No concerns here...Anyone that think conservatives are being suppressed by Google and other Silicon Valley big tech giants are just looney irrational conspiracy theorists....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18eNe973PCA
Agreed. It's pretty sad that Google Executives can't be outwardly optimistic, or even neutral, about the election of a racist, anti-immigrant, "pussy grabbing" misogynist and his gay-bashing running mate. I feel really bad for Google employees who see this and feel like they can't openly discuss their hateful worldview.
Their reactions weren't in response to a conservative White House. They were in response to a horrible, reckless human being being elected leader of the free world.
10-1 odds none of this would have happened had a guy like John McCain been elected President.
Quote from: KenFSU on September 15, 2018, 10:29:17 AM
Agreed. It's pretty sad that Google Executives can't be outwardly optimistic, or even neutral, about the election of a racist, anti-immigrant, "pussy grabbing" misogynist and his gay-bashing running mate. I feel really bad for Google employees who see this and feel like they can't openly discuss their hateful worldview.
Their reactions weren't in response to a conservative White House. They were in response to a horrible, reckless human being being elected leader of the free world.
10-1 odds none of this would have happened had a guy like John McCain been elected President.
Yes the left loves a feckless, rino that loses a lot. Good for you for reaching across the aisle. That you(everyone) do not see this as very scary, demonstrates how tribal we have gotten.You either agree with us or you are the enemy.
Quote from: bill on September 15, 2018, 10:57:06 AM
Quote from: KenFSU on September 15, 2018, 10:29:17 AM
Agreed. It's pretty sad that Google Executives can't be outwardly optimistic, or even neutral, about the election of a racist, anti-immigrant, "pussy grabbing" misogynist and his gay-bashing running mate. I feel really bad for Google employees who see this and feel like they can't openly discuss their hateful worldview.
Their reactions weren't in response to a conservative White House. They were in response to a horrible, reckless human being being elected leader of the free world.
10-1 odds none of this would have happened had a guy like John McCain been elected President.
Yes the left loves a feckless, rino that loses a lot. Good for you for reaching across the aisle. That you(everyone) do not see this as very scary, demonstrates how tribal we have gotten.You either agree with us or you are the enemy.
I get where you're coming from. In literally any other case, I'd totally agree that politics don't belong in the workplace, particularly when it comes to corporate leadership. Would be wildly inappropriate for CSX to begin an all hands meeting by bashing Lenny Curry. That said, Trump's an outlier. A cursory view of his Twitter feed confirms that. I'd also argue that Google's opposition was less politically motivated than socially motivated.
Alllll that said, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Google's got zero room to speak about human rights considering their work with the Chinese government to censor the internet and tie web searches to individual users.
After the Brexit vote, lots and lots of my colleagues openly discussed and lamented the outcome. I'd say that the vast majority of the people I work with voted to remain. But that has nothing to do with our employer or the company's position on the referendum. Simple minds look for conspiracies because it's (somehow) easier than living in the real world and facing the truth.
Quote from: Adam White on September 15, 2018, 06:22:23 PM
After the Brexit vote, lots and lots of my colleagues openly discussed and lamented the outcome. I'd say that the vast majority of the people I work with voted to remain. But that has nothing to do with our employer or the company's position on the referendum. Simple minds look for conspiracies because it's (somehow) easier than living in the real world and facing the truth.
How very arrogant and european of you, a company that literally shapes information discussing how upset they were that most Americans did not have the same (enlightened) view that they have and how they were going to get through it. Let them eat cake. Simple minds can see conspiracies because it is on youtube. dumbass
Rofl... ;D ;D
Quote from: sanmarcomatt on September 16, 2018, 08:29:05 AM
Quote from: Adam White on September 15, 2018, 06:22:23 PM
Simple minds look for conspiracies because it's (somehow) easier than living in the real world and facing the truth.
Good line. I like it. When one vile candidate loses (somehow) to another vile candidate, the simple minds can't face the truth. It was Russians! Misogynists! Racists!
I don't disagree. I'm still waiting for evidence of Trump's collusion with Russia before I decide what happened there. But I know plenty of people who are convinced and talk as if it's fact. And no one really has bothered to explore why so many people voted for Trump in the first place - especially in areas that went to Obama four years prior.
It's so much easier to just blame someone or whatever instead of look in the mirror.
