Jump to content

2020 Election Thread


PapaG

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, CRBuff said:

 Wait, you too don’t think they meddled?  Seriously?  You can argue it didn’t swing the election, but to say they didn’t meddle is ignoring every single report.  

Please tell me that isn’t the argument you are making.

If it’s a stupid fucking argument, @Jalapeno is making it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
15 hours ago, HLB said:

That's not what I said at all.  I said that Biden withheld funds for Ukraine until Shokin - who was investigating Biden's son - was removed as AG.

Except that Shokin wasn't investigating Burisma or Hunter Biden at the time. In fact, that investigation had been dormant since 2012. That was one of the roots of Shokin's corrupt behavior. Try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, HLB said:

No.  That's not what I am contending at all.  I said it's "virtually impossible" to manipulate the EC.  When and where have the Dems given proof, or an example of how the electoral college be manipulated by those outside our country?  You seem to think it's easily possible - so tell me how it can be done.

I was responding to Jalapeno, not to you. I'm sorry you're having trouble following along.

How is it "virtually impossible?"

The EC is made up 538 people. For the most part, they're just regular-guy voters who are required to vote for the candidate they have pledged to vote for. That candidate is determined by the primaries, and in most states, the winner of the primary gets all of that state's delegates. So, whatever influences voters in the primary ("Lock Her Up!") quite obviously influences the make-up of the EC. Is that too hard to comprehend? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Quack 12 said:

So you're contending that the electoral college couldn't be manipulated? Com'on, you're smarter than HLB.

It can be manipulated but with the electoral college, its damage could be limited.  Suppose California allows anyone regardless of citizenship to vote and the person they voted wins the popular vote, its impact isn't felt across the nation because not every state is going to let non-citizens vote for POTUS.  If non-citizens can vote for our President, we should be able to vote who becomes President in Canada & Mexico and the citizens of both countries wouldn't like it either.  Let our people make the decision on how our country is to be run.  How would you feel if I, a Colorado resident, was able to vote in Oregon's elections?  Same for you voting in Colorado's elections as an Oregon resident.

If we elected the POTUS via popular vote instead, that might sound awesome and grand but does that make it easier for states like Russia and China to manipulate our elections?  I'm not saying that the electoral college is manipulation proof but I think it is better than the popular vote in that case.

There is a lot of resentment towards states like California, New York, and Texas...just imagine how much worse that resentment towards those states would be with a popular vote.  That would mean states like Washington, Oregon, Arizona, and Colorado's votes do not count.  Voter participation numbers would suffer and whoever gets elected might not be the best representation that we have...wouldn't that be ironic given that one of the rallying cries for the American Revolution was Taxation Without Representation.

I'm sure if the GOP was in the Dems' shoes, they'd complain about the EC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jalapeno said:

It can be manipulated but with the electoral college, its damage could be limited.  Suppose California allows anyone regardless of citizenship to vote and the person they voted wins the popular vote, its impact isn't felt across the nation because not every state is going to let non-citizens vote for POTUS.  If non-citizens can vote for our President, we should be able to vote who becomes President in Canada & Mexico and the citizens of both countries wouldn't like it either.  Let our people make the decision on how our country is to be run.  How would you feel if I, a Colorado resident, was able to vote in Oregon's elections?  Same for you voting in Colorado's elections as an Oregon resident.

If we elected the POTUS via popular vote instead, that might sound awesome and grand but does that make it easier for states like Russia and China to manipulate our elections?  I'm not saying that the electoral college is manipulation proof but I think it is better than the popular vote in that case.

If your arguments would even APPROACH coherent, we'd have the ability to shred them.

But because they're not, all we can do is point, and facepalm.  

Voter suppression --i.e. disallowing qualified votes -- is a MUCH bigger issue than non-citizens voting.  Like, it's not even CLOSE.

https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/ensure-every-american-can-vote/vote-suppression/myth-voter-fraud

 

Quote

There is a lot of resentment towards states like California, New York, and Texas...just imagine how much worse that resentment towards those states would be with a popular vote.  That would mean states like Washington, Oregon, Arizona, and Colorado's votes do not count.  Voter participation numbers would suffer and whoever gets elected might not be the best representation that we have...wouldn't that be ironic given that one of the rallying cries for the American Revolution was Taxation Without Representation.

I'm sure if the GOP was in the Dems' shoes, they'd complain about the EC.

