Thread: President Donald Trump

Originally Posted by Slick

Just so, so fuckin wrong. The Reason for the Electoral College - FactCheck.org

Originally Posted by Slick

The EC system was made for just this exact instance. Keeping high population centers from overpowering the rest

I guess you were fuckin wrong too.

Originally Posted by Humbert

I guess you were fuckin wrong too.

How? It was definitely not made first and foremost to protect slave owners.

James Madison worried about what he called “factions,” which he defined as groups of citizens who have a common interest in some proposal that would either violate the rights of other citizens or would harm the nation as a whole. Madison’s fear – which Alexis de Tocqueville later dubbed “the tyranny of the majority” – was that a faction could grow to encompass more than 50 percent of the population, at which point it could “sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens.” Madison has a solution for tyranny of the majority: “A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking.”

Originally Posted by Humbert

^Poor Earl. He can't move beyond his repetive little rants. You're spent Earl.

And you can't move beyond your excuses.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

And you can't move beyond your excuses.

And please show me where I have made excuses.

Originally Posted by Slick

Originally Posted by Humbert

I guess you were fuckin wrong too.

How? It was definitely not made first and foremost to protect slave owners.

James Madison worried about what he called “factions,” which he defined as groups of citizens who have a common interest in some proposal that would either violate the rights of other citizens or would harm the nation as a whole. Madison’s fear – which Alexis de Tocqueville later dubbed “the tyranny of the majority” – was that a faction could grow to encompass more than 50 percent of the population, at which point it could “sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens.” Madison has a solution for tyranny of the majority: “A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking.”

What you are doing is pure biased speculation to suggest that population centers reflect a unified faction of interests. BS.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by RPETER65

And you can't move beyond your excuses.

And please show me where I have made excuses.

Oh, it's you again inserting yourself in an exchange, my mistake. In that case never mind, I could give a flying fuk where you draw your hare brained ideas from.

Originally Posted by Humbert

What you are doing is pure biased speculation to suggest that population centers reflect a unified faction of interests. BS.

Im not speculating anything. Actually Im trying to keep sources factual and unbiased. Im simply stating what the founding fathers intended.

It does represent a unified faction. Its exactly that. Of course if you hate Trump, its bullshit, but clearly the EC did what it was intended to do in this election. This kind of stuff rarely happens in US elections, but this was not a typical election was it?

Nobody need 'protection' from liberal BS as you stated before, but there is a huge country out there. In this election, the 'rest of the country' or 'majority of states' had enough 'power' to stop HRC & Co.

The result was Donald Trump. Not the best choice but certainly better than the current Democrat Party.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by RPETER65

And you can't move beyond your excuses.

And please show me where I have made excuses.

You have been making excuses for the fall of the Democratic Party since Trump became president elect.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by RPETER65

And you can't move beyond your excuses.

And please show me where I have made excuses.

Oh, it's you again inserting yourself in an exchange, my mistake. In that case never mind, I could give a flying fuk where you draw your hare brained ideas from.

Then why do you read them.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Then why do you read them.

Run along now like a good little toadie.

Originally Posted by Humbert

It is a leap in reasoning to suggest that 'location' is a faction. A faction would be a group whose interests or ideology are similar. There is no evidence that citizens residing in urban centers hold homogeneous political interests. You only have voting trends that suggest that cities tend to vote for more liberal candidates for president. Hardly conclusive or even the close to being a validation for the intent of the founders.

But 'location' is how the founding fathers intended to 'control' the issue of 'factions' that could violate the 'rights of other citizens' or the 'country as a whole' hence a Democratic Republic and the Electoral College.

Originally Posted by Slick

But 'location' is how the founding fathers intended to 'control' the issue of 'factions' that could violate the 'rights of other citizens' or the 'country as a whole' hence a Democratic Republic and the Electoral College.

There is nothing in the piece you posted to back up that claim. And the fact that over 80% of the US population resides in cities undercuts your argument completely.

Originally Posted by Slick

Originally Posted by Humbert

It is a leap in reasoning to suggest that 'location' is a faction. A faction would be a group whose interests or ideology are similar. There is no evidence that citizens residing in urban centers hold homogeneous political interests. You only have voting trends that suggest that cities tend to vote for more liberal candidates for president. Hardly conclusive or even the close to being a validation for the intent of the founders.

But 'location' is how the founding fathers intended to 'control' the issue of 'factions' that could violate the 'rights of other citizens' or the 'country as a whole' hence a Democratic Republic and the Electoral College.

The part that the anti-EC punters seem to ignore is that the USA is a confederation of "states". States are very different in population mix, economic status, and all kinds of other ways. and there has to be some means to accommodate all these state and regional differences. If a small number of states with the largest populations were able to outvote all of the other smaller states, it would become a very unbalanced federation.

It's been written about before in this thread, but just one more time. In countries that follow the Parliamentary democracy system of local electoral ridings, it is not only possible but quite common to have a majority government formed by a party that only received less than 40% of the overall national vote. The governing party needs to win the most "ridings"....not the popular national vote. The EC was established with some parts of the Parliamentary system in mind, and it had nothing to do with "protecting slave masters" or any such bullshit....

All this, reform or disband the EC talk fired up right after Trump won......was it ever mentioned in this, or any other thread before the election? Might have been, but I don't remember seeing it.

Originally Posted by Humbert

And the fact that over 80% of the US population resides in cities undercuts your argument completely.

Unbiased source please.

You are thinking about it in 'cities' when the solution is the division of 'states'.

My original point was about the popular vote, then to bsnub about and his shill belief that EC was originally intended to protect slave masters.

Originally Posted by Slick

Quote:
Originally Posted by Humbert And the fact that over 80% of the US population resides in cities undercuts your argument completely. Unbiased source please.

According to new numbers just released from the U.S. Census Bureau, 80.7 percent of the U.S. population lived in urban areas as of the 2010

Originally Posted by Slick

You are thinking about it in 'cities' when the solution is the division of 'states'.
My original point was about the popular vote, then to bsnub about and his shill belief that EC was originally intended to protect slave masters

Originally Posted by Slick

You are thinking about it in 'cities' when the solution is the division of 'states'.
My original point was about the popular vote, then to bsnub about and his shill belief that EC was originally intended to protect slave masters.

Your original point was that the EC was created to protect rural interests from urban interests.

Originally Posted by koman

If a small number of states with the largest populations were able to outvote all of the other smaller states, it would become a very unbalanced federation.

Tyranny of the Majority.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Your original point was that the EC was created to protect rural interests from urban interests.

No, but ur doing a good job spinning the shit out of it.

Originally Posted by Cujo

The Republicans won due to a gerrymander, allowing the minority to rule over the majority.

Im not following this. In what way did this happen? When, or how, did district boundaries change?

Are you saying that Gerrymandering is the reason trump won in the 3 narrowest states, therefore taking the Electoral Vote win?

Originally Posted by Slick

Originally Posted by Cujo

The Republicans won due to a gerrymander, allowing the minority to rule over the majority.

Im not following this. In what way did this happen? When, or how, did district boundaries change?

Cujo is writing from afar.....he's in China or someplace thinking that maybe Trump agents moved state borders around and redistributed EC votes when nobody was looking.....gerrymandering...FFS....

Originally Posted by koman

Cujo is writing from afar.....he's in China or someplace thinking that maybe Trump agents moved state borders around and redistributed EC votes when nobody was looking.....gerrymandering...FFS....

It was the russians! Thats what Obama was warning us about!