And as far as I could tell, that video was nothing more than Google employees sharing their opinions on the outcome of the election. I didn't see any evidence of any kind of misconduct or conspiracy or anything else. Who would've thought that a bunch of middle class techie types who live in California wouldn't have wanted Trump to win the election?
Quote from: bill on September 16, 2018, 01:03:09 AM
How very arrogant and european of you, a company that literally shapes information discussing how upset they were that most Americans did not have the same (enlightened) view that they have
Except most Americans did not vote for the current President. Call that view whatever you want, but most Americans shared it.
Quote from: bill on September 16, 2018, 01:03:09 AM
Quote from: Adam White on September 15, 2018, 06:22:23 PM
After the Brexit vote, lots and lots of my colleagues openly discussed and lamented the outcome. I'd say that the vast majority of the people I work with voted to remain. But that has nothing to do with our employer or the company's position on the referendum. Simple minds look for conspiracies because it's (somehow) easier than living in the real world and facing the truth.
How very arrogant and european of you, a company that literally shapes information discussing how upset they were that most Americans did not have the same (enlightened) view that they have and how they were going to get through it. Let them eat cake. Simple minds can see conspiracies because it is on youtube. dumbass
"European". LOL.
Quote from: Adam White on September 16, 2018, 05:20:24 PM
Quote from: bill on September 16, 2018, 01:03:09 AM
Quote from: Adam White on September 15, 2018, 06:22:23 PM
After the Brexit vote, lots and lots of my colleagues openly discussed and lamented the outcome. I'd say that the vast majority of the people I work with voted to remain. But that has nothing to do with our employer or the company's position on the referendum. Simple minds look for conspiracies because it's (somehow) easier than living in the real world and facing the truth.
How very arrogant and european of you, a company that literally shapes information discussing how upset they were that most Americans did not have the same (enlightened) view that they have and how they were going to get through it. Let them eat cake. Simple minds can see conspiracies because it is on youtube. dumbass
"European". LOL.
When i cannot come up with something drool to say, I lol. How continental.
Quote from: Adam White on September 16, 2018, 01:21:39 PM
And no one really has bothered to explore why so many people voted for Trump in the first place - especially in areas that went to Obama four years prior.
It's so much easier to just blame someone or whatever instead of look in the mirror.
I would guess for the same reason populist / far right parties gain in popularity in Europe - voters feel that established politicians do little for them and care even less.
It's debatable whether they get a better deal in the end, but I feel that the disconnect between the governing caste and the rest of the population is becoming a big problem.
If I look at German politics, several high ranking politicians (mostly conservative) were caught cheating on their phd thesis by copying large parts from other works.
The leader of our labor party has no labor experience - she went directly into politics after high school and finished german language studies after 20 semesters (her thesis paper was about "Function of disasters in serial love novels").
Personally, while I will not vote for any freak parties, I have gotten to the point where I am sick of voting for the lesser evil rather than for a candidate I want to win because I think (s)he is good.
I think being a true conservative (i.e. not in the tea party freak show sense) or a true liberal (think Bill maher and not in the SJW freak show sense) is really tough nowadays.
Quote from: bill on September 16, 2018, 11:16:54 PM
Quote from: Adam White on September 16, 2018, 05:20:24 PM
Quote from: bill on September 16, 2018, 01:03:09 AM
Quote from: Adam White on September 15, 2018, 06:22:23 PM
After the Brexit vote, lots and lots of my colleagues openly discussed and lamented the outcome. I'd say that the vast majority of the people I work with voted to remain. But that has nothing to do with our employer or the company's position on the referendum. Simple minds look for conspiracies because it's (somehow) easier than living in the real world and facing the truth.
How very arrogant and european of you, a company that literally shapes information discussing how upset they were that most Americans did not have the same (enlightened) view that they have and how they were going to get through it. Let them eat cake. Simple minds can see conspiracies because it is on youtube. dumbass
"European". LOL.
When i cannot come up with something drool to say, I lol. How continental.
A) What's "drool"?
B) I'm certainly not 'continental,' unless the continent in question is North America.
C) You also resort to personal insults when you've got nothing of merit to say.
Quote from: Gunnar on September 17, 2018, 06:52:32 AM
Quote from: Adam White on September 16, 2018, 01:21:39 PM
And no one really has bothered to explore why so many people voted for Trump in the first place - especially in areas that went to Obama four years prior.
