Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan & Wisconsin, he won those by less than 250,000 votes all together.
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
No, they don't. States aren't people. The 600,000 people of Wyoming don't need to be heard equally as much as the 39,000,000 people of California.
The electoral numbers are disproportionate as well. Wyoming gets 3 EVs while California gets 55 EVs. But the population differences are not proportionate to the EVs assigned.
California pop. (est) 39.1M = 55 EVs = 1 EV for every 711K
Wyoming pop. (est) 590K = 3 EVs = 1 EV for every 197K
If the vote was awarded to California as similar to Wyoming, California would have 195 EVs. This would alter EVs for many states. Texas would be up near 138 EVs if using a 200K base factor.
Last edited:
Well he hates when people criticize him so he was always gonna lash out at her regardless.
Tbf that system isn't unreasonable, it ties in to the way Congress is constituted, the House represents the population at large, the Senate a check against their zeal and helps protect smaller state.
The problem is that the presidency was never meant to be directly elected by the masses. Once you tie the EC to the popular vote in each state, it's already lost its cause, resulting in the farce of 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000, and Doomsday.
What about splitting EVs in each state to match the actual polling numbers?
Granted GOP won't like that and I'd argue DNC may not in some larger states as well. But overall it would probably help the DNC candidate more so than the GOP candidate.
Granted GOP won't like that and I'd argue DNC may not in some larger states as well. But overall it would probably help the DNC candidate more so than the GOP candidate.
The way the others all laugh at the idea of Trump even getting the nomination just shows you how quickly things can change in politics, doesn't it?
No I meant his answers weren't very prepared even if he was handed the questions beforehand. He certainly did not win the elections with his debate performances.
Oh right, good point.
This.
I don't recall anyone throwing tantrums back in 2008 when Obama was elected.
Absurd that those protesters basically protest against the fundamentals of the democracy they live in.
He won fair and square, move on. Want to actually do something productive? Go ahead and channel that enthusiasm behind the next person you want to be elected. There's really nothing to protest against now.
Amazing woman, makes me feel sick to think Trump might pick her replacement.
Yup. I thought he had a shot at the nomination but never thought he'd stand a hope in a million years of winning the Presidency. Lots of learning to do all round unfortunately.
You have got to be kidding me.
Woah... thought she was my age
(28). Maybe 35 when she goes for the "all serious" look. But 45? They should have a disclaimer before the show!!!I'm sorry, that's horrible, but i couldn't help myself. Sorry!
That does parallel the shock of the Trump election.
I don't think people would have rioted if Romney or McCain won either. They might not be progressives but they were good conservative minds who happen to think differently. Like Louis CK said, you have to cycle through the progressive/conservative positions every few years to keep a certain balance in a large and diverse country.
Even if the Republicans are rejoicing now, a few months later, this win might still feel like a loss.
That must be done at state level.
The bigger gripe I have with the Electoral College is congressional district reapportionment. The minimum population for one district is 570k. So DC (760k) and Wyoming (590k) each get one electoral vote from the single district. Yet, if we use that baseline calculation, the real EV of California is 68, not 55. So not only are big states are getting hamstrung by having the same number of Senators as small states, their population don't even get proportionate representation in the House, because comically the US decide to keep the same number of representatives it has since 1913. To provide some context, the population at that time was a smidgen above 97m. Now it's 320m.
I bet you were. Not having one of your own in the Oval Office for the first time in history no doubt caused you incredible anguish.
Bush I picked the replacement of Thurgood Marshall.
Clarence Thomas.
At least Brennan and Douglas got moderates (Souter and Stevens).
Earl Warren himself got Burger, the beginning of the end of that era.
Land of the free.
Obama had a path of roses
So Democrats are no different then? That is by far the worst justification of what is going on. At least listen to what both Clinton and Obama urged, ffs!
VIDEO: Democrat Defecates in Public, Picks It Up, Wipes it on Trump Sign
That suggestion is actually good. It would mean the GOP could grab EC's from states like NY and California even when they don't even come close to winning, and the Dems would do the same in say Texas. Same with smaller states also. Nebraska and Maine have a split way of assigning theirs, some go to the overall winner, others split by winners in district or something like that.
Right now each State is free to come up with their own, but if you are Democrat controlled state or a Republican controlled state, large or small, you don't have a lot of incentive to make these changes when other states are not.
When I get a chance I need to google this I am sure someone has done some looks at past elections and how the Electoral Vote would have been split had it been awarded based on voting within each state.
Might give some third parties a bit of power since they could end up with electoral votes and it keeps either major party candidate from getting to 270. They could release their EV's to one party or the other based on concessions. Like the coalition governments we see formed in other countries. Interesting side effect.
