do I have a right to go after them? Short answer: Yes, I do. Yes, as proved by the reports, Russia has and continues to influence US elections through hostile cyber actions. Mainly disinformation campaigns. Again, I fail to see why you contest this to be true.
Click to expand...

I didn't contest it's legitimacy, but rather it's effect on the election. I doubt they had any influence, most voters already made up their minds who they were gonna vote for.
I would think anyone who is influenced to vote because what's posted on the internet (mostly facebook), from either side, isn't the sharpest knives in the drawer.
 
Penderyn said:
Eagle_Eye said:
Translation: I want 3 or 4 most populated states to elect the president. Fuck all the smaller populated states.
Click to expand...
I think he probably believes that majorities should decide elections.
Click to expand...

Which means Eagle_Eye is correct. It's an attempt to fuck over the majority of American states in favor of the most populated states.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis popularized states as being "laboratories of democracy" by saying this: "a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country."

Eliminating the EC would result in a major power shift away from States and the 10th Amendment to empowering the cities. Politicians would become populists seeking to please only citizens of cities even if that means turning rural areas into wastelands.

40df22168f030ec8d4061008c5222712.jpg
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Which means Eagle_Eye is correct. It's an attempt to fuck over the majority of American states in favor of the most populated states.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis popularized states as being "laboratories of democracy" by saying this: "a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country."

Eliminating the EC would result in a major power shift away from States and the 10th Amendment to empowering the cities. Politicians would become populists seeking to please only citizens of cities even if that means turning rural areas into wastelands.

40df22168f030ec8d4061008c5222712.jpg
Click to expand...

So what? Why ruin the country for a few primitives?
 
RB 60 said:
I didn't contest it's legitimacy, but rather it's effect on the election. I doubt they had any influence, most voters already made up their minds who they were gonna vote for.
I would think anyone who is influenced to vote because what's posted on the internet (mostly facebook), from either side, isn't the sharpest knives in the drawer.
Click to expand...
Dude, by contesting the effect, you are contesting the legitimacy. Additionally, like a shot that misses, even if there was zero effect, shouldn't the US work to protect elections from foreign interference? Condemn Russia and any other nations that use hostile cyber attacks to harm or influence the US?
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Dude, by contesting the effect, you are contesting the legitimacy. Additionally, like a shot that misses, even if there was zero effect, shouldn't the US work to protect elections from foreign interference? Condemn Russia and any other nations that use hostile cyber attacks to harm or influence the US?
Click to expand...

Contesting it's effect isn't contesting it's legitimacy. I believe in it's legitimacy, but not necessarily it's effect.
I'm not at all saying we shouldn't protect our elections from foreign interference. But, isn't it a fact we try to
influence other country's elections (not changing the topic here, just pointing out a fact)?

Wind has an effect on a bullet's trajectory. That's why we use heavier bullets in windier conditions.
The wind is legitimate, but has less effect on a 210 grain bullet than a 55 grain bullet downrange.

Well, it's nice out (60 deg. (and rising) and sunny) so I'm heading out to clean, then fill the gas tank in my car
for the 2 upcoming car shows this weekend. After that, I am mowing my lawn. Have a nice day :smile:
 
Eagle_Eye said:
Translation: I want 3 or 4 most populated states to elect the president. Fuck all the smaller populated states.
Click to expand...
Everytime you vote for governor in your state, most of the votes come from the cities, not the sparsely populated rural counties. It is weird that electoral college fans have never complained about that.

You have not explained why someone in Wyoming should have their vote count more than someone's vote in New York.

One American, one vote. Nothing could be simpler or fairer.

Sparsely populated rural states are already given massively disproportionate representation and power in the US Senate. And as a consequence they are given massively disproportionate power in legislation, court appointments, approval of treaties, oversight of the executive branch.

How much more disproportionate representation do they need? Do the 25 million people in 20 rural states need massively disproportionate representation in every single branch of the federal government?
 
