CTX 700 Forum banner

Political camp?

  • Republican

    Votes: 11 37.9%
  • Democrat

    Votes: 6 20.7%
  • Libertarian

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Independant

    Votes: 3 10.3%
  • Green Party

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Moderate

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • Bullmoose

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other(feel free to comment)

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • None

    Votes: 5 17.2%
41 - 60 of 105 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Please forgive me if this sounds clueless, but my understanding is that the concept of 2 senators per state was intended to balance out any other perceived inequities that may arrise in Congress. Is the Electoral College trying to balance something that is already balanced elsewhere?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
Two senators per state has nothing to do with the electoral college. EC is for presidential elections only. There are 538 electors.
The higher population states have higher representation in the house.
The size of a state's total congressional delegation also determines the size of its representation in the U.S. Electoral College, which elects the U.S. president.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Sorry, I wasn't clear. My point, that I tried (unsuccesfully) to make, was that the EC tries to balance things out with regard to presidential election. Whoever is elected president is subject to election via the EC. The more populous states get their representation in the House which may then in turn be balanced out by the fact that each state gets 2 Senators, be they Vermont or Wyoming vs California or Texas or Florida, to equalize power that may exist in the House. Your system is supposed to have checks and balances between the 3 centres of power (President, House and Senate).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
593 Posts
If I may, (& ty Vulcan Mediator, for questions, as I continue to try to understand all of this), Yes, but our "checks & balance" system is comprised of 3 Branches: Executive, Legislative & Judicial, (White House, House & Senate, & the Courts). If functioning as intended, this is designed to prevent tyranny by any Branch at any time. (extreme partisan politics notwithstanding).(n)
I believe that We the People are actually voting for President; by Political Party, for "Electors", whose numbers are dictated by State population in each State. The Electors then vote for our Executive Branch in December of that year. (TY to vb18). For our Executive Branch, we do this again every four years, Senate; 6 years, House; 2 years (the Supreme Court is chosen by Senate approved majority; lifetime).
The State's Electors submit their totals for Executive Branch & 270 is the magic number of State's Electors that is required to be victorious for that office.
"Government of the People, By the People and For the People" is an essential Principle for any democracy. "We the People" began our great experiment...

Our electoral college system directs that some individual States (out of 50) have the ultimate authority, (States Rights??) over All of the millions of our citizens, (mob???) to select the next leader who Must lead ALL of U.S. IMHO; this is a direct contradiction to the above stated "Principle" from our Founders. Some have described the "EC" as archaic and outdated from a distant past reality of our struggle for equality. Personally, I agree...& agree to disagree...Peace.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. My point, that I tried (unsuccesfully) to make, was that the EC tries to balance things out with regard to presidential election. Whoever is elected president is subject to election via the EC. The more populous states get their representation in the House which may then in turn be balanced out by the fact that each state gets 2 Senators, be they Vermont or Wyoming vs California or Texas or Florida, to equalize power that may exist in the House. Your system is supposed to have checks and balances between the 3 centres of power (President, House and Senate).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #45
And this is why I think the update of the ec to be run as districts votes rather then electors to solidify the decision of that district. Many many many Republicans in california who are outnumbered feel disenfranchised because cali requires it's electors to vote based on popular vote take all. So many dont even try to vote.

Each district should be given one vote value end. Vote goes to libertarian? Cool mama Jo gets the vote. Further we can add on top of that system a ranked system. If everyone's second choice was mama Jo she'd win vs joe or trump. And everyone would feel satisfied their second choice won. No more vote blue no matter who. Or (don't know the red mantra)


If I may, (& ty Vulcan Mediator, for questions, as I continue to try to understand all of this), Yes, but our "checks & balance" system is comprised of 3 Branches: Executive, Legislative & Judicial, (White House, House & Senate, & the Courts). If functioning as intended, this is designed to prevent tyranny by any Branch at any time. (extreme partisan politics notwithstanding).(n)
I believe that We the People are actually voting for President; by Political Party, for "Electors", whose numbers are dictated by State population in each State. The Electors then vote for our Executive Branch in December of that year. (TY to vb18). For our Executive Branch, we do this again every four years, Senate; 6 years, House; 2 years (the Supreme Court is chosen by Senate approved majority; lifetime).
The State's Electors submit their totals for Executive Branch & 270 is the magic number of State's Electors that is required to be victorious for that office.
"Government of the People, By the People and For the People" is an essential Principle for any democracy. "We the People" began our great experiment...