It's so much easier to just blame someone or whatever instead of look in the mirror.
I would guess for the same reason populist / far right parties gain in popularity in Europe - voters feel that established politicians do little for them and care even less.
It's debatable whether they get a better deal in the end, but I feel that the disconnect between the governing caste and the rest of the population is becoming a big problem.
If I look at German politics, several high ranking politicians (mostly conservative) were caught cheating on their phd thesis by copying large parts from other works.
The leader of our labor party has no labor experience - she went directly into politics after high school and finished german language studies after 20 semesters (her thesis paper was about "Function of disasters in serial love novels").
Personally, while I will not vote for any freak parties, I have gotten to the point where I am sick of voting for the lesser evil rather than for a candidate I want to win because I think (s)he is good.
I think being a true conservative (i.e. not in the tea party freak show sense) or a true liberal (think Bill maher and not in the SJW freak show sense) is really tough nowadays.
How do you vote, if you don't mind my asking? I am only so familiar with German politics and assume I'd vote Die Linke if I had to choose. But, like a lot of left wing parties, it has a lot of unsavoury elements in it. I see the SPD as much like our Labour Party - they abandoned true social democracy in the 90s and embraced Clintonite 'third way' politics.
The problem with the USA (and the UK, amongst others) is that first-past-the-post voting has led to a system where there are only two parties, which means they have to basically barely stand for anything in order to have a chance at winning. And they just reinvent themselves when in opposition to be whatever the party in power isn't. And then when they are in power, they abandon any principles they pretended to have in order to get elected.
The Shill versus the Fascist... The USA choose the Fascist... This is what happens when electoral politics is reduced to a plutocracy.
Quote from: Snufflee on September 17, 2018, 12:08:31 PM
The Shill versus the Fascist... The USA choose the Fascist... This is what happens when electoral politics is reduced to a plutocracy.
Yep. She's worse than just a shill, though. A corrupt warmonger, too.
Every four years people go on about how you MUST vote Democratic because the alternative is too scary and not worth the risk. If people keep voting for the lesser of two evils, they will always be in this position. And if you vot Dem or Republican, you're not going to get meaningful electoral reform.
Quote from: Adam White on September 17, 2018, 11:59:32 AM
Quote from: bill on September 16, 2018, 11:16:54 PM
Quote from: Adam White on September 16, 2018, 05:20:24 PM
Quote from: bill on September 16, 2018, 01:03:09 AM
Quote from: Adam White on September 15, 2018, 06:22:23 PM
After the Brexit vote, lots and lots of my colleagues openly discussed and lamented the outcome. I'd say that the vast majority of the people I work with voted to remain. But that has nothing to do with our employer or the company's position on the referendum. Simple minds look for conspiracies because it's (somehow) easier than living in the real world and facing the truth.
How very arrogant and european of you, a company that literally shapes information discussing how upset they were that most Americans did not have the same (enlightened) view that they have and how they were going to get through it. Let them eat cake. Simple minds can see conspiracies because it is on youtube. dumbass
"European". LOL.
When i cannot come up with something drool to say, I lol. How continental.
A) What's "drool"?
B) I'm certainly not 'continental,' unless the continent in question is North America.
C) You also resort to personal insults when you've got nothing of merit to say.
There was nothing personal. Read the following if you have a problem understanding why folks have a hard time with your arrogance and why the people voted against the previous 8 years.
I don't disagree. I'm still waiting for evidence of Trump's collusion with Russia before I decide what happened there. But I know plenty of people who are convinced and talk as if it's fact. And no one really has bothered to explore why so many people voted for Trump in the first place - especially in areas that went to Obama four years prior.
Quote from: Adam White on September 17, 2018, 12:11:58 PM
Every four years people go on about how you MUST vote Democratic because the alternative is too scary and not worth the risk. If people keep voting for the lesser of two evils, they will always be in this position. And if you vot Dem or Republican, you're not going to get meaningful electoral reform.
People need to realize that if they want to see meaningful reform, they have to start in two places: the local level and the primaries. People have to be involved in their local communities, and be aware of the politics that truly influence their everyday lives.
On a state and national level, we need to be picking the candidates who are promising electoral reform, which means picking a party and supporting a candidate through the primaries, not waiting until the general to bemoan whoever got the nomination. The people have to overwhelm the numbers to such an extent that no doubt is possible as to who their choice is.