Cypress said:
Everytime you vote for governor in your state, most of the votes come from the cities, not the sparsely populated rural counties. It is weird that electoral college fans have never complained about that.

You have not explained why someone in Wyoming should have their vote count more than someone's vote in New York.

One American, one vote. Nothing could be simpler or fairer.

Sparsely populated rural states are already given massively disproportionate representation and power in the US Senate. And as a consequence they are given massively disproportionate power in legislation, court appointments, approval of treaties, oversight of the executive branch.

How much more disproportionate representation do they need? Do the 25 million people in 20 rural states need massively disproportionate representation in every single branch of the federal government?
Click to expand...

Typical grasping at straws. The fact is if California, or Mass. or New York wasn't solid blue Trump would have had a landslide and the popular vote. Sorry but Mob rule is what you want.
 
Eagle_Eye said:
Typical grasping at straws. The fact is if California, or Mass. or New York wasn't solid blue Trump would have had a landslide and the popular vote. Sorry but Mob rule is what you want.
Click to expand...

I do not believe every branch of our federal government needs massively disproportionate representation of sparsely populated states. They already receive massively disproportionate representation in the U.S. Senate.
 
Cypress said:
I do not believe every branch of our federal government needs massively disproportionate representation of sparsely populated states. They already receive massively disproportionate representation in the U.S. Senate.
Click to expand...

First off sport the smaller states would be totally ignored by the candidates if we had your fucked up system. Like it or not every American has the right to vote. But you prefer that only the large states voters are fully informed of the candidates positions and screw the smaller states. Thank God the founding fathers were smart enough to know absolute power corrupts absolutely.
 
"60 percent think Biden won in post debate poll"

Of course he did.

Trump came off like an uncouth no-class trailer-trash shouter who thought he was going to a shouting match.

He has no manners.
 
RB 60 said:
Contesting it's effect isn't contesting it's legitimacy. I believe in it's legitimacy, but not necessarily it's effect.
I'm not at all saying we shouldn't protect our elections from foreign interference. But, isn't it a fact we try to
influence other country's elections (not changing the topic here, just pointing out a fact)?

Wind has an effect on a bullet's trajectory. That's why we use heavier bullets in windier conditions.
The wind is legitimate, but has less effect on a 210 grain bullet than a 55 grain bullet downrange.

Well, it's nice out (60 deg. (and rising) and sunny) so I'm heading out to clean, then fill the gas tank in my car
for the 2 upcoming car shows this weekend. After that, I am mowing my lawn. Have a nice day :smile:
Click to expand...

When you contest the reports you are contesting their legitimacy. It's like the idiot Birthers: by contesting Obama's citizenship they are contesting the legitimacy of his election.

I prefer heavier bullets and long-range precision shooting over idiotically emptying a magazine of 5.56s.

4ad38ec034aa6e85bc88dc8b57f16019.jpg
 
Cypress said:
Everytime you vote for governor in your state, most of the votes come from the cities, not the sparsely populated rural counties. It is weird that electoral college fans have never complained about that.

You have not explained why someone in Wyoming should have their vote count more than someone's vote in New York.

One American, one vote. Nothing could be simpler or fairer.

Sparsely populated rural states are already given massively disproportionate representation and power in the US Senate. And as a consequence they are given massively disproportionate power in legislation, court appointments, approval of treaties, oversight of the executive branch.

How much more disproportionate representation do they need? Do the 25 million people in 20 rural states need massively disproportionate representation in every single branch of the federal government?
Click to expand...

You cannot RWR (reason with retards)
 
Eagle_Eye said:
Typical grasping at straws. The fact is if California, or Mass. or New York wasn't solid blue Trump would have had a landslide and the popular vote. Sorry but Mob rule is what you want.
Click to expand...

Newp, not grasping at straws at all. Your savior and living god, twump, didn't win in a landslide. Real estate doesn't vote, sugartits. People do.

Why do you hate America?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top