BTW, there’s some thought that the Four Seasons Landscaping business was selected as the site for this press conference because Trump had tweeted out that there was going to be a press conference at the Four Seasons hotel but when the campaign bookers reached out to the hotel, the hotel shot them down. So in order to make the tweet true - at least nominally - they called the Four Seasons Landscaping out of the blue and put the conference there.
Sounds apocryphal.
Just to go back on some of the topics.
Us handled covid extremely bad. We are in the worst tier of countries probably. Almost equivalent to counties that were against quarantine completely and third world countries. China was among first tier. If we were as good as China, something like 99 percent of the current covid deaths in the us would not exist.
The Electoral college was created by the founding fathers because they needed to compromise with smaller states to join the revolutionary war against the British. So it gave power by giving 2 electoral votes to each state much like the senate and gave additional electoral votes based on population much like the house. This favored smaller states who refused to allow bigger states like New York to have completely control. This is also why they didn’t choose the larger New York area and settled with Washington DC which was closer to southern democrats at the time. Lastly we have electors choosing the president because the founding fathers thought that Americans were uninformed, feared that democratic process would lead to disastrous policies, and above all did not want a populist president that gave in to the people to gain tremendous power.
If you want to look up one of the worst electoral college results. Imagine winning the popular vote, the electoral college, and still losing because you called an ex general turned politician elector a beta male. That is exactly what happened to the populist war hero Andrew Jackson when he ran against The intellectual son of the 2nd president:John Quincy Adams. Anyways the idea that the electoral college robbed Americans the right to choose is a tale as old as time. But it was designed that way!
I think what the election showed is Trump had a lot of support despite racism and poor handling of covid and that the smaller states are still here wielding power and shouldn’t be ignored.
About the electoral college… should be abolished. Biden’s going to win the popular vote by ~5 million votes and we spent days wondering about provisional ballots in Bucks County, Pa. I think it creates some disincentive to vote as well, which is unfortunate. But more than that, the electoral college has had one very obvious result that we witnessed over the past four years - Donald Trump cared for some states more than others. He treated California, the nation’s most populous state, like it was an enemy nation. Nothing in our political system should cause a president - whatever his or her psychological infirmities - to treat citizens in that way.
The EC should remain but states shouldn’t be allowed to be winner take all.
Then how would EC votes be distributed? If EC votes were distributed according to House districts - which is what happens in Maine and Nebraska - then gerrymandering would have a pronounced effect.
If a state’s EC votes were allocated by popular vote, rounding up or down or whatever, then why not just use the straight popular vote?
BTW, the turnout in 2016 was 136.7 million votes, or 59.2% of registered voters. 2020 counting isn’t done but should end up around 160 million and 70%. This is good for the country.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2020-us-election-voter-turnout/
because a straight popular vote would silence less populated areas of the us. personally i dont think backwater people should have a say in policy. we also dont need them anymore as we did in revo war, so they should just be glad that they are somewhat related to us. best case, they’d be like a crappier canada. worst case, theyd be like mexico.
The EC was intended to represent the proportional vote of the state. But this isn’t actually written anywhere. Splitting the EC vote by the vote within the state makes the system works well, but for an individual state it reduces their influence. So over time, to maximize their influence in elections, states have moved to winner take all EC. Didn’t start that way
The shift to statewide winner-take-all was not done for idealistic reasons. Rather, it was the product of partisan pragmatism, as state leaders wanted to maximize support for their preferred candidate. Once some states made this calculation, others had to follow, to avoid hurting their side. James Madison’s 1823 letter to George Hay, described in my earlier post, explains that few of the constitutional framers anticipated electors being chosen based on winner-take-all rules.
smaller states would still have the extra 2 electoral college minimum giving them more power than a straight popular vote. that would just be split and all i can see if a rounding issue that may be a problem. i think the key thing here is that the founding fathers made sure it was the state that decided how their electoral votes will be used. But as of right now, 48 are using take all approach.
Meanwhile, on the same day Biden announces a 12-member advisory committee to focus on the pandemic - a committee that contains actual experts on such things - Donald Trump, in his lame duck period, fires the Secretary of Defense. I’m sure it was a well-thought move by the Donald.
Please get Mr. Crazypants the hell out of here.
Might not last for long, but at this moment, if you go to loser.com, it re-directs to Trump’s wikipedia page.
Not a fan of the wisdom of the crowd theory, eh?
Trump campaign is feverishly sending out emails soliciting money to build up a legal fund to deal with their election theft efforts. Meanwhile, in the fine print…
its not that. my issue is that most of america is a poor.
But doesn’t the election system in 'Merica take that into account? You’re allowed to contribute massive amounts of money to your preferred candidate’s campaign. Even companies are allowed to do that. In the end, people and companies with the means will have a lot more influence on policies than the poor.
^True, but rich people get only one vote–just like poor people. And corporations get no vote at all.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. I believe those who provide more revenue to the government (a.k.a. pay more taxes) should get more votes. Just my .02.
Not a real vote, but if you donate to a campaign a large sum, it does kind of get you similar influence and access as a whole lot of votes. If that wasn’t the case, donors would’ve not donated close to 7 billion in the 2016 election.
lol i was kidding about the poor people comment… sort of. i just think its better for technocrats to run things in the most efficient way possible. rich people are just as dumb!