calfoxwc Posted September 1, 2012 Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 No, you quoted dick head who does reference me. No problem. I'd avoid hitching a wagon to his star. WSS ******************************** Which one did I quote from, Woodpecker or Heckbunker? The quote didn't reference you. I'm particular about things iike that, you know..... @@ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2012 No, you quoted dick head who does reference me. No problem. I'd avoid hitching a wagon to his star. WSS ******************************** Which one did I quote from, Woodpecker or Heckbunker? The quote didn't reference you. I'm particular about things iike that, you know..... @@ As I recall it was Saint. we're fine. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2012 http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/08/ending-work-for-welfare-bogus-measures-of-success Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 2, 2012 Report Share Posted September 2, 2012 blah blah blah blah blah blah But hey, it was good theater. And most people in that audience don't care about what's true. yes we do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I really can't stand this political theater. I was listening to NPR on Friday, and they had a lib and con arguing about Ryan's speech. Each side was saying the other one was making false claims. Well, clearly you're both just lying through your teeth and trying to make the other side look bad. Sucks that if I vote for someone else, it's just a waste. Can't wait to hear what comes out of the Democratic Pep Rally National Convention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I really can't stand this political theater. I was listening to NPR on Friday, and they had a lib and con arguing about Ryan's speech. Each side was saying the other one was making false claims. Well, clearly you're both just lying through your teeth and trying to make the other side look bad. Sucks that if I vote for someone else, it's just a waste. Can't wait to hear what comes out of the Democratic Pep Rally National Convention. I know how you feel. Both sides in this fight stink like an open cistern. Regardless of how you feel about Al Gore, I think he's right in that the electoral college should be abolished. It's a bullshit system. Popular vote is the only thing that should matter. Then third parties could have a realistic chance. Both the ndp and the gop can kiss my ass. I don't like this all in crap, where you have a checklist of agendas and if you don't love them all, every single one, and you don't hate the other party and THEIR checklist of agendas to the death, then you're not republican enough. Or you're not liberal enough. Whatever. It's stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 just more election manipulation dont mess with the college! rah rah! Essentially, the electoral college prevents politicians from states with higher populations from dominating those of lower populations. So, doing away with the electoral college would mean that folks in rural America no longer have a voice, as they don’t have near the numbers of voters as the cities do. Let’s face it, cities tend to vote democrat …so, naturally, Al Gore would be tickled pink if the electoral college were a thing of the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I know how you feel. Both sides in this fight stink like an open cistern. Regardless of how you feel about Al Gore, I think he's right in that the electoral college should be abolished. It's a bullshit system. Popular vote is the only thing that should matter. Then third parties could have a realistic chance. Both the ndp and the gop can kiss my ass. I don't like this all in crap, where you have a checklist of agendas and if you don't love them all, every single one, and you don't hate the other party and THEIR checklist of agendas to the death, then you're not republican enough. Or you're not liberal enough. Whatever. It's stupid. While I do agree that the college should be abolished, I think that popular vote being the only thing that matters is dangerous for minorities. I mean, in either case, what we have now is half of the country being pissed at whomever is in charge, and it ends up being a vicious cycle where everything gets blamed on the POTUS. I think the bigger problem is that Congress is completely unrepresentative of the people. You've got two parties that are diametrically opposed, and everyone in the middle gets screwed. We should switch to a parliamentary system, and give smaller groups of people a voice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 just more election manipulation dont mess with the college! rah rah! Essentially, the electoral college prevents politicians from states with higher populations from dominating those of lower populations. So, doing away with the electoral college would mean that folks in rural America no longer have a voice, as they don’t have near the numbers of voters as the cities do. Let’s face it, cities tend to vote democrat …so, naturally, Al Gore would be tickled pink if the electoral college were a thing of the past. Except the system is fucked. Your vote only matters if you live in Ohio, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Michigan, or Florida. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 because of the "swing states" ..... So? as an example of it not mattering, I live in a state where my vote to an R candidate is always gobbled up by a majority of dems that had rule here. But in light of voter fraud, (proven) I finally sense a change in the wind, and am looking forward to possibly seeing our 10 electoral votes go to the R guy! the electoral college system is proven and wont ever get changed I believe.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 Uh, so you're okay with my vote counting more than yours? I live in Ohio, and I would be pissed about the presidential election if I didn't live in a swing state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I like my system where people get weighted votes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 Uh, so you're okay with my vote counting more than yours? I live in Ohio, and I would be pissed about the presidential election if I didn't live in a swing state. well it wont keep me from voting anyways....To just say screw it - its unfair, and not vote isnt an answer either. stranger things may happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I like my system where people get weighted votes My link I had to check the term "weighted votes" and it parallels the US Electoral system too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 well it wont keep me from voting anyways....To just say screw it - its unfair, and not vote isnt an answer either. stranger things may happen? I'm not saying you shouldn't vote. I'm saying you should advocate for a change to a fairer system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 There is no fairer system. You want a different system, in popular vote? Then, you just want an advantage over elections. All those states like Neb, Montana, etc etc etc... won't have much of anything to do with deciding who the next president is. That isn't representation. It's the tyranny of the inner cities, which will go for the democrat give away to the gimme free ride slugs in our society. That is worse. Not better. Better is NOT better for only