Our electoral college system directs that some individual States (out of 50) have the ultimate authority, (States Rights??) over All of the millions of our citizens, (mob???) to select the next leader who Must lead ALL of U.S. IMHO; this is a direct contradiction to the above stated "Principle" from our Founders. Some have described the "EC" as archaic and outdated from a distant past reality of our struggle for equality. Personally, I agree...& agree to disagree...Peace
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #46
Oh BTW guys thanks for keeping it civil so far. I hate fb atm because people will argue based on you as a person (ad hominem) and no one will use facts or proper civil debate, a lost art it seems. (No offense it seems more of my extreme leftist friends mostly guilty of this)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
And this is why I think the update of the ec to be run as districts votes rather then electors to solidify the decision of that district. Many many many Republicans in california who are outnumbered feel disenfranchised because cali requires it's electors to vote based on popular vote take all. So many dont even try to vote.

Each district should be given one vote value end. Vote goes to libertarian? Cool mama Jo gets the vote. Further we can add on top of that system a ranked system. If everyone's second choice was mama Jo she'd win vs joe or trump. And everyone would feel satisfied their second choice won. No more vote blue no matter who. Or (don't know the red mantra)
You state many Republicans in California feel disenfranchised. You are 100% correct. I know the feeling from when I lived in Connecticut. I would tell my wife that our votes don't really count.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #48
You state many Republicans in California feel disenfranchised. You are 100% correct. I know the feeling from when I lived in Connecticut. I would tell my wife that our votes don't really count.
And requiring a district vote be counted as is without a human elector would allow your vote to feel more counted especially if they were a ranked vote
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
490 Posts
Might be interesting to some. As a NPA voter, electoral college is important to me.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Thanks for the replies and comments (350Four, Hartman23Foscari, Mzflorida). As Election day in the US approaches, it is fascinating to watch from a distance along with all the court challenges (and the speed of some of the rulings) and speculation as to what the outcome will be. I truly hope that there will be a decisive victory on Tuesday, whichever way it goes, and that any outstanding mail in votes won't be needed (as it seems there will be different criteria as to what such ballots will be counted or not based on decisions affecting different states).

The battles involving 2 parties is very different than what we have with multiple parties, and various independants, that end up splitting votes in different areas that directly affect the final standings in the House of Commons.

(WARNING, tongue planted very firmly in cheek, both of them, at same time....) American claims to be the best (or worst) not even close, when you consider some of our political disfunctionality. We don't vote for our Prime Minister directly: the leader of the political party that gets the most seats (if a majority), or who can gain the support of the House (in a minority) is asked by the Governor General to try to form a government; if it doesn't work, the GG can either dissolve the House and call an election, or can ask the Leader of the Opposition (party with second most seats) to try to form a government that can gain confidence of the House). Some of our ridings will have 8 or more candicates. We have 2 parties, that get similar number of votes (Bloc Quebecois and Green), but as the BC are concentreated in Quebec, they end up with a lot of seats, whereas the greens are spread out, and only get a few.

In 2016, Trudeau promised that would be the last election under "first past the post" where the individual with highest number of votes gets the seats; indicating some type of proportioinate representation would result. Proplem: he got elected and changes in system would not benefit him. No change..

Final comments. We have had our fair share of constitutional issues. I won't even start to understand how your constitutional amendments come about (haven't looked into it, sorry). We do have fairly clear delineation of powers between the feds and provinces: Issues of national interest (defence, taxation, foreign policy etc) are federal, those of regional or local interest (education, health etc) remain with the provinces. Recognizing that time will bring change, our founding fathers (sorry, that is historical reality, no women were DIRECTLY involved at that time) outlined that any power not clearly allocated rests with the feds.

I am resisting the temptation to post any overtly controvertial comments as the US election looms near. I encourage anyone who has not voted to do so and I hope things come off smoothly and calmly in the coming days.

By the way, any politician promise "a motorcycle in every garage"?

Phil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #51
Thanks for the replies and comments (350Four, Hartman23Foscari, Mzflorida). As Election day in the US approaches, it is fascinating to watch from a distance along with all the court challenges (and the speed of some of the rulings) and speculation as to what the outcome will be. I truly hope that there will be a decisive victory on Tuesday, whichever way it goes, and that any outstanding mail in votes won't be needed (as it seems there will be different criteria as to what such ballots will be counted or not based on decisions affecting different states).

