Bass Pro Shops   Daveys Locker Sportfishing  Newport Landing Sportfishing   The Fishing Syndicate  Carver Covers  Tight Lines Guide Service  Bob Sands Fishing Tackle 
Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213
Results 121 to 129 of 129

Thread: The 46th President of the United States

  1. #121

    Default

    We most definitely should get rid of the Electoral College. The national popular vote interstate compact is already around 3/4 of the way there, I think it is. For those who are not familiar with it, this compact is an agreement among states to award their Electoral College votes to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of who wins that particular state. Of course, the states that have signed onto it are generally the more "blue states," with Democratic majorities. However, there is pending legislation for this compact in quite a few states, and it keeps passing in more states. For instance, it just passed in Colorado on November 3, the same day that Trump lost his re-election bid. It needs to reach 270 Electoral College votes in order to annul the Electoral College and ensure that the national popular vote winner will become the president. (Imagine all the trouble that would have spared us from Trump's various attempts to overturn the election results or even stage a coup. For that matter, it would have spared us from Trump even becoming president in the first place.) All of this can be done without a constitutional amendment, which are very difficult to accomplish. If the compact passes, we may never have another Republican president.

  2. #122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Lefty View Post
    We most definitely should get rid of the Electoral College.
    NatLeft,

    Now, to play devil's advocate, what happens to those fly over states that have more cows than people?

    By eliminating the electoral college, you've just told them that their votes are worth as much as their cows' votes, even though the most populous states like California are paying for their welfare, and providing a lot of their food.

    Now, I have no problems with that, considering where I live, but I do put myself in their shoes. If i'm a welfare farmer in all those Red States, I'd like to think my vote would matter. But, with the elimination of the Electoral College, all these cousin having relations with other cousins states would no longer be relevant. The presidency would be won in the country's largest cities. (Again, which i have no problem with, considering the GDP is probably based on these cities.) What's Jethro or DevoreFlyer gonna do?

    And while we're on political discussions, MaddFish, what is your opinion on getting rid of the Electoral College?

  3. #123

    Default

    That wasn't exactly a strong defense of the Electoral College, Dark Shadow. LOL If the votes of cows counted as much as the votes of people, then I suppose the Electoral College would be a good thing.

    The folks at FiveThirtyEight and other experts talk about how the Electoral College has built in advantages for less populous states, so the reality is the opposite of taking them for granted. (Articles on this topic can easily be looked up.) This also translates to an advantage for Republicans. The same is true of the 2 Senators per state rule. Ultimately, the only fair policy is one person, one vote, no matter where that person lives.

  4. #124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Lefty View Post
    That wasn't exactly a strong defense of the Electoral College, Dark Shadow. LOL If the votes of cows counted as much as the votes of people, then I suppose the Electoral College would be a good thing.

    The folks at FiveThirtyEight and other experts talk about how the Electoral College has built in advantages for less populous states, so the reality is the opposite of taking them for granted. (Articles on this topic can easily be looked up.) This also translates to an advantage for Republicans. The same is true of the 2 Senators per state rule. Ultimately, the only fair policy is one person, one vote, no matter where that person lives.
    Remember I'm with you, but I've heard the opposing arguments from family members who live in other states. (no their not from an Red state but New Mexico) Their biggest complaint about Majority rule was that the Big states would push around the Small states. They did make a point I had no defense for, so see if you got an answer to this???? Our Founding Father's didn't set up a true Democracy of 1 Man 1 vote! They set up a "Republic" of 13 states using Federalism! So unless you want to rip up the Constitution and start over again. We are an 50 state Republic and have to live with that for now! Lol
    Last edited by etucker1959; Yesterday at 07:45 AM.

  5. #125

    Default

    States are semi-autonomous. I don't see how big states would "push around" small states. Thinking that seems a bit paranoid to me.

    Yes, the United States was set up as a "federal republic." However, I think it's time to give all of the people the true voice that they deserve by making it as democratic (small d) as possible. I mean having democratic rule including voter based initiatives at the national level, and a one person, one vote rule nationwide. Yes, this means revising the Constitution. I think the founders expected revisions to be needed from time to time. In fact, as we probably all know, some of the previous amendments to the constitution involved making the political process more inclusive, by allowing minorities and women to vote, and abolishing slavery, for instance. Would any of us want to go back to when only white men who owned land were allowed to vote, and slaves counted as 3/5 of a white person for census purposes? I don't think so, not in New Mexico or anywhere else.

  6. #126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Lefty View Post
    States are semi-autonomous. I don't see how big states would "push around" small states. Thinking that seems a bit paranoid to me.

    Yes, the United States was set up as a "federal republic." However, I think it's time to give all of the people the true voice that they deserve by making it as democratic (small d) as possible. I mean having democratic rule including voter based initiatives at the national level, and a one person, one vote rule nationwide. Yes, this means revising the Constitution. I think the founders expected revisions to be needed from time to time. In fact, as we probably all know, some of the previous amendments to the constitution involved making the political process more inclusive, by allowing minorities and women to vote, and abolishing slavery, for instance. Would any of us want to go back to when only white men who owned land were allowed to vote, and slaves counted as 3/5 of a white person for census purposes? I don't think so, not in New Mexico or anywhere else.
    In the Big states pushing around the Small states. How much Love does anyone on here have for Red States now that our country is so Partisan? I personally think we should treat the Red States like a bad actor country! Were we put sanctions on them for their bad behavior!

  7. #127

    Default

    as mentioned we are a republic
    and when the constitution was drawn
    a rapid popular vote wasn't possible to tabulate
    took months to get the complete numbers
    thus the college
    today there is no need for it

    but there is a need for a cicero to speak for the mass's

  8. #128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Lefty View Post
    Would any of us want to go back to when only white men who owned land were allowed to vote, and slaves counted as 3/5 of a white person for census purposes?
    Yeah, almost half the country would love that according to the last election. ;-)

  9. #129

    Default

    Not when it excludes all the Trumpettes and working class poor Trumpster dudes who don't own land from voting, Dark Shadow.

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •