The Thread Where People Argue About Kneeling in the NFL (merged)

#2,501
#2,501
luthervol said:
The average electoral vote represents 436,000 people, but that number rises and falls per state depending on that state’s population over 18 years of age. (The map above shows the population 18 years and older per electoral vote by state.) The states with the fewest people per electoral vote, and therefore the highest “vote power,” are Wyoming, Vermont, and North Dakota. In Wyoming, there are 143,000 people for each of its three electoral votes. The states with the weakest votes are New York, Florida, and California. These states each have around 500,000 people for each electoral vote.

In other words, one Wyoming voter has roughly the same vote power as four New York voters. (Mouse over the map and it will show you where your state ranks in voting power.)
Presidential election: A map showing the vote power of all 50 states.
Click to expand...

irrelevant - the election of POTUS is not a direct election.

within the states where electors are chosen each vote has equal weight.

It's not that hard to understand.
 
#2,502
#2,502
volinbham said:
irrelevant - the election of POTUS is not a direct election.

within the states where electors are chosen each vote has equal weight.

It's not that hard to understand.
Click to expand...

You can't seriously claim a vote in Wyoming has the same weight as a vote in NY. The voter in Wyoming had greater input into the presidential election than did the voter in NY. You can slice it any way you wish, but that fact remains.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,503
#2,503
volinbham said:
This again?

Our country was founded with the notion of limited powers for the Federal govt with other governing powers being retained by the States. Just as at the founding, states were concerned in a straight national individual vote scenario, small states would have no say.

The same remains true today. Without the EC a very small number of states could determine the leadership of the Federal govt. If anything, the Founders would think the EC more important today than ever given the massively expanded role of the Federal government.

Someone said why Senators and Congress and governors and mayors popular vote instead of EC - simple, they are all State or municipal focused positions. Any state could choose an EC system if they so chose for mayors or governors or state reps. Congressional members are representatives of the state.

The only way states agreed to even having a POTUS was the guarantee that each state mattered (or potentially mattered) to the election.
Click to expand...


The bolded statement is false and that was my original question. Why? And if they could, don't you think they would? It would be a lot more palatable than gerrymandering. But still equally disgusting.
 
#2,504
#2,504
luthervol said:
You can't seriously claim a vote in Wyoming has the same weight as a vote in NY. The voter in Wyoming had greater input into the presidential election than did the voter in NY. You can slice it any way you wish, but that fact remains.
Click to expand...

I am not claiming that.

Within WY each vote counts the same as it does within each state.

The POTUS election system is not popular vote and it is not for a reason. There is a reason (that has been explained time and time again) why we use Electors rather than the popular vote. There is no Federal post election I know of that is a popular vote election in the US - can you think of one?

I get you don't like it. You can whine all you like but it is not an illegitimate system in any form or function. It was specifically designed to maintain state input to the Federal governance.

The good news for you is the Founders built in a change mechanism. Anyone is free to pursue said change so you can whine that it's not fair or you can get busy an organize a change movement. Good luck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,505
#2,505
luthervol said:
The bolded statement is false and that was my original question. Why? And if they could, don't you think they would? It would be a lot more palatable than gerrymandering. But still equally disgusting.
Click to expand...

The bolded statement is not false. A state certainly could choose to use an electorate system based on counties for governor if they liked. I'd argue in some states it would make sense.

Nothing disgusting about it.
 
#2,506
#2,506
Given your dictatorial leanings Luther you realize the Founders set up a system where we could decide to go full monarchy if we so chose?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,507
#2,507
Back to the thread topic - I wouldn't have pulled a Pence but is it his right to express himself just as the players do? Why crap on him for it if you defend the players?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,508
#2,508
County Unit System | New Georgia Encyclopedia

Constitutional challenges to this system and others like it elsewhere in the nation were made several times in the 1940s and 1950s. The U.S. Supreme Court refused, however, to take on such cases because the court considered the dispute to be an apportionment issue that should be resolved within individual states. Finally, in March 1962 the Supreme Court considered a Tennessee-based case, Baker v. Carr, in which it ruled that all citizens' votes should have equal weight and that the county unit system violated the principle of "one man, one vote."

Judge Griffin Bell headed a judicial panel that ruled in April 1962 that the system was indeed invalid in its present form and must be redesigned before the next Democratic primary, which was scheduled for September. The panel declared that every vote was to be given equal weight regardless of where in the state a voter lived.
 
#2,509
#2,509
luthervol said:
County Unit System | New Georgia Encyclopedia

Constitutional challenges to this system and others like it elsewhere in the nation were made several times in the 1940s and 1950s. The U.S. Supreme Court refused, however, to take on such cases because the court considered the dispute to be an apportionment issue that should be resolved within individual states. Finally, in March 1962 the Supreme Court considered a Tennessee-based case, Baker v. Carr, in which it ruled that all citizens' votes should have equal weight and that the county unit system violated the principle of "one man, one vote."