Clinton and Obama, who spent months saying how unacceptable, dangerous, and unpalatable Trump is now suddenly think it's ok; the defence establishment who was so worried about Putin taking over now are all converging around him in support.
I've heard what Trump says and can see what those words can do. I don't need to take my cues from politicians who highlighted his words when it suited them and will now bury them.
Alright, carry on. The peaceful transition of power, indeed.
Not sure I'm following. Who are you referring to by one of your own?
If you're going to do this kind of reform, I'm not sure why you wouldn't just go the whole hog and bring in a straightforward popular vote. There comes a time where you have to say, okay, individual states having a voice is important, but is it so important we want apparently undemocratic consequences to occur?
Plans similar to Maine's would be most likely so it would be a hybrid.
Newt flying some ideas for Trump's Gestapo
Absolutely. It pisses me off when I see these protests. If it made any difference, I would have gone and joined in, but it's not going to make a difference now. People need to be educated to go out and vote when they have a chance, vote for something that's going to affect them now and in the future.
Yey to McCarthyism.
If the protests can remind people they need to turn out and vote in two years time then more's the better, as long as they don't get violent.
Ok, for some reason I feel compelled to defend myself.
What these protests are (IMO should be) about is signaling the broad opposition to Trump: his personal failings and the political risk he carries. A sign to the new administration that attempts to take away womens' rights, give further impunity to the police, destroy the environment faster: these steps will be resisted.
This is unlike the nonsensical calls and petitions to overturn Brexit or to have electoral college voters abandon Trump. That is anti-democratic in a devious way. This is an open display of free speech.
Someone on reddit was saying if EV's were handed out proportionatly in every state is would have ended 270-268 for Clinton. Albeit early on Wednesday so the math may not be 100%.
So, when's the moderation coming?
[QUOTE="berbatrick, post: 20051280, member: 56313"This is unlike the nonsensical calls and petitions to overturn Brexit or to have electoral college voters abandon Trump. That is anti-democratic in a devious way. This is an open display of free speech.[/QUOTE]
I know it is an aside but democracy is bullcrap. We should 100% have a second referendum with at least a grain of truth introduced to the proceedings.
I know it is an aside but democracy is bullcrap. We should 100% have a second referendum with at least a grain of truth introduced to the proceedings.
Agreed.
I'm not worried about the handful violent protesters; they'll get arrested, prosecuted and sentenced appropriately. And anyone using violence as a reason to not align with the views of the majority is being intellectually dishonest (and that's putting it lightly)
I don't see anything wrong with people protesting against Trump. What's the problem? They don't like him and they don't have to like or support him and they have every right to show just that by protesting against him. Democracy isn't about working for the people elected by the majority. Opposing them ALL THE TIME when you disagree with them is exactly what democracy is about.
"(CNN)Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is calling for the creation of a new House Committee on Un-American Activities, invoking the infamous "Red Scare"-era congressional body as a blueprint for weeding out American ISIS adherents and sympathizers.
"We originally created the House Un-American Activities Committee to go after Nazis," he said during an appearance on "Fox and Friends" this week. "We passed several laws in 1938 and 1939 to go after Nazis and we made it illegal to help the Nazis. We're going to presently have to go take the similar steps here."
Gingrich, a vocal supporter of Donald Trump, has been touted as a potential running mate for the presumptive Republican nominee.
His comments on Monday echoed Trump's, as the billionaire businessman suggested "Muslim communities" should be held to greater account for the actions of their neighbors.
"They know what is going on," Trump said during a speech Monday in New Hampshire. "They know that (the Orlando killer) was bad. They knew the people in San Bernardino were bad. But you know what, they didn't turn them in, and we had death and destruction."
The House Un-American Activities Committee was founded on the eve of World War II but gained greater notoriety a decade later as it launched a series of investigations into alleged communist elements inside the U.S. government and other aspects of U.S. society.
Gingrich framed the idea of its revival in some form as part of an inevitable escalation of the conflict with the Syria and Iraq-based militant group.
"We're going to ultimately declare a war on Islamic supremacists and we're going to say, if you pledge allegiance to ISIS, you are a traitor and you have lost your citizenship," he said. "We're going to take much tougher positions."
This is absolute crazy and extremely dangerous journey to embark on. This is collective punishment and that will hurt a lot of innocent people. Its the sort of punishment tool you can find during Mao Zedong´s cultural revolution and that was an extremely horrible approach were thousands ended up as victims just on the suspicion of being different. That line of thinking is dangerous for the individual liberty and safety and most never be allowed to manifest it self in to the Law system otherwise you can use mass incarnation or deportation as a weapon against any group of people you don´t like or if perceived as a threat. The generalization of muslims most stop and letting people like this guy into power would be an stain on Americas history. Gingrich is comparing muslims to nazis and this is disgraceful line of thinking and if Trump let guys like this into powerful government positions it wont end well as the amount of damage they can do to peoples lives is too dangerous to ignore.
