46d
@A-Unique-Nickname saidYes.
What's your alternative? Just most votes wins between two parties?
Would be interesting in states where you know has a majority, would more of the minority come out to vote because their vote is actually going to count?
If the govt announces millions available for public renovations, etc, the citizens (mob) of NY would come out in droves to vote for the money to be applied to the outdated subway systems in NYC. Citizens of WY never even go to NYC.
Citizens of WY would like the money to repair all of the fences in the state. They need tons of barb wire and machinery.
Who will likely prevail?
Who do you think would prevail in a federal vote
46d
@no1marauder saidWhat about WY?
The Founders and Framers didn't want women or black folks to vote either.
They were progressive for their time but many of their ideas are long outmoded. They recognized times change and provided for a process to amend the Constitution - one would should use to eliminate the EC.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19081
46d
@AverageJoe1 saidDumb, irrelevant question.
Yes.
If the govt announces millions available for public renovations, etc, the citizens (mob) of NY would come out in droves to vote for the money to be applied to the outdated subway systems in NYC. Citizens of WY never even go to NYC.
Citizens of WY would like the money to repair all of the fences in the state. They need tons of barb wire and machinery.
Who will likely prevail?
Who do you think would prevail in a federal vote
@A-Unique-Nickname saidPlease recognize that this is not really a question. It is common sense written so that ever you might understand its logic.
Dumb, irrelevant question.
Often in some circles called rhetorical, but that may have confused you.
The answer is the combination of the highly populated states.
@AverageJoe1 saidWhat the hell do you mean that nobody can define democracy?
How can mott talk about Democracy when no one here can define it? Sonhouse mentions it the most, and knows it the least.
That is just complete stupidity.
Democracy (from Ancient Greek: δημοκρατία, romanized: dēmokratía, dēmos 'people' and kratos 'rule' ) is a system of government in which state power is vested in the people or the general population of a state.
And there are various methods of achieving this.
It’s not bloody rocket science, and you were taught this at primary school.
Good grief.
46d
@AverageJoe1 saidWhat kind of say would 3 electoral vote WY and 3 electoral vote VT have either?
What if there were 5 states...California, Texas, Florida, Wyoming and Vermont.
The first listed 3 have 100M people. The other 2, about ONE million.
Now create a situitation where WY and/or ME have a say in a populous vote.
You suck at analogies, man. Has no one told you this before?
46d
@AverageJoe1 saidEvery citizen, everywhere, would have a equal say.
What if there were 5 states...California, Texas, Florida, Wyoming and Vermont.
The first listed 3 have 100M people. The other 2, about ONE million.
Now create a situitation where WY and/or ME have a say in a populous vote.
Abstract things wouldn't.
46d
@shavixmir saidLook again. Note that we are NOT a democracy, because the 'power' of which you speak is vested in reps of the people, not directly in the people. If the power were vested directly in the people, Hillary would have won..
What the hell do you mean that nobody can define democracy?
That is just complete stupidity.
Democracy (from Ancient Greek: δημοκρατία, romanized: dēmokratía, dēmos 'people' and kratos 'rule' ) is a system of government in which state power is vested in the people or the general population of a state.
And there are various methods of achieving this.
It’s not bloody rocket science, and you were taught this at primary school.
Good grief.
I respectfully wish that all of you would stop writing about how bad things are , and write about the way things are. Look at what you have on the plate, sit back and see what Chef Donald does. He started within hours of correcting a lot of stuff, begining with letting some world leaders know that there is a new gunslinger in town. Some of the stuff, it will be good for even you.
I could wax on, but to what end. It is what it is. If you want predictions, do a thread on just that....how will he get inflation turned around. I think it cannot not be done with money of the rich, but I am quite sure it can be done with drilling.
Energy.
SHouse and Sue often comment on who or what has power. Should not our president have power? We want our enemies and competitors to see some strength over here. A guy who gets up from having been scared by a bullet for about 5 seconds, and then fights like hell....and he can walk down a flight of stairs......and up again.,
Accept his being powerful, and if he gets out of line, fire him. I think a major news story, BTW, will be the people he fires. The list is too long, Wray, Garland, a whole barn full. I think that sleepy joe fired no one.
Query: Will he pardon his son? Said he would not. I say he goes back on his word. There is a word for that.
45d
@AverageJoe1 saidWake up Joe.
Look again. Note that we are NOT a democracy, because the 'power' of which you speak is vested in reps of the people, not directly in the people. If the power were vested directly in the people, Hillary would have won..
I respectfully wish that all of you would stop writing about how bad things are , and write about the way things are. Look at what you have o ...[text shortened]... not be done with money of the rich, but I am quite sure it can be done with drilling.
Energy.
Yes. You are a democracy.
That you use reps does not diminish the fact that the people, by voting, can change the government.
That the scale of government (span of control, if you will) means that it has to be layered, says nothing about the principle behind it.
44d
@shavixmir said? People by voting obviously can obviously change the government. But you dance the jitterbug.
Wake up Joe.
Yes. You are a democracy.
That you use reps does not diminish the fact that the people, by voting, can change the government.
That the scale of government (span of control, if you will) means that it has to be layered, says nothing about the principle behind it.
If we did Not have EC, The People With The Most votes by voting would change the government. But for the pesky EC, Hillary would have won.
So why did not the people w the most votes win that election? They did not, because of representatives.
Their votes count, but not in the sense of ‘most votes’.
Do you make your Self dizzy?!?!?
44d
@AverageJoe1 said...win.
If we did Not have EC, The People With The Most votes by voting would
Stop right there. You got it. 😆
44d
@spruce112358 saidBut they don’t. Explain Hillary, with most votes , NOT winning.
...win.
Stop right there. You got it. 😆
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147606
44d
@shavixmir saidso in a democacy each state would have one vote? 50 votes total for fed elections?
What the hell do you mean that nobody can define democracy?
That is just complete stupidity.
Democracy (from Ancient Greek: δημοκρατία, romanized: dēmokratía, dēmos 'people' and kratos 'rule' ) is a system of government in which state power is vested in the people or the general population of a state.
And there are various methods of achieving this.
It’s not bloody rocket science, and you were taught this at primary school.
Good grief.