The (Current year) General Political/Salma Hayek discussion Thread Part V

[ghuns]

That is NOT an Arabian horse.

 

[BugI02]

Man that is terrifying. They’re either evil or ignorant.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/eliz...-the-electoral-college-before-her-second-term

Elizabeth Warren Says She’ll Abolish The Electoral College Before Her Second Term

Before or after she declares herself 'president for life'?

 

[KG1]

Elizabeth Warren Says She’ll Abolish The Electoral College Before Her Second Term

Before or after she declares herself 'president for life'?

This should be quite telling for people that don't live in urban population centers that they should'nt have equal representation of which the EC currently provides them and was designed for.

 

[actaeon277]

Ted Cruz retweeted Carpe Donktum... an excellent thread:



https://twitter.com/CarpeDonktum/status/1201705886261170177

 

[Kutnupe14]

This should be quite telling for people that don't live in urban population centers that they should'nt have equal representation of which the EC currently provides them and was designed for.

IMO. It's kinda hard to argue against a presidency based on popular vote. Thought it's a moot point currently.

 

[printcraft]

IMO. It's kinda hard to argue against a presidency based on popular vote. Thought it's a moot point currently.

 

[Kutnupe14]

You're clear on the "moot point," right?

 

[Hatin Since 87]

IMO. It's kinda hard to argue against a presidency based on popular vote. Thought it's a moot point currently.

Why currently? Are you a supporter of popular vote for elections?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Why currently? Are you a supporter of popular vote for elections?

No. My thoughts on the ability of the electorate are well documented. But that does not mean that I don't recognize, that as far as fairness and equality go, popular vote seems the obvious answer. At some point, I can see it being changed.

 

[T.Lex]

"They" convinced people to require popular election of senators. That was a mistake that people have totally forgotten about.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

No. My thoughts on the ability of the electorate are well documented. But that does not mean that I don't recognize, that as far as fairness and equality go, popular vote seems the obvious answer. At some point, I can see it being changed.

I hope not. That’s how we end up with Salem witch trials. The minority should never be ruled by the majority.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I hope not. That’s how we end up with Salem witch trials. The minority should never be ruled by the majority.

With the amount of power now resting with the presidency (and well before Trump), that is a sound belief. However, there was certainly a time when it should have been that way, with extra protections extended to the states. But that's from a state's rights perspective, and that idea jumped the shark a long time ago.

 

[jbombelli]

"They" convinced people to require popular election of senators. That was a mistake that people have totally forgotten about.

This. So much this. It's one of the biggest mistakes this country ever made.

 

[jamil]

IMO. It's kinda hard to argue against a presidency based on popular vote. Thought it's a moot point currently.

It's quite easy to argue against a presidency based on popular vote.

 

[jamil]

No. My thoughts on the ability of the electorate are well documented. But that does not mean that I don't recognize, that as far as fairness and equality go, popular vote seems the obvious answer. At some point, I can see it being changed.

Fairness and equality are complicated.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Fairness and equality are complicated.

No, they kinda aren't, at least not so far popular voting is concerned. In making a decision, one person, one vote... there's nothing more fair, nor more equal. Change my mind.

 

[jamil]

There's a reasonable balance between federalism and central power. We've gone way too far towards the latter and far away from the former. States shouldn't have the power to tyrannize it's people. There needs to be reasonable regulation of commerce between states, the nations borders need protected, the right of US citizens need to be protected. But the federal government shouldn't have the power to assert the values of one sect over the other, population density or not. Each states decide its own values, within broad limits. That's not completely fair. There isn't a completely fair. But it's the fairest.

 

[Phase2]

No, they kinda aren't, at least not so far popular voting is concerned. In making a decision, one person, one vote... there's nothing more fair, nor more equal. Change my mind.

Can you explain the reasoning behind the Electoral College being established in the first place? If so, then you will have a starting point towards understanding.

 

[COOPADUP]

Sorry, but something seemed to be missing from this thread.

 

[jamil]

No, they kinda aren't, at least not so far popular voting is concerned. In making a decision, one person, one vote... there's nothing more fair, nor more equal. Change my mind.

The US is the most diverse nation on the planet. It's not fair to the rural cultures in Wyoming that California, just because of its sheer voting population, can assert its urban values. California should get to decide for itself what its values are. Even in California, it's not fair that the dense population centers should get to impose their urban values on the rural counties. For example: water rights. Rich lawns get watered. Farmers vie for every drop.

Ain't nothing fair. But freer is fairer. The founders had it right, that the fairest and freest system will have decentralized seats of power, closest to the people.