Quote from: KenFSU on September 15, 2018, 10:29:17 AM
10-1 odds none of this would have happened had a guy like John McCain been elected President.
LOL, you mean the warmongering RINO neocon who once said "Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran?" Okay...Liberals used to tell the truth about him, but just because he kept Obamacare alive (ONLY to spite his rival Trump, NOT because he thought Obamacare was any good), he's a darling of the left now...McCain was an establishment warhawk globalist neocon, that's it.
Quote from: bill on September 17, 2018, 11:54:43 PM
Quote from: Adam White on September 17, 2018, 11:59:32 AM
Quote from: bill on September 16, 2018, 11:16:54 PM
Quote from: Adam White on September 16, 2018, 05:20:24 PM
Quote from: bill on September 16, 2018, 01:03:09 AM
Quote from: Adam White on September 15, 2018, 06:22:23 PM
After the Brexit vote, lots and lots of my colleagues openly discussed and lamented the outcome. I'd say that the vast majority of the people I work with voted to remain. But that has nothing to do with our employer or the company's position on the referendum. Simple minds look for conspiracies because it's (somehow) easier than living in the real world and facing the truth.
How very arrogant and european of you, a company that literally shapes information discussing how upset they were that most Americans did not have the same (enlightened) view that they have and how they were going to get through it. Let them eat cake. Simple minds can see conspiracies because it is on youtube. dumbass
"European". LOL.
When i cannot come up with something drool to say, I lol. How continental.
A) What's "drool"?
B) I'm certainly not 'continental,' unless the continent in question is North America.
C) You also resort to personal insults when you've got nothing of merit to say.
There was nothing personal. Read the following if you have a problem understanding why folks have a hard time with your arrogance and why the people voted against the previous 8 years.
I don't disagree. I'm still waiting for evidence of Trump's collusion with Russia before I decide what happened there. But I know plenty of people who are convinced and talk as if it's fact. And no one really has bothered to explore why so many people voted for Trump in the first place - especially in areas that went to Obama four years prior.
Yeah, calling someone a 'dumbass' isn't a personal insult. Fake news!
Also - I am not really certain you understand what I posted, based on your reply.
Edit: to clarify - I agree with Matt's joke that people use conspiracies to explain away outcomes they are unhappy with rather than try to actually explore why things happened they way they did. It's easier for some to blame Russia, etc rather than look into why voters in areas that previously voted for Obama would now vote for Trump. It's easier for them to blame everyone else rather than look in the mirror (or at their candidates). Obama ran a compaign based around 'hope' and 'change'. Trump ran a campaign based on change, too - he positioned himself as an outsider, untainted by Washington. Seems logical to me that people who feel left behind by Washington would've voted for Obama in 2008 and then, seeing that things hadn't changed and there was still no hope, would vote for Trump in 2016. But what do I know? I'm 'continental' and arrogant, after all.
And maybe Trump DID collude with Russia. But I've not seen any evidence yet and will withhold judgement until I do, because this is being played out in the media and is very heavy on the speculation. I don't doubt Russia tried to influence the election - makes sense, since we do the same sort of thing. But whether it worked and whether Trump was a willing participant hasn't been shown yet.
Is Space Force really going to let the Japanese take over the moon? This is the fight we need to be fighting.
Re bill's "dumbass" comment, we're currently working on formalizing rules for the forum. Name calling and personal attacks will likely be on the list. The expectation is that folks here should treat each other with civility and respect.
Thanks goodness for the US being a constitutional republic (not a democracy), and having an electoral college. Otherwise we would have mob rule mainly from the Northeast megalopolis and urban West Coast cities.
Politics will always include "National Security" and in the 2008 election it was front in center. I am very much an agnostic voter and allowed myself to be swayed by a certain candidates promise of a 15 month troop withdrawal strategy. I of course never believed GITMO would be shut-down within a month of taking office, that was just silly.
Needless to say the 15 months goal was never achieved and now believe the timeline would had been no different no matter who was elected into office.
We can all feel let down by either side of the aisle.
BTW, I wonder if the Nobel Peace Prize committee ever felt regret for awarding someone based on nothing more than their campaign promises.
