townsend
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2013
- Messages
- 5,377
He lost the electoral vote. Then he whined about it.Breaking news. He didn't lose.
Just like he did last year when he lost Iowa
He lost the electoral vote. Then he whined about it.Breaking news. He didn't lose.
It's a ridiculous idea. I hate the dumbasses who burn flags as much as anyone but freedom of speech is freedom of speech. And you sure as shit can't strip someone's citizenship. Doesn't even make sense.How about Trump wanting to take away your citizenship if you burn the flag?
One of his first Tweets ever was talking about how burning the flag was a bold display of protest.How about Trump wanting to take away your citizenship if you burn the flag?
It's not and frankly it doesn't bother me that much. Has no real lasting impact on me or my life. Laws don't get changed by a tweet and honestly I don't expect any real change under Trump. Just a lot of words with the same old stuff going on behind them.You guys act like this is a surprise. Its exactly what I expected. He has a mouth that runs ahead of his brain. Just laugh at the idiocy. It will save your heart some stress.
It's information not an indictment.So your vote should count less, because you live in a big city...?
No but a few cities shouldn't be allowed to hold the rest of the country hostage either. To do away with the electoral college is to sort of strip away state rights.So your vote should count less, because you live in a big city...?
Isn't this why you have local government? And why each county, state, etc. is given such autonomy?Why the Electoral College is important I would say this title makes this text more about justification than information
There are 3,141 counties in the United States.
Trump won 3,084 of them.
Clinton won 57.
There are 62 counties in New York State.
Trump won 46 of them.
Clinton won 16.
Should the electoral college be by counties then?
Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes. That makes for 1.5 million voters who consider that their vote didn't count
In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond)
Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country. So next time let's just not give New Yorkers the right to vote...?
These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles.
The United States is comprised of 3, 797,000 square miles.
When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. I thought it was the people, not the acreage that mattered and voted, should we give votes based on how much land each person possess? I bet Ted Turner would love that. If the land belongs to a Corporation should the CEO get the vote? Or should it be divided amongst stockholders?
Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc) don’t and shouldn’t speak for the rest of our country. Large empty spaces should...?
The above information came from Allen West.
These highly populated cities should never determine the outcome of any election. They don't, it's the people that do.
I’ve read recently that if the popular vote was used alone to elect the president only 9 counties in the county could determine the outcome of the election. Our founding fathers were very wise and protected the “fly over country”.
That's basically what the electoral college is. Sort of allows a state to pool all of their votes and use them all towards one candidate.Isn't this why you have local government? And why each county, state, etc. is given such autonomy?
It's information not an indictment.
"government of the people, by the people, for the people..."No but a few cities shouldn't be allowed to hold the rest of the country hostage either. To do away with the electoral college is to sort of strip away state rights.
Because crude direct democracy is government by the mob, not the people?"government of the people, by the people, for the people..."
Why should a state decide? I thought you were all against government intervening, why should the state do with my vote as it pleases?
Interesting, care to elaborate?Because crude direct democracy is government by the mob, not the people?