(05-23-2017 11:24 AM)solohawks Wrote:  the big cities don't get to bully the small population areas.

What do cities have to do with anything???

It was always about states, ie a union of states.

(05-23-2017 11:28 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:24 AM)solohawks Wrote:  the big cities don't get to bully the small population areas.

What do cities have to do with anything???

It was always about states, ie a union of states.

States with big cities would bully states without them.

You can deny it if you like but you are ignoring states like New York, Illinois, and Minnesota where NYC, Chicago, and Minnesota-St Paul where all you have to do is run up the margin in the big city to win state wide elections

Many states are culturally diverse places. Eastern NC is much different than Western NC and thus deserves unique representation that their communities get to vote on. Having Raleigh, Charlotte, and Greensboro decide everything for everyone in the state would be awful and create a lot of unrest.

(05-23-2017 11:32 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Eastern NC is much different than Western NC and thus deserves unique representation that their communities get to vote on. Having Raleigh, Charlotte, and Greensboro decide everything for everyone in the state would be awful and create a lot of unrest.

But that's not what would happen.

Eastern would have several candidates on the ballot. If those candidates were some of the best candidates in the race, then one (or more) of NC's federal representatives would happen to come from Eastern.

Done and done!

(05-23-2017 11:36 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:32 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Eastern NC is much different than Western NC and thus deserves unique representation that their communities get to vote on. Having Raleigh, Charlotte, and Greensboro decide everything for everyone in the state would be awful and create a lot of unrest.

But that's not what would happen.

Eastern would have several candidates on the ballot. If those candidates were some of the best candidates in the race, then one (or more) of NC's federal representatives would happen to come from Eastern.

Done and done!

But since Raleigh Charlotte and Greensboro have more votes all Eastern candidates would lose to Central candidates. You severely underestimate the power of "the devil you know v. the devil you don't." People vote for their own. While party affiliation seems to trump all now, there is still a major geographic factor that is going to come into play.

There is a reason Pat McCrory was the first Governor from Charlotte in forever...whenever a Charlotte candidate ran, the rest of the state ganged up against him because they did not want the big city to control the governor's mansion.

(05-23-2017 11:41 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Raleigh Charlotte and Greensboro have more votes all Eastern candidates would lose to Central candidates

You are falsely assuming that voters from Raleigh, Charlotte, and Greensboro would not vote for a candidate that happened to be from Eastern, even if he/she was the best candidate on the ballot.

That is bunk.


I would definitely vote for a federal rep that happened to be from rural Minn, if he/she was one of the best X candidates on the ballot. (saying X because I don't know how many Minn would have, in such a system)

(05-23-2017 11:36 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:32 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Eastern NC is much different than Western NC and thus deserves unique representation that their communities get to vote on. Having Raleigh, Charlotte, and Greensboro decide everything for everyone in the state would be awful and create a lot of unrest.

But that's not what would happen.

Eastern would have several candidates on the ballot. If those candidates were some of the best candidates in the race, then one (or more) of NC's federal representatives would happen to come from Eastern.

Done and done!

Why would people in the triangle, Greensboro, or Charlotte vote for someone that represents the interests of farmers and commercial fishermen 350 miles away over a representative closer to them that has the interest of banks and manufacturing companies in mind?

Here's a simple image that illustrates why your ideas are so bad.

(05-23-2017 11:43 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:41 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Raleigh Charlotte and Greensboro have more votes all Eastern candidates would lose to Central candidates

You are falsely assuming that voters from Raleigh, Charlotte, and Greensboro would not vote for a candidate that happened to be from Eastern, even if he/she was the best candidate on the ballot.

That is bunk.


I would definitely vote for a federal rep that happened to be from rural Minn, if he/she was one of the best X candidates on the ballot. (saying X because I don't know how many Minn would have, in such a system)

and you are ignorantly assuming that voters would not vote for someone who runs on positions that matter to them. Voters in Charlotte share very few of the same concerns as voters in Stumpy Point.

(05-23-2017 11:46 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Why would people in the triangle, Greensboro, or Charlotte vote for someone that represents the interests of farmers and commercial fishermen 350 miles away

Each of the X federal representatives for North Carolina represents the interests of ........ North Carolina.

That a particular candidate for federal representative comes from Eastern, would have no affect on his/her ability to represent the state in Washington.

(05-23-2017 11:49 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Voters in Charlotte share very few of the same concerns as voters in Stumpy Point.

How do they possibly manage to vote on senators, in NC???

(05-23-2017 11:50 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:49 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Voters in Charlotte share very few of the same concerns as voters in Stumpy Point.

How do they possibly manage to vote on senators, in NC???

I guess you think the OP and subsequent discussion is about "senatoral disctricts"

Bless your heart you poor soul.

(05-23-2017 11:43 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:41 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Raleigh Charlotte and Greensboro have more votes all Eastern candidates would lose to Central candidates

You are falsely assuming that voters from Raleigh, Charlotte, and Greensboro would not vote for a candidate that happened to be from Eastern, even if he/she was the best candidate on the ballot.

That is bunk.


I would definitely vote for a federal rep that happened to be from rural Minn, if he/she was one of the best X candidates on the ballot. (saying X because I don't know how many Minn would have, in such a system)

So just because you personally would not vote that way means "its bunk"

But Im the obstinate one?

In the 2014 GOP primary for the congressional seat I was in the Wilmington candidate lost to the rural candidate because the rural counties voted against the big city candidate. I remember it well because Woody White, the guy that lost, said this seat belongs in Wilmington. That didn't sit well with the voters outside of Wilmington and he lost. Had Wilmington been like a Chicago, NYC, or Minneapolis, a raw majority of the district/state, he would have won.