Quote from: JPalmer on September 18, 2018, 10:17:48 AM
BTW, I wonder if the Nobel Peace Prize committee ever felt regret for awarding someone based on nothing more than their campaign promises.
Have you seen the list of prizes for literature? These people are evidently incapable of acknowledging their embarrassing choices.
Quote from: I-10east on September 18, 2018, 09:58:08 AM
Thanks goodness for the US being a constitutional republic (not a democracy), and having an electoral college. Otherwise we would have mob rule mainly from the Northeast megalopolis and urban West Coast cities.
The US is a democracy (as well as a constitutional republic). The terms aren't mutually-exclusive.
Quote from: Adam White on September 18, 2018, 11:15:22 AM
The US is a democracy (as well as a constitutional republic). The terms aren't mutually-exclusive.
If the US was a democracy, Hillary Clinton would be pres. The highest amount of votes gets the presidency, versus having the electoral college. Right now on wiki (everyone's favorite trustworthy site) the US is listed as a "federal republic" but used to be listed as a "constitutional republic" not long ago; I'm not sure if there's any difference between the two.
Quote from: I-10east on September 18, 2018, 07:18:56 PM
Quote from: Adam White on September 18, 2018, 11:15:22 AM
The US is a democracy (as well as a constitutional republic). The terms aren't mutually-exclusive.
If the US was a democracy, Hillary Clinton would be pres. The highest amount of votes gets the presidency, versus having the electoral college. Right now on wiki (everyone's favorite trustworthy site) the US is listed as a "federal republic" but used to be listed as a "constitutional republic" not long ago; I'm not sure if there's any difference between the two.
The USA is a democracy and a republic. It's a representative democracy (it's far too large to be a direct democracy, though it has elements of that - like referendums, for example). The example you use is an example of democracy in action - people vote for the electors who vote for the President.
The 'republic' bit means that the head of state isn't a king or whatever. The UK is an example of a democracy that is not a republic.
As I stated before, the two terms are not mutually-exclusive.
Quote from: Adam White on September 17, 2018, 12:04:38 PM
How do you vote, if you don't mind my asking? I am only so familiar with German politics and assume I'd vote Die Linke if I had to choose. But, like a lot of left wing parties, it has a lot of unsavoury elements in it. I see the SPD as much like our Labour Party - they abandoned true social democracy in the 90s and embraced Clintonite 'third way' politics.
Die Linke is out of the question for me as they are the successor to the party that ruled communist East Germany, the SED. They have too much blood on their hands and for me they never faced up to their past.
Also, those people ruled a country for over 40 years and we saw what became of that.
Personally, I tend towards labor but see myself in their conservative wing (conservative being a relative term here). With the way the party has gone in the last years, I do not think I will vote at all in the next federal elections.
Really, watching Bill Maher I can identify with his view points - he's no fan of Republicans but at the same time is disgusted of what has become of the side he sees himself belonging to / sees them as idiots.
This quote sums it up pretty nicely:
Quote"Democrats have gone from the party that protects people to the party that protects feelings. From, 'Ask not what your country can do for you,' to, 'You owe me an apology,'"
Quote from: Adam White on September 17, 2018, 12:04:38 PM
The problem with the USA (and the UK, amongst others) is that first-past-the-post voting has led to a system where there are only two parties, which means they have to basically barely stand for anything in order to have a chance at winning. And they just reinvent themselves when in opposition to be whatever the party in power isn't. And then when they are in power, they abandon any principles they pretended to have in order to get elected.
Both major parties have lost so many voters in Germany that they are no longer in a position to govern together with a smaller party but rather needed to govern in a coalition with each other. As they are losing their identity, they are also losing voters to fringe parties. I think labor is now below 20%, the Conservatives are dipping below 30%.
I think this is happening across many countries - saw this in Sweden were neither the left nor the conservative blocks (that consist of several parties each) could govern.
Quote from: I-10east on September 18, 2018, 07:18:56 PM
Quote from: Adam White on September 18, 2018, 11:15:22 AM
The US is a democracy (as well as a constitutional republic). The terms aren't mutually-exclusive.
If the US was a democracy, Hillary Clinton would be pres. The highest amount of votes gets the presidency, versus having the electoral college. Right now on wiki (everyone's favorite trustworthy site) the US is listed as a "federal republic" but used to be listed as a "constitutional republic" not long ago; I'm not sure if there's any difference between the two.