The battles involving 2 parties is very different than what we have with multiple parties, and various independants, that end up splitting votes in different areas that directly affect the final standings in the House of Commons.

(WARNING, tongue planted very firmly in cheek, both of them, at same time....) American claims to be the best (or worst) not even close, when you consider some of our political disfunctionality. We don't vote for our Prime Minister directly: the leader of the political party that gets the most seats (if a majority), or who can gain the support of the House (in a minority) is asked by the Governor General to try to form a government; if it doesn't work, the GG can either dissolve the House and call an election, or can ask the Leader of the Opposition (party with second most seats) to try to form a government that can gain confidence of the House). Some of our ridings will have 8 or more candicates. We have 2 parties, that get similar number of votes (Bloc Quebecois and Green), but as the BC are concentreated in Quebec, they end up with a lot of seats, whereas the greens are spread out, and only get a few.

In 2016, Trudeau promised that would be the last election under "first past the post" where the individual with highest number of votes gets the seats; indicating some type of proportioinate representation would result. Proplem: he got elected and changes in system would not benefit him. No change..

Final comments. We have had our fair share of constitutional issues. I won't even start to understand how your constitutional amendments come about (haven't looked into it, sorry). We do have fairly clear delineation of powers between the feds and provinces: Issues of national interest (defence, taxation, foreign policy etc) are federal, those of regional or local interest (education, health etc) remain with the provinces. Recognizing that time will bring change, our founding fathers (sorry, that is historical reality, no women were DIRECTLY involved at that time) outlined that any power not clearly allocated rests with the feds.

I am resisting the temptation to post any overtly controvertial comments as the US election looms near. I encourage anyone who has not voted to do so and I hope things come off smoothly and calmly in the coming days.

By the way, any politician promise "a motorcycle in every garage"?

Phil
as much as I wish it will be a peaceful one, this is a long time coming due to the 2 party thing. Our founding fathers warned us of a 2 party system. We cannot do purely mob vote either. What we need to do however is modernize the ec. Personally as I stated before, do electoral districts where the majority vote wins the electoral vote for their choice. Include ranked voting and we may see third parties get seats and or presidency.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
593 Posts
I may be wrong but my understanding is that our founding father(s) (Thomas Jefferson? & ?) warned us against the formation of any political parties.
We seem to be a 50-50 politically divided country. Thing is, we've been a politically divided society for a very, very long time...because this is the normal, natural & inescapable result of human nature and debate. Sadly, the current distrust in and of our government as well as the public animosity, is beginning to rival the period before our TRAGIC Civil War. (methinks Vladimir Putin is dancing for joy!)
Over the past several decades, the popularity of extremely partisan radio & TV shows has grown significantly, and we MUST NOT overlook the ADVERTISING Dollar$$$ that promote this phenomenon. Commentators, in large part, are paid very, very well to say whatever their employer thinks that their audience wants to hear, and our politicians are "buying into" this misconception for selfish political survival. :ROFLMAO: (Congressional term limits, anyone?) The opinion editorial and factual reporting are often combined to effectively deceive us with half truths and/or worse. This has been going on for quite some time.
The inevitable results of this continuing selfish behavior, by some media and elected politicians, are where we are headed...extreme government gridlock, disdain for our neighbor?, and/or our public servants (99% of whom just want to serve us well)...& even potential irrational violence...WHY???

After 9/11, this baby boomer had never seen our people SO United, we will NOT tolerate foreign attack, whether by force or cyberspace! I sincerely hope that our people will come together & agree to disagree, and work together to find common ground so that United We Can Stand. USA!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #53
I may be wrong but my understanding is that our founding father(s) (Thomas Jefferson? & ?) warned us against the formation of any political parties.
We seem to be a 50-50 politically divided country. Thing is, we've been a politically divided society for a very, very long time...because this is the normal, natural & inescapable result of human nature and debate. Sadly, the current distrust in and of our government as well as the public animosity, is beginning to rival the period before our TRAGIC Civil War. (methinks Vladimir Putin is dancing for joy!)
Over the past several decades, the popularity of extremely partisan radio & TV shows has grown significantly, and we MUST NOT overlook the ADVERTISING Dollar$$$ that promote this phenomenon. Commentators, in large part, are paid very, very well to say whatever their employer thinks that their audience wants to hear, and our politicians are "buying into" this misconception for selfish political survival. :ROFLMAO: (Congressional term limits, anyone?) The opinion editorial and factual reporting are often combined to effectively deceive us with half truths and/or worse. This has been going on for quite some time.
The inevitable results of this continuing selfish behavior, by some media and elected politicians, are where we are headed...extreme government gridlock, disdain for our neighbor?, and/or our public servants (99% of whom just want to serve us well)...& even potential irrational violence...WHY???