Judge Griffin Bell headed a judicial panel that ruled in April 1962 that the system was indeed invalid in its present form and must be redesigned before the next Democratic primary, which was scheduled for September. The panel declared that every vote was to be given equal weight regardless of where in the state a voter lived.
Click to expand...

Not an elector system with individual votes counting the same within the state or county.

In effect, the system of allotting votes by county, with little regard for population differences, allowed rural counties to control Georgia elections by minimizing the impact of the growing urban centers, particularly Atlanta.
Under the county unit system, in effect from 1917 to 1962, a total of 410 unit votes were distributed among Georgia counties based on their designation as rural, town, or urban counties. Rural counties, in total, had 242 votes in primary elections, while town counties had 120, and urban counties had 48. Rural counties enjoyed 59 percent of the primary votes under this system, although by 1960 only 32 percent of the state's population lived in rural counties.
Distribution of Votes in the County Unit System
All 159 counties were classified according to population into one of three categories: urban, town, and rural. Urban counties were the 8 most populous; town counties were the next 30 in population size; and rural counties constituted the remaining 121. Based upon this classification, each county received unit votes in statewide primaries. The urban counties received six unit votes each, the town counties received four unit votes each, and the rural counties received two unit votes each.
Click to expand...

Try again on whether states could go to an EC style system.

Also is irrelevant to legitimacy of the POTUS EC system.

Stop posting and get busy effecting the change you desire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,510
#2,510
volinbham said:
Back to the thread topic - I wouldn't have pulled a Pence but is it his right to express himself just as the players do? Why crap on him for it if you defend the players?
Click to expand...

Thanks for getting the thread back on topic. I think it is the calculated strategy from trump that's at issue. Trump obviously wanted to add fuel to the fire. Everyone should closely consider why.
 
#2,511
#2,511
luthervol said:
Thanks for getting the thread back on topic. I think it is the calculated strategy from trump that's at issue. Trump obviously wanted to add fuel to the fire. Everyone should closely consider why.
Click to expand...

wouldn't the same apply to the protestors? clearly they have a calculated strategy.

I care not about the whole thing but find it funny how people pick a side
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#2,512
#2,512
luthervol said:
Thanks for getting the thread back on topic. I think it is the calculated strategy from trump that's at issue. Trump obviously wanted to add fuel to the fire. Everyone should closely consider why.
Click to expand...

I think it's Trump both appealing to his base and screwing with the NFL for revenge.
 
#2,513
#2,513
volinbham said:
Not an elector system with individual votes counting the same within the state or county.



Try again on whether states could go to an EC style system.

Also is irrelevant to legitimacy of the POTUS EC system.

Stop posting and get busy effecting the change you desire.
Click to expand...

I'll accept your apology and admission that you were wrong. The EC system is archaic and wrong. The majority realize this, because it's the majority that gets screwed. The rural state conservatives will ride it as long as they can. They're just hating that they couldn't get into the state level.
 
#2,515
#2,515
luthervol said:
I'll accept your apology and admission that you were wrong. The EC system is archaic and wrong. The majority realize this, because it's the majority that gets screwed. The rural state conservatives will ride it as long as they can. They're just hating that they couldn't get into the state level.
Click to expand...

ha - can't support it with an argument so you claim victory

King Luther has spoketh

Funny how you are all about majority rule - I'll remember that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,516
#2,516
volinbham said:
ha - can't support it with an argument so you claim victory

King Luther has spoketh

Funny how you are all about majority rule - I'll remember that.
Click to expand...

It's more about consistency and every vote counts the same. Majority shouldn't always rule - but it should in elections. That's a rather large distinction.
 
#2,517
#2,517
luthervol said:
It's more about consistency and every vote counts the same. Majority shouldn't always rule - but it should in elections. That's a rather large distinction.
Click to expand...

The Senate must drive you nuts - Wyoming gets 2 just like everyone else. The horrors!

How is that even fair! OMG!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,519
#2,519
volinbham said:
The Senate must drive you nuts - Wyoming gets 2 just like everyone else. The horrors!

How is that even fair! OMG!!!
Click to expand...

It does bother me a little. I'm not sure that it is fair. I'm not sure that the benefits outweigh the negatives.
 
#2,523
#2,523
CNN reports that this little antic cost the taxpayers a couple hundred grand, plus advance team and secret service costs. So let's figure $250,000, conservatively.

As a taxpayer, I think it fair to require that this be reimbursed. As it was Trump's caper, as he has admitted, I expect him to personally write the check.

If he does not, Congress should investigate and take action.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top