Not necessarily - it really depends on the voting system. If you look at the UK, the party that scores the majority in a district gets the seat in parliament, so it may well be possible that a party who gets 49.9% of votes does not have a single seat in the lower house (Adam will probably know this better).
As for the US, historically the system was set-up to find a balance between majority rule (i.e. pure popular vote) and maintaining the influence of smaller states / prevent them from becoming disenfranchised, which is where the Connecticut Compromise originated.
While I find the electoral college to be outdated, I personally have no issue with not having a pure popular vote system.
Quote from: Gunnar on September 19, 2018, 07:56:59 AM
Quote from: Adam White on September 17, 2018, 12:04:38 PM
How do you vote, if you don't mind my asking? I am only so familiar with German politics and assume I'd vote Die Linke if I had to choose. But, like a lot of left wing parties, it has a lot of unsavoury elements in it. I see the SPD as much like our Labour Party - they abandoned true social democracy in the 90s and embraced Clintonite 'third way' politics.
Die Linke is out of the question for me as they are the successor to the party that ruled communist East Germany, the SED. They have too much blood on their hands and for me they never faced up to their past.
Also, those people ruled a country for over 40 years and we saw what became of that.
Personally, I tend towards labor but see myself in their conservative wing (conservative being a relative term here). With the way the party has gone in the last years, I do not think I will vote at all in the next federal elections.
Really, watching Bill Maher I can identify with his view points - he's no fan of Republicans but at the same time is disgusted of what has become of the side he sees himself belonging to / sees them as idiots.
This quote sums it up pretty nicely:
Quote"Democrats have gone from the party that protects people to the party that protects feelings. From, 'Ask not what your country can do for you,' to, 'You owe me an apology,'"
Quote from: Adam White on September 17, 2018, 12:04:38 PM
The problem with the USA (and the UK, amongst others) is that first-past-the-post voting has led to a system where there are only two parties, which means they have to basically barely stand for anything in order to have a chance at winning. And they just reinvent themselves when in opposition to be whatever the party in power isn't. And then when they are in power, they abandon any principles they pretended to have in order to get elected.
Both major parties have lost so many voters in Germany that they are no longer in a position to govern together with a smaller party but rather needed to govern in a coalition with each other. As they are losing their identity, they are also losing voters to fringe parties. I think labor is now below 20%, the Conservatives are dipping below 30%.
I think this is happening across many countries - saw this in Sweden were neither the left nor the conservative blocks (that consist of several parties each) could govern.
Aren't Die Linke made up of the successor to the SED and other parties as well? I thought they weren't solely the Stasi guys.
When you say "Labor" do you mean the SPD? I am only so familiar with the German parties, of course.
I still think that the US is not a democracy (it's not listed on wiki, the dictionary etc for a reason). The forefathers even warned about not having a direct democracy (which is basically mob rule).
I get why many on the left wants to get rid of the electoral college, because demographics (esp with having a porous Southern border) is on your side. The problem with getting rid of the electoral college is that most of the county (state wise not population) will be alienated; like a California situation, the entire state is ran by San Fran and LA.
Kinda similar economic wise, the entire country is doing pretty damn well right now (and ascending) versus the last administration where the coastal areas did okay for the most part, but the middle of the country suffered badly. Now we have a plant being reinvested in Gary Indiana for godsakes.
Quote from: Adam White on September 19, 2018, 08:08:15 AM
Aren't Die Linke made up of the successor to the SED and other parties as well? I thought they weren't solely the Stasi guys.
When you say "Labor" do you mean the SPD? I am only so familiar with the German parties, of course.
Well, Die Linke (= "The Left") would like everyone to believe that they are the successor to a bunch of parties and leftist movements.
Historically, you had the SED (Socialist Unity Party of Germany - all others were forced to merge with them), which was renamed to "PDS" (Party of democratic socialism) after the fall of the East German dictatorship and which then turned into "Die Linke" by absorbing the former West German Communist party and movements.
As for Labor, yes, I mean the SPD. Figured it would be easier for other posters to follow.
Quote from: I-10east on September 19, 2018, 09:14:39 AM
I get why many on the left wants to get rid of the electoral college, because demographics (esp with having a porous Southern border) is on your side. The problem with getting rid of the electoral college is that most of the county (state wise not population) will be alienated; like a California situation, the entire state is ran by San Fran and LA.
