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%
61 - 80 of 105 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,430 Posts
Would you rather 3 cities to rule the vote or while entirely unequal but everyone's vote counts for something? I would rather a vote worth 2/5 of someone in wyoming if it meant their votes counted for something.

Part of why people in cali and other states feel their vote isn't counted for much of anything is because they force their electorates to vote based on popular vote of the state or general population vote. This means that in california because the cities are bigger if you win los Angeles you don't need to campaign to the rural and urban areas as all that matters is the one city.
That's where people live. Might as well land owners of thousands of acres get their own electoral vote then. Latest I know, people vote, not the land.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #62
That's where people live. Might as well land owners of thousands of acres get their own electoral vote then. Latest I know, people vote, not the land.
It's not about people or land. It's about representation. The founding fathers wanted everyone to be represented not just land and not just people. They knew clumps of people would have similiar wants and knew if cities ruled by majority vote it would become city states.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
719 Posts
It's not about people or land. It's about representation. The founding fathers wanted everyone to be represented not just land and not just people. They knew clumps of people would have similiar wants and knew if cities ruled by majority vote it would become city states.
That is exactly what has occured. The cities voted one way, and the rest voted another. The electoral college is not fair nor is it needed. If you want every vote to count, you either go by popular vote, or you split the electoral votes (like some states already do).

I'm sick of hearing this crap about every vote counts. It does not, and will not, until the system is changed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #64
That is exactly what has occured. The cities voted one way, and the rest voted another. The electoral college is not fair nor is it needed. If you want every vote to count, you either go by popular vote, or you split the electoral votes (like some states already do).

I'm sick of hearing this crap about every vote counts. It does not, and will not, until the system is changed.
Actually we need to revert it back Dems changed it to state take all and it originally was designed to be split
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,430 Posts
Actually we need to revert it back Dems changed it to state take all and it originally was designed to be split

Yeah, lets do that. Keeping in mind, that you are effectivelly saying the MAJORITY and Popular vote will be the deciding factor, in a split system too. Because if you are implying a town of 500 should get the same electoral votes as a city of 3 million, then YOU ARE making the majority's votes not count.

I recommend studying democratic election systems that set of course thresholds on % for the winner, and then also help all the runners to get representation (with a min. threshold). This way, a NON 2 PARTY SYSTEM is encouraged, and most get a piece of the pie, and temporary non partisan coalitions form. While still having the rightful way of the MAJORITY of the PEOPLE decide. As it should be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #66
Yeah, lets do that. Keeping in mind, that you are effectivelly saying the MAJORITY and Popular vote will be the deciding factor, in a split system too. Because if you are implying a town of 500 should get the same electoral votes as a city of 3 million, then YOU ARE making the majority's votes not count.
You need to pick up a history book at look at how it was supposed to be arranged
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,430 Posts
You need to pick up a history book at look at how it was supposed to be arranged

I do not need to, 231 years ago was NOT written also that women could vote. Neither was there the civil rights act, neither, neither..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #68
I do not need to, 300 years ago also women was NOT written they could vote. Neither was there the civil rights acts, neither, neither..
Lol. Again you gotta pick up a book on history. Most of the major founding fathers actually wanted away with slavery and wanted female votes they may of set it otherwise but only to unite the states and leave that morale battle for later. The founding fathers were probably some of the most forward thinkers of their time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,430 Posts
Lol. Again you gotta pick up a book on history. Most of the major founding fathers actually wanted away with slavery and wanted female votes they may of set it otherwise but only to unite the states and leave that morale battle for later. The founding fathers were probably some of the most forward thinkers of their time.
You mean the founding fathers obliged with what the MAJORITY wanted at the time? LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
You mean the founding fathers obliged with what the MAJORITY wanted at the time? LOL
The founding fathers were brilliant. Electoral college is the only way small states/rural areas have a say in this countries elections. Otherwise, we would be ruled by NY, CA, TX, FL. The other fact you have to remember is that we are a Republic, not a Democracy.
If you open the article below, please scan down to read it completely.
America Is a Republic, Not a Democracy
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
593 Posts
The founding fathers were brilliant. Electoral college is the only way small states/rural areas have a say in this countries elections. Otherwise, we would be ruled by NY, CA, TX, FL. The other fact you have to remember is that we are a Republic, not a Democracy.
If you open the article below, please scan down to read it completely.
America Is a Republic, Not a Democracy
With All Due Respect to my Fellow Americans & Forum members; our founding fathers attempted to make the wisest electoral decisions possible, given their pre-abolition of slavery time period view, as well as a very limited glimpse of the millions upon millions of people our country would grow to encompass. However still, there was much disagreement & alternate proposals for choosing our president, before a compromise consensus finally came about, including having Congress choose our president (which as we know, did not pass).
"America is a Republic, Not a Democracy" as an overall statement, is a necessary truth for our country, although the article itself seems to be an extremely lengthy diatribe against the premise of democracy. (one should note, fwiw, the Heritage Foundation is a right wing "think tank" organization with historically partisan points of view).
"Direct Democracy", as mentioned, (again, also considering our current tremendous population), would likely be extremely unworkable, thus we have always had our U.S. Congress (the legislative branch, intended to be an integral part of our "checks & balances" system)...(minus the corruption of the (n)money(n) affecting All political partieso_O). Our U.S. House of Representatives and Especially our U.S. Senate comprised of Two Senators per STATE, regardless of population, make up our necessary "Republic" form of representation of the people.

