HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » This is WHY we have a Rea...

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 03:20 AM

This is WHY we have a Reality TV host the POTUS

38 replies, 3962 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 38 replies Author Time Post
Reply This is WHY we have a Reality TV host the POTUS (Original post)
pbmus Nov 2017 OP
pnwmom Nov 2017 #1
yuiyoshida Nov 2017 #5
rogue emissary Nov 2017 #11
C Moon Nov 2017 #2
pbmus Nov 2017 #3
C Moon Nov 2017 #4
RhodeIslandOne Nov 2017 #25
Le Gaucher Nov 2017 #6
Little Star Nov 2017 #8
pbmus Nov 2017 #9
Le Gaucher Nov 2017 #10
Progressive dog Nov 2017 #12
Le Gaucher Nov 2017 #13
Progressive dog Nov 2017 #14
Le Gaucher Nov 2017 #15
Progressive dog Nov 2017 #16
pbmus Nov 2017 #17
Progressive dog Nov 2017 #18
pbmus Nov 2017 #19
Progressive dog Nov 2017 #20
pbmus Nov 2017 #21
Progressive dog Nov 2017 #22
pbmus Nov 2017 #23
Progressive dog Nov 2017 #24
pbmus Nov 2017 #26
Progressive dog Nov 2017 #28
bigbrother05 Nov 2017 #34
karynnj Nov 2017 #29
dpibel Nov 2017 #32
lapfog_1 Nov 2017 #31
joshcryer Nov 2017 #35
genxlib Nov 2017 #7
VOX Nov 2017 #27
StevieM Nov 2017 #30
lunamagica Nov 2017 #33
pbmus Nov 2017 #36
lunamagica Nov 2017 #38
lunamagica Nov 2017 #37

Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 03:44 AM

1. And 2.7 million of us had our votes not count at all.

The 2.7 million more Hillary had than DT.

We were all shocked when Bush was put into office even though Gore won half a million more votes.

This time it was 2.7 million, and the media just shrugged.

What's it going to be next time? 5 million more? Eight?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 05:31 AM

5. What will likely happen is that

only rich white male land owners will be allowed to vote. the rest of us , not so much. This is provided we don't vote out the Republican bastards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yuiyoshida (Reply #5)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 02:50 PM

11. That's why they call themselves originalist when it comes to the constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 04:38 AM

2. Is this true? (I don't trust memes). I'm trying to verify it, but so far have not been able to.

If so, this is powerful (and dreadful) stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 04:40 AM

3. Ok, the math is in the meme...

Use the calculator on your puter..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Reply #3)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 04:42 AM

4. There are more polite ways to communicate with your fellow Democratic party folks.


Than just being rude.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Reply #2)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:13 PM

25. It probably is....

 

But you could also make similar arguments about Texas and Rhode Island.

I support a national popular vote, though. The election is campaigned on TV, not on the stump anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 05:54 AM

6. That is because they get 2 senators.

 

They have one representative and 2 senators.. Thus 3 EV

California has 53 reps, proportional to their population.. But they too only get 2 senators.. Thus 55 EV

Unfair - yes. But that is the shit we have.. Can't change it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Le Gaucher (Reply #6)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 02:13 PM

8. I bet if enough people.....

demonstrated and marched in the streets we could change it. And that is exactly what we need to do instead of having a defeatist attitude.

As President Obama said: Yes we can!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Le Gaucher (Reply #6)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 02:28 PM

9. The people should decide with there vote, not the electoral college...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Reply #9)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 02:33 PM

10. Electoral college itself is rooted in slavery

 

The colonists wanted slave population to be included the result but not allow slaves to vote.