Personally, I do not suggest you do away with the entire system, just replace the electoral college / electors with actual votes (so the outcome of the presidential election would automatically be the number of votes a candidate had received rather than determine electors who in theory could vote for whoever they wanted. The system itself would not change much.
I mean, it's not like they have to ride to DC on a horse fighting off wild animals any longer... this is one point where having an electoral college made sense.
I also feel that if you go just by the popular vote, this may not turn out that well for some of the smaller / less populous states that may end up being ignored.
All that said, since I am not a US citizen this is purely my personal opinion and not up to me in any way.
Quote from: I-10east on September 19, 2018, 09:14:39 AM
I still think that the US is not a democracy (it's not listed on wiki, the dictionary etc for a reason). The forefathers even warned about not having a direct democracy (which is basically mob rule).
If you're going to rely on Wikipedia (which I don't object to), why not explore their article on democracies, republics and presidential republics:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy#Types_of_governmental_democracies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_system
QuoteIn American English, the definition of a republic refers specifically to a form of government in which elected individuals represent the citizen body[2] and exercise power according to the rule of law under a constitution, including separation of powers with an elected head of state, referred to as a constitutional republic[4][5][6][7] or representative democracy.[8]
QuoteA presidential system is a democratic and republican system of government where a head of government leads an executive branch that is separate from the legislative branch. This head of government is in most cases also the head of state, which is called president.
The USA is a democracy. This is beyond dispute. It is true that the USA is not a direct democracy, though as I mentioned before, it does retain aspects of this.
It is specious to limit the definition of the word "democracy" to direct democracy and no one would seriously do that.
I can see your argument about the Electoral College, though I am not entirely certain I agree. I think it would be preferable for the President to be elected by direct popular vote. However, I think a reasonable compromise (which would be fairer whilst still retaining the benefits of the EC) would be to split the awarding of electors between the candidates based on their performance in each state. (For example, Florida's 29 electors could've been split 15 to Trump and 14 to Clinton).
Quote from: I-10east on September 19, 2018, 09:14:39 AM
I still think that the US is not a democracy (it's not listed on wiki, the dictionary etc for a reason). The forefathers even warned about not having a direct democracy (which is basically mob rule).
It is a representative democracy. Our founders tried to balance lots of factors and created to electoral college for the Senate and then years later applied it to the Presidency because it was about as close as they could come to collecting the votes of the people with the technology available in the early 1800s. It was also less democratic back then because fewer people could legally vote.
Quoteget why many on the left wants to get rid of the electoral college, because demographics (esp with having a porous Southern border) is on your side. The problem with getting rid of the electoral college is that most of the county (state wise not population) will be alienated; like a California situation, the entire state is ran by San Fran and LA.
No doubt some just want whatever system gets their guy elected. Many however view the system as slightly broken when one party constantly for decades gets more votes at the federal level and yet does not have the majority in the House, Senate, Administration or Judiciary appointments. The thing that bothers me is when I ask people who support the EC "How much should vote be skewed based on survey lines?" or even "what is the rationale for the current level it is skewed?" and you can tell they have never spent a moment looking into how much or little it is skewed or how much it should be. At that point you know they just support the system now because it is a political advantage as opposed to some thoughtful method to represent as closely as it can the various people of this country.
Full disclosure I support
Two Senators (map vote) for each state for regional balance,
1 congressman for each state and 400 congressmen divided evenly(as close as you can given state lines) amongst the population. This would more favor population centers than the current system.
Popular vote (People vote) for the President.
Yes , Although a better term than slightly broken would be less fair then we can achieve. The system has become more and more skewed as population has grown and changed. We can now have the vote be more representative of our citizenry.
I lead with the fact that political bias tends to play into this debate. Were the elections running contrary to votes for that 100 years? You know gas lamps were fine before electricity but there came a time where we could do better. However this may not be a debate we should have if you believe there is no honest conversation to be had.
If only there was a way to modify and amend the constitution to eliminate the electoral college.
Quote from: civil42806 on September 19, 2018, 05:48:19 PM
If only there was a way to modify and amend the constitution to eliminate the electoral college.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VNFi1DLGHE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VNFi1DLGHE)
Disgusting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-me-too.html
How can anyone defend this?
