(11-12-2022 07:47 PM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 04:43 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 01:46 PM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 12:23 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 12:11 PM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  Like in 2016 when voters preferred Clinton over Trump.

Go back into your hole.

What an intelligent comeback. Please explain why it is OK for Trump to win when he loses the popular vote but it is stupid if Murkowsi does it.

Take a f*cking civics class where your teacher isnt trying to groom you into letting him pound you in the ass and you would learn the difference.

Keep me out of your fantasies involving you and Trump.

Sadly AKC, you'll find that many of the loudest mouths here have unresolved sexual feelings for public figures such as our former President, and the President of Ukraine.

(11-12-2022 08:21 PM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 08:04 PM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 05:08 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  AKC, surely you realize that the 'popular vote' is not an official thing. It means diddly and was only created out of curiosity.

Maybe you don't. I know that a lot of far lefties want it to count for something.

I am aware of how the electoral college works and that popular vote on a national level is irrelevant. And I'm not a far lefty just because I don't bow down to Trump, a person I concluded was full of crap and a horrible person long before he entered politics.

I think the EC is a stupid way to select the president but that's the system we have. It was created by people who didn't think the riffraff (non-white male land/humanowners) should vote at all.

I haven't had direct experience with ranked choice voting but it seems designed to elect someone that the majority can live with. If it keeps Sarah Palin out it did its job. If NY had it you might see a moderate Democrat and not AOC. And that would work for me as well.

Absolute whiff on Electoral College on your part. The EC was put in place so small states would have a voice in electing the President and VP. They used to run on their own not as a set. Otherwise, there would never be a need for Presidential candidates to hold rallys anywhere but large population areas.

We would all be subservient to large urban areas. Talk about disenfranchisement. Would most likely lead to a ton of malcontents.

Now I have to laugh at that, we certainly wouldn't want to do anything to disturb our current tranquility and stability! Far more people are effectively disenfranchised via the electoral college than would be via a binding national popular vote. In that case, your vote adds 1 more to the pile that decides it all no matter where you live. Under our current system, the votes of Democrats in deep red states and Republicans in deep blue states have no impact on the Presidential race. Depending on where they live in the opposite aligned state, those voters may not have an opportunity to elect ANYONE who represents their political viewpoint. You think Democrats in Wyoming, or Republicans in most of California, don't feel disenfranchised?

(11-12-2022 08:38 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 07:47 PM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 04:43 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 01:46 PM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 12:23 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Go back into your hole.

What an intelligent comeback. Please explain why it is OK for Trump to win when he loses the popular vote but it is stupid if Murkowsi does it.

Take a f*cking civics class where your teacher isnt trying to groom you into letting him pound you in the ass and you would learn the difference.

Keep me out of your fantasies involving you and Trump.

Sadly AKC, you'll find that many of the loudest mouths here have unresolved sexual feelings for public figures such as our former President, and the President of Ukraine.

(11-12-2022 08:21 PM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 08:04 PM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 05:08 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  AKC, surely you realize that the 'popular vote' is not an official thing. It means diddly and was only created out of curiosity.

Maybe you don't. I know that a lot of far lefties want it to count for something.

I am aware of how the electoral college works and that popular vote on a national level is irrelevant. And I'm not a far lefty just because I don't bow down to Trump, a person I concluded was full of crap and a horrible person long before he entered politics.

I think the EC is a stupid way to select the president but that's the system we have. It was created by people who didn't think the riffraff (non-white male land/humanowners) should vote at all.

I haven't had direct experience with ranked choice voting but it seems designed to elect someone that the majority can live with. If it keeps Sarah Palin out it did its job. If NY had it you might see a moderate Democrat and not AOC. And that would work for me as well.

Absolute whiff on Electoral College on your part. The EC was put in place so small states would have a voice in electing the President and VP. They used to run on their own not as a set. Otherwise, there would never be a need for Presidential candidates to hold rallys anywhere but large population areas.

We would all be subservient to large urban areas. Talk about disenfranchisement. Would most likely lead to a ton of malcontents.

Now I have to laugh at that, we certainly wouldn't want to do anything to disturb our current tranquility and stability! Far more people are effectively disenfranchised via the electoral college than would be via a binding national popular vote. In that case, your vote adds 1 more to the pile that decides it all no matter where you live. Under our current system, the votes of Democrats in deep red states and Republicans in deep blue states have no impact on the Presidential race. Depending on where they live in the opposite aligned state, those voters may not have an opportunity to elect ANYONE who represents their political viewpoint. You think Democrats in Wyoming, or Republicans in most of California, don't feel disenfranchised?

