Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 76 to 82 of 82
  1. #76
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    We should just let NY and CA select our presidents, tbh.
    Instead of OH and FL

  2. #77
    Independent DMX7's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    22,149
    In a republic, the voting responsibility is greater than one man one vote. This is why we are a republic of individual states each with measured responsibility. You can always move to Wyoming if it bothers you so much.
    Also, California has 17.9 million registered voters, while Texas had 15 million registered voters. Texas only gets 38 electoral votes to California's 55. 20% greater voting population, but over 40% more votes. Seems to balance out in the end.
    Actually, it doesn't seem to balance out in the end or we wouldn't have the loser of the popular vote winning the election for the 2nd time in 5 presidential elections. And I suppose anyone could move to Wyoming or we could do the more reasonable thing and change the system (or at least make the representation for each state more in line with its population when selecting a president).

  3. #78
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    44,134
    Actually, it doesn't seem to balance out in the end or we wouldn't have the loser of the popular vote winning the election for the 2nd time in 5 presidential elections. And I suppose anyone could move to Wyoming or we could do the more reasonable thing and change the system (or at least make the representation for each state more in line with its population when selecting a president).
    So do you propose doing away with the Senate?

    It's the same popular vote theory.

  4. #79
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    39,469
    Actually, it doesn't seem to balance out in the end or we wouldn't have the loser of the popular vote winning the election for the 2nd time in 5 presidential elections. And I suppose anyone could move to Wyoming or we could do the more reasonable thing and change the system (or at least make the representation for each state more in line with its population when selecting a president).
    For the 2nd time since 1888 as well.

  5. #80
    Independent DMX7's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    22,149
    So do you propose doing away with the Senate?

    It's the same popular vote theory.
    I'm more ok with the senate than the electoral college because the senate is only one house of a bicameral legislature.

  6. #81
    notthewordsofonewhokneels Thread's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Post Count
    91,195
    I'm more ok with the senate than the electoral college because the senate is only one house of a bicameral legislature.
    Bend over. I'll give ya some in' bicaramel.

  7. #82
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,840
    In a political forum I normally assume I don't have to spell out basic details about how gerrymandering is created by both parties. I guess you are the exception. 1960s democrats gerrymandered Texas districts. 2000's republicans do. 2000's democrats gerrymander New York districts. Is what it is.
    some states have non-partisan redistricting boards. might be a preferable system.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

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