Quote from: sanmarcomatt on October 03, 2018, 01:49:37 PM
I would say a Seminole football player saying "I paid for these shoes myself" edges her in credibility at this point.
YOU TAKE THAT BACK, MATT.
YOU TAKE THAT BACK NOW.
Quote from: KenFSU on October 03, 2018, 12:33:22 PM
Disgusting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-me-too.html
How can anyone defend this?
Trump was always known for his restraint and measured, presidential responses before.
Quote from: Tacachale on October 03, 2018, 03:26:38 PM
Quote from: KenFSU on October 03, 2018, 12:33:22 PM
Disgusting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-me-too.html
How can anyone defend this?
Trump was always known for his restraint and measured, presidential responses before.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/a0Lgc1JvbfS4o/giphy.gif)
Quote from: KenFSU on October 03, 2018, 12:33:22 PM
Disgusting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-me-too.html
How can anyone defend this?
Defend what? You're tinfoil hat is preventing my equipment from reading your mind.
Quote from: KenFSU on October 03, 2018, 12:33:22 PM
Disgusting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-me-too.html
How can anyone defend this?
Defend what ? I assume you mean the taunts. Well, has Kavanaugh not been taunted in the same way or even worse all over the place ?
Quote from: Gunnar on October 04, 2018, 05:23:07 AM
Quote from: KenFSU on October 03, 2018, 12:33:22 PM
Disgusting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-me-too.html
How can anyone defend this?
Defend what ? I assume you mean the taunts. Well, has Kavanaugh not been taunted in the same way or even worse all over the place ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
Quote from: Gunnar on October 04, 2018, 05:23:07 AM
Quote from: KenFSU on October 03, 2018, 12:33:22 PM
Disgusting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-me-too.html
How can anyone defend this?
Defend what ? I assume you mean the taunts. Well, has Kavanaugh not been taunted in the same way or even worse all over the place ?
Because the orange headed freak of nature cannot control himself. He is President of The United States, and in the 5 minutes it take me to type this I can come up with a measured response to the controversy that paves the way for a senate vote.
Rose Garden Presser:
"Good morning, it has come to light that serious allegations have been levied against Judge Kavanaugh during the Judiciary Committees hearings. I would ask that we respect the victim and the difficult situation she has been put in and sincerely hope this is not a democratic ploy to derail this nomination. I have to ask the question as to why now? Judge Kavanaugh has been on the federal bench for years and has served in this very building as a white house council and this allegation has never been brought up before.
I have authorized the Justice Department via the FBI to reopen the background investigation and provide a detailed report to the committee as soon as possible. I also ask any witnesses to come forward and cooperate, this is NOT a criminal investigation so witness cooperation is voluntary but the quality of the report will depend on this very cooperation.
Shame on the democrats if this is a political ploy and shame on any republicans who victim blame. We are a nation built on the rule of law and due process, I ask that all parties concerned respect both the accuser and the accused and refrain from creating a circus.
Thank you"
There, done and done, but he can't help himself.
PS: And I despise both our political and economic system and was able to come up with a measured response, but no the POTUS with help from both parties has allowed this to become said circus.
Snufflee:
Very good - like what you wrote. One thing:
Change
"I would ask that we respect the victim and the difficult situation she has been put in"
to
"I would ask that we respect the potential victims and the difficult situation they have been put in"
As at the moment we do not know who the victim is for the lack of any proof (as far as I know).
Quote from: Gunnar on October 04, 2018, 05:23:07 AM
Quote from: KenFSU on October 03, 2018, 12:33:22 PM
Disgusting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-me-too.html
How can anyone defend this?
Defend what ? I assume you mean the taunts. Well, has Kavanaugh not been taunted in the same way or even worse all over the place ?
The public has never been held to any standard of decency but a President? This guy is the most disgusting human to ever sit in the WH.
Quote from: Gunnar on October 04, 2018, 10:03:20 AM
Snufflee:
Very good - like what you wrote. One thing:
Change
"I would ask that we respect the victim and the difficult situation she has been put in"
to
"I would ask that we respect the potential victims and the difficult situation they have been put in"
As at the moment we do not know who the victim is for the lack of any proof (as far as I know).
At the very least this guy is a liar. Even his Yale friends are calling him a liar but the WH doesn't care. Why should they the POTUS is a bigger liar.
Someone needs a hug... :)
I think nothing short of a kiss will help this butthurt.