libs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 YEAH! More votes for our conservative farmers! More votes for real America! yeehaw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 No answer. Typical. Just a dimwitted woodpeckerhead change of subject as usual. Loser. Here's your song, stupidass: The Woodpecker Song Glenn Miller (Reginella Campagnola) (E. Di Lazzaro) He's up each morning bright and early To wake up all the neighborhood To bring to ev'ry boy and girlie His happy serenade on wood. Hear him pickin' out a melody Peck, peck, peckin' at the same old tree. He's as happy as a bumble bee All day long. To serenade your lady Just find a tree that's shady And when you hear that tick-a-tick-tick, tick-a-tick-tick Sing right along. Come on and try his rhythm And let your hearts beat with 'im Just listen to that tick-a-tick-tick, tick-a-tick-tick Happy little Woodpecker Song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 All those states like Neb, Montana, etc etc etc... won't have much of anything to do with deciding who the next president is. That isn't representation. It's the tyranny of the inner cities, which will go for the democrat give away to the gimme free ride slugs in our society. That is worse. Not better. Better is NOT better for only libs. Uh, right because Obama and Romney spend so much time on those states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 To me the college is more unfair giving those votes more weight than they actually carry. It should be one vote one person, no more no less. That's democracy, fellas, and if you get left out in the cold too bad for you. The people have spoken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I never thought I would agree with Al Gore, but I think the electoral college should go away. Just most votes wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I like the college because I'm in California and we're never in play so we don't have to sit through all of the stupid campaign ads. When I'm traveling and see what people in Ohio and Michigan and New Hampshire and Colorado have to go through, I feel lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I like the college because I'm in California and we're never in play so we don't have to sit through all of the stupid campaign ads. When I'm traveling and see what people in Ohio and Michigan and New Hampshire and Colorado have to go through, I feel lucky. I second that! OTOH I go back and forth with my opinion of the E C. If pure numbers, a straight vote, is the ideal then it's time to eliminate the Senate. If, in fact, we are at Association of free and independent states...... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I go back and forth too, but think it should probably be done away with. And if you eliminated the electoral college, you want to keep the Senate because it preserves the same idea. Rural/less populous states would still be over-represented in Congress. At the very least I think the early primary states should change every four years. More competition is almost always a good thing. Make them appeal to a broader audience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I go back and forth too, but think it should probably be done away with. And if you eliminated the electoral college, you want to keep the Senate because it preserves the same idea. Rural/less populous states would still be over-represented in Congress. Over represented? How so? I'm guessing you mean equal senators. Should they be over represented? At the very least I think the early primary states should change every four years. More competition is almost always a good thing. Make them appeal to a broader audience. That makes sense, but how do we do it? Lottery? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 Over-represented in the sense that Wyoming and California have the same numbers of Senators despite having populations of 568,000 and 37.6 million respectively. Christ, there are probably 568,000 people living within a three mile radius of my house. (And they're all on the freeway at the same time.) I don't know how you'd do the primaries. They'd just have to rotate their schedules somehow. But these are the little things that I think would help make our government more representative and elections more competitive. It's get rid of gerrymandered districts as well, and have a computer draw up the districts by population. If some members lose their districts or the makeup of their district changes, so be it. Then represent those people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 Over-represented in the sense that Wyoming and California have the same numbers of Senators despite having populations of 568,000 and 37.6 million respectively. Christ, there are probably 568,000 people living within a three mile radius of my house. (And they're all on the freeway at the same time.) in the Senate, yes. Are you proposing we eliminate that somehow? I don't know how you'd do the primaries. They'd just have to rotate their schedules somehow. But these are the little things that I think would help make our government more representative and elections more competitive. It's get rid of gerrymandered districts as well, and have a computer draw up the districts by population. If some members lose their districts or the makeup of their district changes, so be it. Then represent those people. Well that would be more egalitarian... I might think that you would be concerned with minorities losing some power. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 No, I'm not proposing that we eliminate the Senate. I'm saying the argument (one of them anyway) for the electoral college is that it makes candidates focus on rural areas and not just the big population centers. But that if you got rid of the electoral college rural states would still be overrepresented in the Senate, just less so in the presidential electoral process. Right now rural America has three advantages: the primary schedule (starts with three mostly rural states), the electoral college, and the Senate. And I'm less concerned with minorities losing fellow minority representation in Congress than I am with promoting greater competition for seats in Congress. Congress shouldn't be allowed to create its own system of self-preservation, or game it for partisan advantage. There will always be some of that, but it should be minimized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I like the college because I'm in California and we're never in play so we don't have to sit through all of the stupid campaign ads. When I'm traveling and see what people in Ohio and Michigan and New Hampshire and Colorado have to go through, I feel lucky. I live in Ohio and the ads are AWEFUL. Both sides just say what the other has done bad. No ads actaully say anything useful. And they are on ALL DAMN DAY. Especially from 4pm untill 11pm. I can't wait until this election is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted September 4, 2012 Report Share Posted September 4, 2012 I don't envy you. I was just in Michigan and Colorado and got another taste of it. It almost makes you wonder if they're trying to make people so disgusted that they stay home. You'd think there's got to be some point where it's so saturated that you get diminishing returns. Worst part? The campaign starts for real after Labor Day so you ain't seen nothing yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.