Once slavery was abolished.. Jim crow laws played the same role

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Le Gaucher (Reply #10)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 06:57 PM

12. Slave states got .6 votes for every slave

That did not just apply to President. The electoral college was to benefit states like Rhode Island, with small populations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #12)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 07:47 PM

13. Small state benefit is the 2 senators per state.

 

The EV is still proportional to the population.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Le Gaucher (Reply #13)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 08:19 PM

14. The EV is NOT proportional to population

and never has been.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #14)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 09:05 PM

15. If you remove the 2 senatorial votes per state.. It is.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Le Gaucher (Reply #15)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 09:10 PM

16. And if you paint red over with blue

then it's red but if you don't it's still blue. Truth can't be papered over by lies that might have been. Facts are facts and what if's don't change lies into facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #16)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 03:01 AM

17. Nothing progressive about a pre civil war amendment.

Last edited Tue Nov 14, 2017, 03:49 PM - Edit history (1)

The electoral college was established by the constitutional convention because?

During that time, there was no formal mandatory education. Many people did not know how to read or write, and had difficulty understanding the complexities of their newly formed nation. For that reason, they needed to think about how to best elect a president. It should be recognized that most people would never leave the town in which they were born. How, then, would someone living in Virginia know how competent a person from Vermont might be?   To eliminate the possibility of electing someone who might not be the best person for the job, a solution was created, the Electoral College. People would elect their representatives, who would be local. The governors would appoint the senators, who would best represent the state. These combined groups would each cast votes to elect the president. The citizens would vote first. Then, of the candidates who   received the largest number of votes, the elected officials would cast their votes, thus ensuring the best leader possible became the President of the United States of America.  Many believe that the Electoral College has outlived its usefulness, since we now have the telephone, radio, television, and the Internet...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Reply #17)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 03:39 PM

18. 1804?? We didn't have a Constitutional caonvention in 1804

Amendment?? No the original.
Our mandatory education doesn't seem to have worked well. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #18)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 03:48 PM

19. ....

‘The closest Congress has come to amending the Electoral College since 1804 was during the 91st Congress (1969–1971). H.J. Res. 681 proposed the direct election of a President and Vice President, requiring a run off when no candidate received more than 40 percent of the vote. The resolution passed the House in 1969, but failed to pass the Senate.’

http://history.house.gov/Institution/Electoral-College/Electoral-College/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Reply #19)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 03:54 PM

20. Learn to read for understanding.

The actual Constitution is available and short, the amendments are additions-the original wording has not been changed. It was not written in 1804 and how each state gets electors has not been amended. Now you just need to figure out what the wording you posted actually means.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #20)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:00 PM

21. Your rudeness is only surpassed by your ignorance

‘The Twelfth Amendment (Amendment XII) to the United States Constitution provides the procedure for electing the President and Vice President. It replaced the procedure provided in Article II, Section 1, Clause 3, by which the Electoral College originally functioned. Problems with the original procedure arose in the elections of 1796 and 1800.

The Twelfth Amendment refined the process whereby a President and a Vice President are elected by the Electoral College. The amendment was proposed by the Congress on December 9, 1803, and was ratified by the requisite three-fourths of state legislatures on June 15, 1804.’

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Reply #21)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:05 PM

22. Pretend to yourself that the amendment has something to do

with how many electoral votes each state gets, but don't try to sell it to anyone who has actually read the Constitution. Now that is rude.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #22)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:09 PM

23. WTF...

‘The United States Electoral College is the mechanism established by the United States Constitution for the indirect election of the president of the United States and vice president of the United States. Citizens of the United States vote in each state and the District of Columbia at a general election to choose a slate of "electors" pledged to vote for a particular party's candidate.[1][2]

The Twelfth Amendment requires each elector to cast one vote for president and another vote for vice president.[3] In each state and the District of Columbia, electors are chosen every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, and then meet to cast ballots on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December.[4] The candidates who receive a majority of electoral votes among the states are elected president and vice president of the United States when the Electoral College vote is certified by Congress in January.