After 9/11, this baby boomer had never seen our people SO United, we will NOT tolerate foreign attack, whether by force or cyberspace! I sincerely hope that our people will come together & agree to disagree, and work together to find common ground so that United We Can Stand. USA!
You gotta read the room dude. Putin is not dancing. China has been being aggressive and pushing their borders they want this civil war because the UN won't stop them. Without america to help russia won't risk it.

And if china takes the locations I suspect they want (india, Hong Kong, taiwan, korea, and maybe even japan) they will have cornered and taken all technology in this world. They will own us utterly.

Blitzkrieg 2.0 consolidate defenses and then all they need to do is wait and increase prices astronomically. Our defense budget as massive as it is may be worth 1/3 what it is now. Then all they need to do is play the waiting game like they did with manufacturing and once they control the world market everyone has to roll over and learn chinese especially "how may I serve you master"

No russia actually likes america. They may meddle in out affairs but only because they believe it to be in their best interest to keep us going because china is up to shit. Is it right? Hell no they need to leave out. But at the same time. China has been meddling way more and russia's meddling has only been counteracting barely china's.

China wants us disarmed they want us defenseless and they want us fighting ourselves. This is from sun tzu's art of war:

To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.

No dude china is dancing and Biden is the puppet or puppy they wanted. This is why the scandal between him and his son is so dire, so horrible. I'm not saying it's true but if it is and Biden wins we are totally screwed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
You gotta read the room dude. Putin is not dancing. China has been being aggressive and pushing their borders they want this civil war because the UN won't stop them. Without america to help russia won't risk it.

And if china takes the locations I suspect they want (india, Hong Kong, taiwan, korea, and maybe even japan) they will have cornered and taken all technology in this world. They will own us utterly.

Blitzkrieg 2.0 consolidate defenses and then all they need to do is wait and increase prices astronomically. Our defense budget as massive as it is may be worth 1/3 what it is now. Then all they need to do is play the waiting game like they did with manufacturing and once they control the world market everyone has to roll over and learn chinese especially "how may I serve you master"

No russia actually likes america. They may meddle in out affairs but only because they believe it to be in their best interest to keep us going because china is up to shit. Is it right? Hell no they need to leave out. But at the same time. China has been meddling way more and russia's meddling has only been counteracting barely china's.

China wants us disarmed they want us defenseless and they want us fighting ourselves. This is from sun tzu's art of war:

To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.

No dude china is dancing and Biden is the puppet or puppy they wanted. This is why the scandal between him and his son is so dire, so horrible. I'm not saying it's true but if it is and Biden wins we are totally screwed.
Well said.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #55
Well said.
Ive been paying attention for years now, and connected the dots. My prefered media isnt fox or cnn or even alex jones. Its Tim Pool. A lefty who has slowly shifted center and from anti gun to pro gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
Ive been paying attention for years now, and connected the dots. My prefered media isnt fox or cnn or even alex jones. Its Tim Pool. A lefty who has slowly shifted center and from anti gun to pro gun.
Fox News sucks. Sad to see what has happened to them since Roger Ailes left.
Newsmax is pretty good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
You gotta read the room dude. Putin is not dancing. China has been being aggressive and pushing their borders they want this civil war because the UN won't stop them. Without america to help russia won't risk it.

And if china takes the locations I suspect they want (india, Hong Kong, taiwan, korea, and maybe even japan) they will have cornered and taken all technology in this world. They will own us utterly.

Blitzkrieg 2.0 consolidate defenses and then all they need to do is wait and increase prices astronomically. Our defense budget as massive as it is may be worth 1/3 what it is now. Then all they need to do is play the waiting game like they did with manufacturing and once they control the world market everyone has to roll over and learn chinese especially "how may I serve you master"

No russia actually likes america. They may meddle in out affairs but only because they believe it to be in their best interest to keep us going because china is up to shit. Is it right? Hell no they need to leave out. But at the same time. China has been meddling way more and russia's meddling has only been counteracting barely china's.