No, no, no, a thousand times fucking NO.

The popular vote doesn't give outsized voices to people in CA, TX or NY.  That's not how it works.  The popular vote would give every voting-age citizen in the U.S. EXACTLY ONE VOTE.  That's the epitome of fair.

Right now, Wyoming voters get about 3x the voting power of voters in CA or NY by virtue of the outsized # of delegates WY has despite their miniscule population that doesn't even approach the size of Fresno, CA.

 

Now FUCKING respond to this, you fucking pussy, because it's important, and I need you on record understanding it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Orange said:

Now FUCKING respond to this, you fucking pussy, because it's important, and I need you on record understanding it.

Why should I respond after that comment?  I already stated my case and there is no need for me to further respond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election/biden-vows-to-stay-the-course-after-gut-punch-in-iowa-idUSKBN1ZZ2NJ

Biden didn't do so well in Iowa.  From reading other articles, he seems to be hedging more of his bets in South Carolina.  If he can't win that state (February 29th), he's probably finished.

Bloomberg is cranking up his ad buys at the moment.  The question is how long will Buttieg last?  Bloomberg could be soon the lone Dem moderate...maybe as soon as next month.

The culling of the Dem nominees is happening quicker than I thought.  That means the politics are going to get nastier down the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colorado's Cory Gardner, a GOP US Senator, is probably done in Colorado because he's running against Hickenloper and given that Hick is a moderate Dem, he's pretty much a shoo-in for Gardner's seat in the US Capitol.  It is something that I was expecting even before this impeachment saga.

Count one Dem gain for the US Senate.  I will be shocked if Gardner retains his seat in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jalapeno said:

Why should I respond after that comment?  I already stated my case and there is no need for me to further respond.

This isn't about your case, it's about your fucking lies that you keep repeating, over and over and over, no matter how many times you're corrected using objective proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jalapeno said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election/biden-vows-to-stay-the-course-after-gut-punch-in-iowa-idUSKBN1ZZ2NJ

Biden didn't do so well in Iowa.  From reading other articles, he seems to be hedging more of his bets in South Carolina.  If he can't win that state (February 29th), he's probably finished.

Bloomberg is cranking up his ad buys at the moment.  The question is how long will Buttieg last?  Bloomberg could be soon the lone Dem moderate...maybe as soon as next month.

The culling of the Dem nominees is happening quicker than I thought.  That means the politics are going to get nastier down the road.

This is precisely how many were in the running for the GOP and the Dems in 2016.  It happens like this every election.  NH and IA usually winnow the field to 3-4.

 

Another very good reason to stop having NH and IA set the tone for the nation.  A state with 90% white people has no business being a bellwether for anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Orange said:

This is precisely how many were in the running for the GOP and the Dems in 2016.  It happens like this every election.  NH and IA usually winnow the field to 3-4.

 

Another very good reason to stop having NH and IA set the tone for the nation.  A state with 90% white people has no business being a bellwether for anything.

Then do something about it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jalapeno said:

Then do something about it!

It's already being done.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/04/us/politics/iowa-caucus-future.html

FYI, this is not unique to democrats.  Remember when we found out weeks later that Santorum won the Iowa caucuses in 2016?

yeah.  That fucks up your narrative, doesn't it?

When will the GOP change theirs?  Oh that's right, they WANT 90% of voters to be white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jalapeno said:

Colorado's Cory Gardner, a GOP US Senator, is probably done in Colorado because he's running against Hickenloper and given that Hick is a moderate Dem, he's pretty much a shoo-in for Gardner's seat in the US Capitol.  It is something that I was expecting even before this impeachment saga.

Count one Dem gain for the US Senate.  I will be shocked if Gardner retains his seat in this case.

JALAPENO HOT TAKE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Orange said:

It's already being done.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/04/us/politics/iowa-caucus-future.html

FYI, this is not unique to democrats.  Remember when we found out weeks later that Santorum won the Iowa caucuses in 2016?

yeah.  That fucks up your narrative, doesn't it?

When will the GOP change theirs?  Oh that's right, they WANT 90% of voters to be white.

Good to see that change is coming.  Perhaps having both parties caucus in the same state at the same time has run its course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Donate

    Please donate to support this community. We appreciate all donations!

    Donate Sidebar by DevFuse
×
×
  • Create New...