I don´t buy the thinking that Trump will just be a regular republican president if most of he´s administration will be people like this. Trump might have won the right to be president for 4 years but that don´t mean people should sit and wait until the period is over. People need to stand together and show this line of thinking that Gingrich represent wont be left unchallenged otherwise i fear the extreme groups of the right wing America might feel vindicated and become a lot more bold in the public life and the consequence of this is a terrible thought. If enough people across America protest the appointment of people like Gingrich it might persuade Trump to appoint less extreme people if he wants an second term as president, to appease the other side a little bit to show he can do compromises for the sake of the country.
"We originally created the House Un-American Activities Committee to go after Nazis," he said during an appearance on "Fox and Friends" this week. "We passed several laws in 1938 and 1939 to go after Nazis and we made it illegal to help the Nazis. We're going to presently have to go take the similar steps here."
Gingrich, a vocal supporter of Donald Trump, has been touted as a potential running mate for the presumptive Republican nominee.
His comments on Monday echoed Trump's, as the billionaire businessman suggested "Muslim communities" should be held to greater account for the actions of their neighbors.
"They know what is going on," Trump said during a speech Monday in New Hampshire. "They know that (the Orlando killer) was bad. They knew the people in San Bernardino were bad. But you know what, they didn't turn them in, and we had death and destruction."
The House Un-American Activities Committee was founded on the eve of World War II but gained greater notoriety a decade later as it launched a series of investigations into alleged communist elements inside the U.S. government and other aspects of U.S. society.
Gingrich framed the idea of its revival in some form as part of an inevitable escalation of the conflict with the Syria and Iraq-based militant group.
"We're going to ultimately declare a war on Islamic supremacists and we're going to say, if you pledge allegiance to ISIS, you are a traitor and you have lost your citizenship," he said. "We're going to take much tougher positions."
This is absolute crazy and extremely dangerous journey to embark on. This is collective punishment and that will hurt a lot of innocent people. Its the sort of punishment tool you can find during Mao Zedong´s cultural revolution and that was an extremely horrible approach were thousands ended up as victims just on the suspicion of being different. That line of thinking is dangerous for the individual liberty and safety and most never be allowed to manifest it self in to the Law system otherwise you can use mass incarnation or deportation as a weapon against any group of people you don´t like or if perceived as a threat. The generalization of muslims most stop and letting people like this guy into power would be an stain on Americas history. Gingrich is comparing muslims to nazis and this is disgraceful line of thinking and if Trump let guys like this into powerful government positions it wont end well as the amount of damage they can do to peoples lives is too dangerous to ignore.
I don´t buy the thinking that Trump will just be a regular republican president if most of he´s administration will be people like this. Trump might have won the right to be president for 4 years but that don´t mean people should sit and wait until the period is over. People need to stand together and show this line of thinking that Gingrich represent wont be left unchallenged otherwise i fear the extreme groups of the right wing America might feel vindicated and become a lot more bold in the public life and the consequence of this is a terrible thought. If enough people across America protest the appointment of people like Gingrich it might persuade Trump to appoint less extreme people if he wants an second term as president, to appease the other side a little bit to show he can do compromises for the sake of the country.
Really? you don't recall the GOP declaring that it was their sole mission to obstruct him and make him a one-term POTUS? I recall folks on the right buying guns in record numbers, survival supplies, gold, tinfoil etc. and being vocal in their hatred.
In regards to the 'normalisation' of Trump, my major concern is that with his election, we're going to see a gradual, subtle shift in what's being seen as typically normal in political spheres.
It's happening already...when Trump initially expressed some of his more abhorrent views, there was widespread outrage in the UK and debates as to whether he should be banned from entering the country. Now he's President...suddenly the government intend to work closely with him, and Boris Johnson is accusing people who have legitimate concerns of 'whinging'. A man who was seen as abhorrent by just about everyone in the UK a year ago is now going to be seen as a close ally.
Already the perception of what's normal among major political spheres has changed. It will only change further if Trump continues in his current rhetoric.
It's happening already...when Trump initially expressed some of his more abhorrent views, there was widespread outrage in the UK and debates as to whether he should be banned from entering the country. Now he's President...suddenly the government intend to work closely with him, and Boris Johnson is accusing people who have legitimate concerns of 'whinging'. A man who was seen as abhorrent by just about everyone in the UK a year ago is now going to be seen as a close ally.
Already the perception of what's normal among major political spheres has changed. It will only change further if Trump continues in his current rhetoric.
http://cesrusc.org/election/
probably got it closer than most.
probably got it closer than most.
- Status