Originally posted by BlueK
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Electoral College Sucks
Collapse
X
-
"Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf
-
Originally posted by wapiti View PostI don't understand the "my vote doesn't count" complaint. Unless the election is decided by a single vote, no single vote actually matters. So whether the vote goes to a national count or is filtered by the state is irrelevant IMO."There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
"It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
"Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by wapiti View PostI don't understand the "my vote doesn't count" complaint. Unless the election is decided by a single vote, no single vote actually matters. So whether the vote goes to a national count or is filtered by the state is irrelevant IMO.Te Occidere Possunt Sed Te Edere Non Possunt Nefas Est.
Comment
-
Originally posted by old_gregg View Postthis is also the reason why a rational person should probably not voteLast edited by pelagius; 12-05-2018, 05:13 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by pelagius View PostNot exactly (I know we've discussed this before): a rational person (and by rational ... rational they way it gets defined in economics) and their preferences are such that they get no/little enjoyment (utility in econ speak) from things other than their impact on the outcome. Voting because you get a kick out of filling out your ballot on a touch screen voting machine is a perfect rational reason to vote (at least they way it's defined in economics).τὸν ἥλιον ἀνατέλλοντα πλείονες ἢ δυόμενον προσκυνοῦσιν
Comment
-
Originally posted by All-American View PostSheesh. Do they not have sports fans in economics? There’s a much simpler explanation: when you vote you are part of the team. Same reason you pay 50 bucks to sit in nosebleeds."There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
"It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
"Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by wapiti View PostKasich as an independent would just hand the election to the Dem nominee. If Kasich managed some EC votes they would come in solid red states like Utah. Swing states would swing blue with Trump and Kasich splitting the conservative vote. The election wouldn't be close.
Thinking specifically about the EC, Trump couldn't have won last time without swing states WI, PA and MI. Those states were extremely close in 2016 but are currently leaning toward the dems based on the last election and current polling. Trump could very easily lose them in the next election. However, some moderates and independents who are leaning to the dems right now if they found a more natural vote in Kasich would then take enough votes from the dem to help Trump win those states again. I don't think the standard assumptions (like independent candidates always help the dem candidate) work with Trump.Last edited by BlueK; 12-06-2018, 10:06 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BlueK View PostI'm not sure about that. Trump is not in any way a normal Republican or "conservative" figure. He is so polarizing that I think an independent getting a decent chunk of votes nationally might actually be taking more votes from the dem side from moderates or independents who have already decided not to vote for Trump no matter what. Think of someone here like Moliere or any number of others on here who don't necessarily like the democrats and who would otherwise vote for a traditional republican, but who have stated they can't vote for Trump.
Thinking specifically about the EC, Trump couldn't have won last time without swing states WI, PA and MI. Those states were extremely close in 2016 but are currently leaning toward the dems based on the last election and current polling. Trump could very easily lose them in the next election. However, some moderates and independents who are leaning to the dems right now if they found a more natural vote in Kasich would then take enough votes from the dem to help Trump win those states again. I don't think the standard assumptions (like independent candidates always help the dem candidate) work with Trump.
I differ politically from Kasich but I really like him and have been on record that I would have preferred him over Hillary, but I hope he doesn’t run. It would reckless to enable a Trump victory.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BlueK View PostI'm not sure about that. Trump is not in any way a normal Republican or "conservative" figure. He is so polarizing that I think an independent getting a decent chunk of votes nationally might actually be taking more votes from the dem side from moderates or independents who have already decided not to vote for Trump no matter what. Think of someone here like Moliere or any number of others on here who don't necessarily like the democrats and who would otherwise vote for a traditional republican, but who have stated they can't vote for Trump.
Thinking specifically about the EC, Trump couldn't have won last time without swing states WI, PA and MI. Those states were extremely close in 2016 but are currently leaning toward the dems based on the last election and current polling. Trump could very easily lose them in the next election. However, some moderates and independents who are leaning to the dems right now if they found a more natural vote in Kasich would then take enough votes from the dem to help Trump win those states again. I don't think the standard assumptions (like independent candidates always help the dem candidate) work with Trump.
In reality, which side Kasich affect depends heavily on who the dems nominate. If they nominate Joe Biden, he probably hurts Trump. If they nominate Warren, he probably hurts her.
Comment
-
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...ar-vote-555148
Trump favors getting rid of the electoral college. Does that make anyone second guess their support of its removal?
Been thinking about this issue again today, and I still think I like the electoral college, but with each state assigning their delegates proportionately to the popular vote of that state. I think that would make for a nice level of chaos.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BigPiney View Posthttps://www.politico.com/story/2018/...ar-vote-555148
Trump favors getting rid of the electoral college. Does that make anyone second guess their support of its removal?
Been thinking about this issue again today, and I still think I like the electoral college, but with each state assigning their delegates proportionately to the popular vote of that state. I think that would make for a nice level of chaos."I think it was King Benjamin who said 'you sorry ass shitbags who have no skills that the market values also have an obligation to have the attitude that if one day you do in fact win the PowerBall Lottery that you will then impart of your substance to those without.'"
- Goatnapper'96
Comment
Comment