Reply With Quote
Why do you support electronic voting and defy voter ID laws if you're so concerned about the will of the people?
It's very similar to gerrymandering. One side wants to change the rules to give themselves a better chance to win. It's not about fairness at all.
Why do you support electronic voting and defy voter ID laws if you're so concerned about the will of the people?
Will of the people and all that, ya know?
It's not true that candidates look for every vote they can get. They look for every electoral vote they can get. That's why certain candidates don't spend a lot of time campaigning in states that they know they can't win even if they would get more individual votes. Maybe I don't understand what you were saying but it doesn't make any sense to me.
This is why they campaign in swing states.
You made your point clear as a day, and I concur. There’s clearly other non-democratic representation problems that should also be adjusted to the current reality as a nation, such as representation numbers in the Senate. We’re clearly not the same country we were centuries ago.
None of that is happening any time soon, tbh, but nonetheless it’s a valid point.
Obviously, the not-so-popular will push back, usually with an inordinate amount of excuses instead of the actual fact that best way to actually affect democracy in a positive way is to slowly reinvent themselves to become more popular. New ideas, spearheading new causes, etc.
All that said, it’s just about equally important that there’s alternation of power for a robust democracy, but one would hope it comes from such new ideas instead of inadequate representation.
It's funny because for the eight years that Obama was President I don't recall anyone pushing to abolish the electoral college.
I’m game with paper ballots and a paper trail. I’m not a fan of the current digital security employed by the companies in charge. I much rather have a company like Amazon, Google or Microsoft running those systems.
I’m also not opposed to Voter ID as long as it’s regulated federally not to create a burden on the voters, monetarily or otherwise (at least 2 year notice, country-wide application, no-cost to the citizen, at least 12 year non-expiration, would replace the need for voter registration and voter purges, would be automatically updated from other government databases, such as death notification, changes of address, etc). It really doesn’t solve any perceived problem, as voter fraud is factually almost non-existent and heavily prosecuted, as this administration found out, but nonetheless, if it meets at least all those conditions above, it wouldn’t necessarily hurt either.
ElNono To Lite
I did mention it, IIRC. Before Obama too. Heck, I’m pretty sure there was conversation about it in the Gore days.
I don’t think it’s completely unfair. However, it’s undeniably less democratic than a popular vote, which was the point presented. As I said, largely academic due to the current political realities.
And don’t even hint this has anything to do with the current POTUS, I was first in line here defending he won fair and square.
No wonder they support Trump.
I’m sure DMC will let me know if I’m wrong. I’m also 1000% sure boutons ranted about it non-stop post Trump election.
With all the direct voter fraud, I don't think it's undeniable at all.
Again, fix the rigors before you cry that it could be more perfect.
Ah, show us all this do ented fraud you're talking about.
Or fold.
Chump making demands in pursuit of tiny w's. Par.
Preemptively comforting himself, too. Par.
We’ve gone through this song and dance many times, and it always ends up the same: you can’t back up that claim. So I’ll agree to disagree again until you actually can back it up.
I'm asking you to back up your claim about "all the direct voter fraud."
Why make a claim just to immediately fold?
I don't care and you know I don't care. You need a fake tiny w.
I do the math; you don't (or Im sure you do, but it's an inconvenient math to admit, so you don't). Democrats wouldn't be so vehemently against voter ID laws if they weren't benefiting from the fraud. The lack of accountability in our current electronic systems are there for a reason. There are plenty of videos out there that detail instances of impropriety as well. None of this means I want to go searching for links for you; you're willfully ignorant; it's what you do. Don't feel bad; you're not alone. It's pretty much the signature move of a chumpette. I only give you a hard time b/c you strike me as a person who ought to know about it unlike the other lowlifes.
The EC electing 2 NPV-losing Repugs is obviously why the Repugs, increasingly demographic losers, will get $100Ms from their financiers to kill the NPV program.
The ed-up, archaic Cons ution, now fully weaponized by the Repugs/oligarchy, will remain in force for decades.
MORE likely because it's way ahead in state-support than NPV is an Article V Convention of States, pushed by red states with oligarchy financing, which is now supported by 28 states of 34 (2/3) needed.
Article V promoters are mainly saying a convention would be about specific issues, eg balanced budget so loved by conservatives, but in fact the entire Cons ution could be voided and replaced, ending America's myth that it is a democracy and formalizing ownership and operation to the oligarchy.
=========
States Likely Could Not Control Cons utional Convention on Balanced Budget Amendment or Other Issues
https://www.cbpp.org/research/states-likely-could-not-control-cons utional-convention-on-balanced-budget-amendment-or
============
U.S. Cons ution Threatened as Article V Convention Movement Nears Success
https://www.commoncause.org/resource/u-s-cons ution-threatened-as-article-v-convention-movement-nears-success/
I know you don't care about your made-up voter fraud.
Nice of you to finally admit it.
That doesn’t eliminate the electoral college, it tries to work around it by having delegates pledge to vote for the most-vote-getter. Actual elimination of the electoral college requires a cons utional amendment.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
