@Deathy McDeath has the best avatar of anyone on the Net.
Election Day and Results
- Thread starter AWP
- Start date
- Status
I'm a hardened veteran of the Facebook wars
ThunderHorse
Verified Military
The model is obviously not statistically sound.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2012
- Messages
- 12,740
Semper Fi, BITCHES!!!
Trump has chosen retired Marine Gen. James Mattis for secretary of defense
Thread on the topic here:
General Mattis is our new SECDEF
ETA above link to specific thread
Trump has chosen retired Marine Gen. James Mattis for secretary of defense
Thread on the topic here:
General Mattis is our new SECDEF
ETA above link to specific thread
Last edited:
SpongeBob*24
Verified Military
Nothing yet............
Holy shit, that's my Wet Dream Border right there.
Rifle, casual uniform, elk/moose thing. Hat.
Rifle, casual uniform, elk/moose thing. Hat.
It looks like we have our first faithless elector. He's out of Texas and won't be casting a vote for PE Trump
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/o...-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=0
I'm not sure what to think of this. We've had only a handful of faithless electors in the last 20 years (2, according to Wikipedia), so it's not like it's without precedent. But it still signals a deep division in the country that is going to be increasingly difficult to heal. It should be noted, also, that 21 states do not require their electors to cast their vote in accordance with the state popular vote.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/o...-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html?_r=0
I'm not sure what to think of this. We've had only a handful of faithless electors in the last 20 years (2, according to Wikipedia), so it's not like it's without precedent. But it still signals a deep division in the country that is going to be increasingly difficult to heal. It should be noted, also, that 21 states do not require their electors to cast their vote in accordance with the state popular vote.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2012
- Messages
- 12,740
I am. He is a Republican who was essentially awarded a ceremonial position to cast his vote based on the majority of that particular state, so shut the fuck up and cast your vote for P.E. Trump. The same way people did when they were pissed Obama won, or would have done had Hilary won.
So tired of these fame-whores trying to get their 15 minutes of internet fame.
I think the author weakened his own points by being overly dramatic. "I'm taking my kids to Star Wars to celebrate light triumphing over evil" (paraphrased) Dude, fuck off. What does that have to do with anything? And his closing line about swearing an oath... Do first responders swear that oath? He seems overly self-righteous and emotional. I agree with @Ooh-Rah about him just trying to get his 15 minutes.
That is one of my biggest issues with the EC. The electors should have to vote according to the will of their voters. It's sad that they can vote according to their own desires.
This to me seems like the heart of the problems with the electoral college. If the purpose of the EC is for these representative individuals to make the choice - ensuring the democratic masses can't fuck over the republic, as Hamilton and the founders wanted, then more electors should take this view. If that's not the right way to go - that they need to just reflect the will of the voters then why have them in the first place?
I agree PE Trump won the election and the world will have to live with it - you don't get to change the rules retroactively. But I would think this result would cause us to seriously question the purpose of why we still use the EC going forward.
Part of the reason for the EC is also to ensure that big states didn't run roughshod over smaller states.
I'm curious though why you seem to want to change the EC only after your candidate didn't win. We've been friends a long time and I don't remember you bringing this up previously.
Yeah, I can't say it's something I've ever been very passionate about and just considered it a part of the system.
I don't think of it now as a massive flaw in the system on the scale of campaign finance, voter suppression, and gerrymandering - all of which I do think are institutional problems that are a serious danger to the republic. But, I do think it should change because two presidential elections in 16 years have gone to someone who lost the popular vote.
I think that's a bad thing. 2000 was so close I would have chalked it up to a fluke but given the distance between the candidates on the popular vote this time around - and coming inside the span of 20 years - that seems like a bad thing to me. Still, I take your point. Would I think of it as a flaw vs a necessary corrective if my preferred candidate had won (both times)? I'd like to think I would but I think that's one of those questions of inherent bias that's really hard to answer accurately.
I mean, I'm the only unbiased person around it's everybody else that's got the agenda and flawed logic. Just like when I'm the only one in step marching in formation - terrible of the 1SG to be calling it wrong for all those other jokers...