Each state chooses electors, equal in number to that state's combined total of senators and representatives. There are a total of 538 electors, corresponding to the 435 representatives and 100 senators, plus the three electors for the District of Columbia as provided by the Twenty-third Amendment.[5] The Constitution bars any federal official, elected or appointed, from being an elector. The Office of the Federal Register is charged with administering the Electoral College.[6] Since the mid-19th century when all electors have been popularly chosen, the Electoral College has elected the candidate who received the most popular votes nationwide, except in four elections: 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016. In 1824, there were six states in which electors were legislatively appointed, rather than popularly elected, so the true national popular vote is uncertain; the electors failed to select a winning candidate, so the matter was decided by the House of Representatives.[7]’

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_States)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Reply #23)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:11 PM

24. Still having trouble understanding that

the number of electoral votes per state favors the small states and that hasn't changed, are you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #24)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:21 PM

26. I am not confused about the stupidity of the electoral college..

In today’s world...I am only concerned that your understanding is limited to keeping such an antiquated system in control of electing our most important people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Reply #26)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:23 PM

28. That's why you expanded your original post

Very deceptive changes, probably copied and pasted. You forgot to change the heading. LOL
Now you need to change how Senators were chosen in the original Constitution, governors is not correct. I guess I was wrong about the copying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Reply #23)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:49 PM

34. Prior to that amendment, the Prez & VP weren't a single ticket

Electors could, in theory, elect from different parties. Also, for clarity, there weren't 100 Senators when the 12th was ratified, so the total # of electors has changed through the years, but still is one for each member of Congress.

The intent was that the Electors would be citizens of some standing that could potentially override the ignorance of the voting masses. While not tested, most legal experts agree that state laws requiring Electors to vote based on how the votes were cast in their state, there is no requirement for an Elector to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Le Gaucher (Reply #15)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:26 PM

29. With them in, it is NOT proportional

If you wanted to make it fairer, make the EV equal to the number of representatives. Said by an overweighted resident of a very good, but very small state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Le Gaucher (Reply #15)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:37 PM

32. How do you figure?

The link you provide gives me an error.

But, assuming the numbers in the meme are correct, Wyoming gets one representative per 584,153 people.

California gets 53 representatives per 38,800,000 people. 38.8 million/53 = one representative per 732,075 people.

So a Californian is worth less in the House as well as the Senate.

This is a function of the fact that no state can have zero representatives, but the number of seats in the House has been frozen since 1913. If the House had been permitted to grow to keep stable the number of people represented by each member of the House, there'd be about a thousand members (rough number; I worked it out exactly a while back, but don't recall the number).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Le Gaucher (Reply #6)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:37 PM

31. we can split California into 2 or 3 states

Increase the Senate by 4 people (most likely all Democrats). House stays the same. EV also increases by at least 4 votes for CA.

Doesn't fix things entirely but helps... and without needing a constitutional change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #31)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 05:00 PM

35. Nothern CA would be a Republican stronghold.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Nov 13, 2017, 08:31 AM

7. Is is actually much worse than just that

Consider...

The popular vote was won by the Democrats in 6 of the last 7 elections (Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Bush, Obama, Obama, Clinton) yet we only held office for 4 of those 7. Further, the only "winning" Republican was an unjustified incumbent buoyed by an unjustified war.

The Senate is horribly skewed due to the size of states. The last time I checked, there were 46 Democrats elected by 67.8 million votes and 54 Republicans elected by 47.1 million votes. If the representation was relative to the voting, there would be 59 Democratic Senators.

The House of Representatives is so gerrymandered that it is estimated that Democrats would need to win by a margin of 5% overall in order to carry enough seats to gain control. In 2012, Democratic Representatives had more votes (59.65 to 58.23 million) yet still Republicans held 234-201 seats. This is especially insidious because they use these numbers to brag about a mandate to bully the agenda. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/feb/19/steny-hoyer/steny-hoyer-house-democrats-won-majority-2012-popu/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:22 PM

27. Basics: Wyoming has two U.S. senators, same as California.

So they’re dead-equal in the lawmaking and procedural process, but the Wyoming senators enjoying more than a 66% voting “value” compared to California senators.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 04:33 PM

30. A totally corrupted FBI targeting the Democratic candidate was an even bigger factor. (eom)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)


Response to lunamagica (Reply #33)

Tue Nov 14, 2017, 07:40 PM

36. What doesnt make sense?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Reply #36)

Wed Nov 15, 2017, 02:14 AM

38. That the majority of voters don't elect the POTUS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunamagica (Reply #33)

Reply to this thread