China wants us disarmed they want us defenseless and they want us fighting ourselves. This is from sun tzu's art of war:
China won't just wait; they are extremely aggressive with industrial espionage. Huawei did a "Dorion Grey" with Nortel, a canadian company from whom they stole almost all of their technology.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
593 Posts
Interesting comments, especially about the "opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself"; well said, & that is my point. No foreign enemy would wage all out war against our country, but they are certainly smart enough to know that the internal division they can & do create, whether thru racial unrest and/or polarizing political means, (including using the propaganda prone cyberspace/internet/social media etc, etc,) will & has weakened our ability to unify our people and maintain our free society. Our enemies ALL want us fighting ourselves.... "Divided, We Will Fall"...slowly but surely.
I am no expert in world affairs and have no access to sophisticated intelligence services...that said, I see China as wanting to be the dominant world economic power, replacing "U.S." in that role. Over time, they have done well, albeit not without some help from our corporations & our government. The likelihood of them actually taking over (occupying?) the territory/countries mentioned, may be unrealistic and unnecessary. Economic domination creates the ultimate power, imho.

With all due respect, I maintain my agreement with the widespread opinion regarding Vladimir Putin. He was raised, well educated, and promoted high up in the ranks of the KGB, of the former, powerful Soviet Union. With the collapse of the USSR and the loss of control over it's once massive territory, Mr. Putin's dogged ambition quickly elevated him to political power (Gorbachev faded quietly) and he will be Russia's president for life, or until he decides to "retire". Many in the world, view him as a ruthless, murderous dictator.
As a direct result of the USSR's catastrophic downfall, Mr. Putin (& others) surely blame "Western Democracies" (especially Europe & the U.S.) rather than their own poorly managed government. Communist China, (their ally), could not be held responsible at all, and "Russia" likely has little concern with China (other than covid19), these days.
Because of this history, Mr. Putin, almost certainly harbors a deeply seated resentment (even hidden hatred?) against us and must enjoy nothing more than to witness & contribute to our internal strife/division, with an impending downfall of the "Beacon of Freedom" we represent to the world.o_O
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #60
Interesting comments, especially about the "opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself"; well said, & that is my point. No foreign enemy would wage all out war against our country, but they are certainly smart enough to know that the internal division they can & do create, whether thru racial unrest and/or polarizing political means, (including using the propaganda prone cyberspace/internet/social media etc, etc,) will & has weakened our ability to unify our people and maintain our free society. Our enemies ALL want us fighting ourselves.... "Divided, We Will Fall"...slowly but surely.
I am no expert in world affairs and have no access to sophisticated intelligence services...that said, I see China as wanting to be the dominant world economic power, replacing "U.S." in that role. Over time, they have done well, albeit not without some help from our corporations & our government. The likelihood of them actually taking over (occupying?) the territory/countries mentioned, may be unrealistic and unnecessary. Economic domination creates the ultimate power, imho.

With all due respect, I maintain my agreement with the widespread opinion regarding Vladimir Putin. He was raised, well educated, and promoted high up in the ranks of the KGB, of the former, powerful Soviet Union. With the collapse of the USSR and the loss of control over it's once massive territory, Mr. Putin's dogged ambition quickly elevated him to political power (Gorbachev faded quietly) and he will be Russia's president for life, or until he decides to "retire". Many in the world, view him as a ruthless, murderous dictator.
As a direct result of the USSR's catastrophic downfall, Mr. Putin (& others) surely blame "Western Democracies" (especially Europe & the U.S.) rather than their own poorly managed government. Communist China, (their ally), could not be held responsible at all, and "Russia" likely has little concern with China (other than covid19), these days.
Because of this history, Mr. Putin, almost certainly harbors a deeply seated resentment (even hidden hatred?) against us and must enjoy nothing more than to witness & contribute to our internal strife/division, with an impending downfall of the "Beacon of Freedom" we represent to the world.o_O
My thing is merely speculation that should we fall into internal strife we may see the true people behind the curtain. This is why I prepared as best case I don't need the stuff but when a hurricane hits I do.
 
41 - 60 of 105 Posts
Top