It’s not perfect. But a popular vote would be the end of the US. We are on borrowed time as far as Democracies are concerned. Most are DOA before 200 years. Sadly, I don’t believe we’ll make another fifty.

The only thing I could tell you about those in Wyoming or California is the last freedom we have left is to move around the country without being harassed or face restrictive checkpoints. They should move if it effects their lives that much.

My guess is politics is an afterthought for most unless it affects them personally. My sister’s in laws from Colorado are very vocal Progressive liberals. Every time I see them I completely ignore their opinions to the point they start talking about other things. They know I disagree with them but arguing endlessly with them is not high on my priority list.

(11-12-2022 08:58 PM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 08:38 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 07:47 PM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 04:43 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 01:46 PM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  What an intelligent comeback. Please explain why it is OK for Trump to win when he loses the popular vote but it is stupid if Murkowsi does it.

Take a f*cking civics class where your teacher isnt trying to groom you into letting him pound you in the ass and you would learn the difference.

Keep me out of your fantasies involving you and Trump.

Sadly AKC, you'll find that many of the loudest mouths here have unresolved sexual feelings for public figures such as our former President, and the President of Ukraine.

(11-12-2022 08:21 PM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 08:04 PM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 05:08 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  AKC, surely you realize that the 'popular vote' is not an official thing. It means diddly and was only created out of curiosity.

Maybe you don't. I know that a lot of far lefties want it to count for something.

I am aware of how the electoral college works and that popular vote on a national level is irrelevant. And I'm not a far lefty just because I don't bow down to Trump, a person I concluded was full of crap and a horrible person long before he entered politics.

I think the EC is a stupid way to select the president but that's the system we have. It was created by people who didn't think the riffraff (non-white male land/humanowners) should vote at all.

I haven't had direct experience with ranked choice voting but it seems designed to elect someone that the majority can live with. If it keeps Sarah Palin out it did its job. If NY had it you might see a moderate Democrat and not AOC. And that would work for me as well.

Absolute whiff on Electoral College on your part. The EC was put in place so small states would have a voice in electing the President and VP. They used to run on their own not as a set. Otherwise, there would never be a need for Presidential candidates to hold rallys anywhere but large population areas.

We would all be subservient to large urban areas. Talk about disenfranchisement. Would most likely lead to a ton of malcontents.

Now I have to laugh at that, we certainly wouldn't want to do anything to disturb our current tranquility and stability! Far more people are effectively disenfranchised via the electoral college than would be via a binding national popular vote. In that case, your vote adds 1 more to the pile that decides it all no matter where you live. Under our current system, the votes of Democrats in deep red states and Republicans in deep blue states have no impact on the Presidential race. Depending on where they live in the opposite aligned state, those voters may not have an opportunity to elect ANYONE who represents their political viewpoint. You think Democrats in Wyoming, or Republicans in most of California, don't feel disenfranchised?

It’s not perfect. But a popular vote would be the end of the US. We are on borrowed time as far as Democracies are concerned. Most are DOA before 200 years. Sadly, I don’t believe we’ll make another fifty.

The only thing I could tell you about those in Wyoming or California is the last freedom we have left is to move around the country without being harassed or face restrictive checkpoints. They should move if it effects their lives that much.

My guess is politics is an afterthought for most unless it affects them personally. My sister’s in laws from Colorado are very vocal Progressive liberals. Every time I see them I completely ignore their opinions to the point they start talking about other things. They know I disagree with them but arguing endlessly with them is not high on my priority list.

A great point Dragon, the freedom of movement we enjoy in this country certainly helps keep down the number of malcontents we would otherwise have for many reasons. It sounds like you are handling your sisters in-laws very well and they are being a bit rude. Hopefully we all have friends & family on the other side of the aisle, and those of us who value those relationships and want to get along with others quickly learn who enjoys talking politics and who doesn't. It's a shame that you have to repeatedly ignore their political chatter before they'll move on to other topics instead of just learning that you don't want to debate with them and sticking to other things, but at least they eventually take the hint. Hopefully your family will all have a great holiday season, whether the Centennial state liberals are involved or not!

Always forgetting about the steal in 2016..

(11-13-2022 09:50 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  Always forgetting about the steal in 2016..

What steal? Hillary? Is that you?

(11-14-2022 08:54 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(11-13-2022 09:50 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  Always forgetting about the steal in 2016..

What steal? Hillary? Is that you?

The best part of this is that it's WAY more likely that the 2016 election was stolen when compared to 2020. But trump won in 2016, so.....

Psst...neither one was actually stolen.