(please note; our President does not & must not Rule the United States...ever.(y)

Therefore: Our President, Our Chosen Leader For ALL of OUR PEOPLE, Need/Ought Not to be chosen by our States, whether it be NY or FL...OH or CA...SC or OR...WA or MS...RI or TX...AZ or IN or on & on & on. Our President, unlike our Congress, must serve/lead everyone (not just WI or WV etc, etc) and should be chosen By the People and For the People.
This is simply my nonpartisan view of how We the People should select the occupant of Our White House, every four years.:coffee:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
593 Posts
Methinks Cities, Counties, States & our Federal Government are "ruled" by the People who bother to always be educated/involved & vote...especially in the "midterms", when the White House is not on the ballot. That would be democracy in action, forming our republic representation.(y)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
593 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
As stated above -
"Our President, unlike our Congress, must serve/lead everyone (not just WI or WV etc, etc) and should be chosen By the People and For the People. "

Yet that is not the case.
If only a list was available at the poles and I could just pick one.
BUT no it has to be one of two parties.
But I have to endure weeks of ads, and sign, and billboards, and crap leading up to the election.
Funny how you can spend hundreds of millions to get a job that pays less than half a million!!!
AND wow what "they" could do with that money instead - food for the hungry, clothes for the needy, shelter for the homeless. But that's the other country we have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
With All Due Respect to my Fellow Americans & Forum members; our founding fathers attempted to make the wisest electoral decisions possible, given their pre-abolition of slavery time period view, as well as a very limited glimpse of the millions upon millions of people our country would grow to encompass. However still, there was much disagreement & alternate proposals for choosing our president, before a compromise consensus finally came about, including having Congress choose our president (which as we know, did not pass).
"America is a Republic, Not a Democracy" as an overall statement, is a necessary truth for our country, although the article itself seems to be an extremely lengthy diatribe against the premise of democracy. (one should note, fwiw, the Heritage Foundation is a right wing "think tank" organization with historically partisan points of view).
"Direct Democracy", as mentioned, (again, also considering our current tremendous population), would likely be extremely unworkable, thus we have always had our U.S. Congress (the legislative branch, intended to be an integral part of our "checks & balances" system)...(minus the corruption of the (n)money(n) affecting All political partieso_O). Our U.S. House of Representatives and Especially our U.S. Senate comprised of Two Senators per STATE, regardless of population, make up our necessary "Republic" form of representation of the people.

(please note; our President does not & must not Rule the United States...ever.(y)

Therefore: Our President, Our Chosen Leader For ALL of OUR PEOPLE, Need/Ought Not to be chosen by our States, whether it be NY or FL...OH or CA...SC or OR...WA or MS...RI or TX...AZ or IN or on & on & on. Our President, unlike our Congress, must serve/lead everyone (not just WI or WV etc, etc) and should be chosen By the People and For the People.
This is simply my nonpartisan view of how We the People should select the occupant of Our White House, every four years.:coffee:
I was agreeing with you 100% until your last paragraph. We the people select our congressmen and senators whom we give the power to to write our laws. We the people select the electors to choose a president. This is how a Republic works. Your method is a true democracy, and as such, we the people should also vote on the laws, not some congressman/woman. In a true democracy, there would be no need for a congress/senate. You can't have it both ways.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
As stated above -
"Our President, unlike our Congress, must serve/lead everyone (not just WI or WV etc, etc) and should be chosen By the People and For the People. "

Yet that is not the case.
If only a list was available at the poles and I could just pick one.
BUT no it has to be one of two parties.
But I have to endure weeks of ads, and sign, and billboards, and crap leading up to the election.
Funny how you can spend hundreds of millions to get a job that pays less than half a million!!!
AND wow what "they" could do with that money instead - food for the hungry, clothes for the needy, shelter for the homeless. But that's the other country we have.
They waste all that money to get elected because they want the power of being part of the Washington establishment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
So true and yet THAT is not what we need!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Call it conspiracy theory, or what ever, but when a group, pick any party, will back any other of the same party EVEN when they know they are either lying or look really stupid, WTF? They never break ranks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
The amounts of money spent on the presidential race is truly staggering, as is the amounts being talked about on contesting the Georgia senate run-offs in january. As ctxdock noted, those funds could be used far more productively for all citizens, but unfortunately they will be spent trying to influence voters instead.
 
61 - 80 of 105 Posts
Top