I don't think of it now as a massive flaw in the system on the scale of campaign finance, voter suppression, and gerrymandering - all of which I do think are institutional problems that are a serious danger to the republic. But, I do think it should change because two presidential elections in 16 years have gone to someone who lost the popular vote.
I think that's a bad thing. 2000 was so close I would have chalked it up to a fluke but given the distance between the candidates on the popular vote this time around - and coming inside the span of 20 years - that seems like a bad thing to me. Still, I take your point. Would I think of it as a flaw vs a necessary corrective if my preferred candidate had won (both times)? I'd like to think I would but I think that's one of those questions of inherent bias that's really hard to answer accurately.
I mean, I'm the only unbiased person around it's everybody else that's got the agenda and flawed logic. Just like when I'm the only one in step marching in formation - terrible of the 1SG to be calling it wrong for all those other jokers...
I retract my earlier statement, in retrospect it was kind of dick-ish. It often takes a big event to get people to start thinking about issues that they otherwise probably wouldn't dwell on, simply because there's so much going on in the world. I didn't really think much about Islamic extremism until 9/11. And I suspect most people didn't think much about the EC until this election. The only reason I did was because I had to teach American Politics for a semester last year.
One of the reasons I like the EC is because it forces presidential candidates... and their parties... to give a shit about the smaller states. If it wasn't set up this way, it would allow the handful of biggest states in the Union to be all "f-you, I do what I want!" which could lead to disgruntlement, civil unrest, and ultimately, civil war. Our political system is all about compromise, and if you remove the incentive to compromise, it will be detrimental to the long term health of our Republic.
One of the reasons I like the EC is because it forces presidential candidates... and their parties... to give a shit about the smaller states. If it wasn't set up this way, it would allow the handful of biggest states in the Union to be all "f-you, I do what I want!" which could lead to disgruntlement, civil unrest, and ultimately, civil war. Our political system is all about compromise, and if you remove the incentive to compromise, it will be detrimental to the long term health of our Republic.
Yeah, I think that's fair. That's the same reason I can't summon much passion for the EC changes. I think the EC is one of the main ways rural America gets a voice and the 2nd and 3rd order effects of taking that away are hard to judge (at least from my foxhole).
I think interestingly it kind of mirrors the 'superdelegate' debacle in the Democratic primaries. Superdelegates were added by the DNC in an effort to increase grassroots engagement for people who were not party insiders. Considering how that turned out - at least from a narrative standpoint - in the Democratic primaries it's kind of crazy. Maybe it gets back to the silicon valley truism - ideas are cheap, execution is valuable.
Roger. The EC is one of the only reasons people care (from an election standpoint) about the kinds of states you and I are from. As we've seen over the last few years, if you ignore the real and imagined grievances of important social demographics, it can cause reactions that we didn't expect and don't want.
One of my aggravations about this election (in which I voted for... no one) is this whole "OMG our candidate didn't win!! CHANGE ALL THE THINGS!" attitude, especially from people who probably don't have the slightest understanding about how our political system works and why it's set up the way it is.
One of my aggravations about this election (in which I voted for... no one) is this whole "OMG our candidate didn't win!! CHANGE ALL THE THINGS!" attitude, especially from people who probably don't have the slightest understanding about how our political system works and why it's set up the way it is.
TLDR20
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 6,199
I like the idea of giving partial EC votes. When you win a state by less than 5 thousand votes but get let's say 18EC votes, it doesn't seem representative at all. It may be better if one candidate got 8 and the other 10. It would work out both ways, even California has counties or districts that vote red.
I think it is funny though that before the election many here, and from the GOP in general were talking about how the EC was part of a "rigged" system(especially when Hillary seemed prime to win the EC and lose the popular vote). Now the system isn't rigged and the "losers" just need to suck it up and deal with it.
When were people thinking SEC Clinton was going to lose the popular vote? I'll admit I wasn't following the election closely (because I thought she was going to win), but all the "rigging" I was tracking was from people worried about voting in general.
Personally, I never said, or thought, that the general election was rigged (although the Democratic primary seems pretty suspect) and yes, I do think the side that lost needs to deal.
Personally, I never said, or thought, that the general election was rigged (although the Democratic primary seems pretty suspect) and yes, I do think the side that lost needs to deal.
- Status