You cannot honestly look at Illinois and tell me that Chicago does not run the place and puts their people in positions of state power.

(05-23-2017 11:49 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:46 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Why would people in the triangle, Greensboro, or Charlotte vote for someone that represents the interests of farmers and commercial fishermen 350 miles away

Each of the X federal representatives for North Carolina represents the interests of ........ North Carolina.

That a particular candidate for federal representative comes from Eastern, would have no affect on his/her ability to represent the state in Washington.

Do you understand the difference between the Senate and House of Representatives?

Go back to 4th grade and then you may be informed enough to participate in a grown up discussion.

(05-23-2017 11:49 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:46 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Why would people in the triangle, Greensboro, or Charlotte vote for someone that represents the interests of farmers and commercial fishermen 350 miles away

Each of the X federal representatives for North Carolina represents the interests of ........ North Carolina.

That a particular candidate for federal representative comes from Eastern, would have no affect on his/her ability to represent the state in Washington.

Congressional representatives are supposed to representing their specific portion of the state. You are from a geographically big state, I am surprised you are ignoring the obvious and stating that your state is culturally heterogeneous. Not all states are like Rhode Island and Vermont.

Look at Maine, Northern Maine is much different than southern Maine and thus deserves specific representation to reflect those differences.

Congressmen are not serving the same role as senators for a very good reason. Senators were also originally appointed by the state government which again reflected the cultural diversity of the state.

I would dare say a log cabin born backwoods roughneck like Abraham Lincoln would never win a state wide election where Chicago controls who wins. They would have preferred Douglas.

(05-23-2017 11:52 AM)solohawks Wrote:  In the 2014 GOP primary for the congressional seat I was in the Wilmington candidate lost to the rural candidate because the rural counties voted against the big city candidate.

So you just provided an example that exactly contradicts what you're claiming ...

(05-23-2017 11:52 AM)solohawks Wrote:  You cannot honestly look at Illinois and tell me that Chicago does not run the place and puts their people in positions of state power.

Almost 13M American voters live in Illinois. Only around 3M American voters live in Chicago.

Clearly, what you're suggesting is untrue. Keep in mind, Chicago suburbs (like Milwaukee suburbs, and like MSP suburbs) are more conservative.

(05-23-2017 11:53 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Do you understand the difference between the Senate and House of Representatives?

I get that you needed a deflection, in order to buy yourself time to think of something substantive to respond with. You should have plenty of time now.

(05-23-2017 11:57 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Congressional representatives are supposed to representing their specific portion of the state.

You're just stating how the system currently works -- that's not a validation of the underlying philosophy used to justify why the system was made that way, in the first place.

I reject the premise of an arbitrary, artificially crafted sub-state boundary, and that such a boundary deserves an independent federal representative.

(05-23-2017 11:59 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:52 AM)solohawks Wrote:  In the 2014 GOP primary for the congressional seat I was in the Wilmington candidate lost to the rural candidate because the rural counties voted against the big city candidate.

So you just provided an example that exactly contradicts what you're claiming ...

(05-23-2017 11:52 AM)solohawks Wrote:  You cannot honestly look at Illinois and tell me that Chicago does not run the place and puts their people in positions of state power.

Almost 13M American voters live in Illinois. Only around 3M American voters live in Chicago.

Clearly, what you're suggesting is untrue. Keep in mind, Chicago suburbs (like Milwaukee suburbs, and like MSP suburbs) are more conservative.

There are almost 13 million people in IL, but millions are under 18, green card holders, visa holders, or convicted felons.

(05-23-2017 12:02 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:53 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Do you understand the difference between the Senate and House of Representatives?

I get that you needed a deflection, in order to buy yourself time to think of something substantive to respond with. You should have plenty of time now.

This entire discussion has been about congressional districts. Congressional districts are represented by Representatives, not Senators. Why don't you tell me why you brought up the means by which NC elects Senators in a discussion that has been entirely based on congressional districts and Representatives?

(05-23-2017 12:05 PM)Niner National Wrote:  There are almost 13 million people in IL, but millions are under 18, green card holders, visa holders, or convicted felons.

Same with Chicago, probably more so.

(05-23-2017 12:07 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Why don't you tell me why you brought up the means by which NC elects Senators in a discussion that has been entirely based on congressional districts and Representatives?

It proves that a statewide election to elect a federal representative for the state of NC is not only possible, it's reasonable and has been done for many years.

(05-23-2017 11:59 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 11:52 AM)solohawks Wrote:  In the 2014 GOP primary for the congressional seat I was in the Wilmington candidate lost to the rural candidate because the rural counties voted against the big city candidate.

So you just provided an example that exactly contradicts what you're claiming ...

(05-23-2017 11:52 AM)solohawks Wrote:  You cannot honestly look at Illinois and tell me that Chicago does not run the place and puts their people in positions of state power.

Almost 13M American voters live in Illinois. Only around 3M American voters live in Chicago.

Clearly, what you're suggesting is untrue. Keep in mind, Chicago suburbs (like Milwaukee suburbs, and like MSP suburbs) are more conservative.

They ganged up against the big city candidate. that happens in NC a lot and is unable to happen it Illinois due to Chicago being so massive.

(05-23-2017 12:11 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 12:07 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Why don't you tell me why you brought up the means by which NC elects Senators in a discussion that has been entirely based on congressional districts and Representatives?

It proves that a statewide election to elect a federal representative for the state of NC is not only possible, it's reasonable and has been done for many years.

Which any 4th grader can tell you only works when paired with congressional districts and Representatives.

Our founders were much, much wiser than you and included the House of Representatives in the US Constitution expressly to give a voice to everybody.