Vae on 17/2/2018 at 04:16
Quote Posted by Starker
What, people in cities don't count as much? Why?
This is because the U.S.A is a Union of States...50 States, each with their own representative government. As opposed to a one-state country, such as Cuba or Mexico.
Renzatic on 17/2/2018 at 05:15
Moved.
Renzatic on 17/2/2018 at 05:16
Quote Posted by Vae
This is because the U.S.A is a Union of States...50 States, each with their own representative government. As opposed to a one-state country, such as Cuba or Mexico.
You do know there are 31 states in Mexico, right?
Starker on 17/2/2018 at 05:35
Yeah, it's not called the United Mexican States (Estados Unidos Mexicanos) for nothing.
Also, we were talking about people's support, so the argument still goes -- why is the vote of a city-dweller considered less valuable? How is it that a minority of voters is better suited to represent the opinion or the attitude of a nation than a majority of voters?
Renzatic on 17/2/2018 at 06:09
It's strange seeing a massive amount of people proclaim Trump's victory as the will of the people being spoken aloud, while denying the votes of ~3 million American voices as being an unimportant aside all in the same breath. It's a contradiction laid bare.
Though truth be told, the electoral college isn't the massive drag on our representative republic it's made out to be, and ridding ourselves of it wouldn't make a huge amount of difference.
The college has been in place since the founding of the nation. Of the multiple elections we've held, only 5 have failed to account for the popular vote. Of those 5, 2 have been in recent history. George Bush, who lost by around 500k votes, and Trump, who lost the popular vote by the greatest margin in US history. Now he's still officially the president despite this. Just because his entire run for the presidency, from the primaries, to the actual election, has been by the barest skin of his teeth, he did win per the rules. We can't really argue that.
What we can argue is that his presidency is a mandate from the American people. Like I said, he lost the popular vote by the largest margin in history, and his candidacy was won on a bare 45% plurality among an oversaturated field. If anything, he lucked into the presidency through a cascading comedy of errors, which HE should've long since considered as a warning to aim more for a bipartisan presidency. More republicans voted against him in the primaries, and more people in general voted against him during the election. His approval ratings have never peaked above 45%. He is not a well liked individual.
Instead, he sees everything as a sound, solid, and undeniable victory. A mandate from America herself. He and his closest followers now believe they're perfectly entitled to scream of the will of the people being heard, to do what they want, when they want, whenever they want.
They should all be thanking God above the economy is doing so well, because that's the ONLY thing that's currently saving him.
Renzatic on 17/2/2018 at 06:12
Quote Posted by Vae
dema, is correct...Goldmoon has in fact consistently stated from the beginning that he is not aligned with either political party, and the corruption that has infiltrated our entire political system needs to end...With him naturally being anti-Hillary, due to her being a clear representation of this political corruption. Any support of Trump, by Goldmoon, is predicated on him being an
agent of disruption, as a means of destruction for this current corrupt system, as opposed to a motivation derived from politically conservative principals.
Renz, you should take a cue from dema, who is respected for his balanced assessments and fair adjudications, rather than unethically threaten a long-term member with your flagrant misconceptions.
If that is the case, which I severely doubt, then he's approaching this from the entirely wrong tact. Trump represents less a disruption than he does a purer form of corruption of the very government he's meant to protect. From a political standpoint, his policies and actions aren't vastly removed from what we would've seen were Rubio, Kasich, or Jeb! would've fielded were they to have won the Republican nomination. His biggest difference is he absolutely no tact, doesn't respect the dignity of the office he represents, and bases his decisions primarily upon who likes him, and what benefits him the most. Donald Trump doesn't care about the United States. He cares about Donald Trump. The presidency is but a checked box on his bigly yuge resume.
All he's accomplished while sitting in the highest seat of the land is piss off our closest allies, while he makes moves to buddy up with people who the rest of the world views at wannabe autocrats (Putin), or are unhinged populists who happily take hardline extremist measures in response to difficult social issues (Duterte). I mean here we are, the country in the midst of an investigation that very finely defines an attempted tampering of our election process, with an ever increasing amount of evidence supporting the various claims surrounding it, and what has Trump done in regards? Constantly, desperately tweets his innocence, attack the very institutions who are meant to protect us from such infringements, while publicly supporting the very man who has likely spearheaded the campaign against our most precious of processes, steadfastly refusing to implement sanctions against him that have passed both the House and Senate by unanimous vote, a rare thing in these politically riven days. In the meanwhile, he's managed to land himself in a very public insult spree with the mayor of London.
Of the 13 men and women indicted today, do you believe Trump will request to have them extradited to stand trial, possibly answer for their crimes if they're found guilty?
I severely doubt it.
If he is an agent of change, his is one that'll leave the country considerably worse off than it was previously. It seems you're willing to trade one kind of corruption for another even grosser and more flagrant, telling yourself all the while that you're the heroes of this little anarchist-lite populist fairy tale. Let's go shoot up another pizza parlor, huh? Maybe this time you'll kill someone. You know, for the good of the nation.
Now let me explain to you why I'm so hard on Gold. Out of just about everyone here, he is the one person I've received the most PMs and reports over. It's not because of his politics. There are plenty of people who come in here with a right leaning bent who neither get reported, nor give me a reason to believe I should intervene. See, he has a previous reputation across the entire board that he's more than happy to live up to. He somehow manages to be sanctimonious, condescending, yet nigh incomprehensible all at the same time. Just about every thread he pops into, he stirs shit up, coming off high and mighty, looking down his nose at everyone while he proclaims a jovial neutrality that he fails to honor through his actions. In short, he's annoying. Contributes almost nothing. Every time I have to deal with him, I lose a bit of patience. Others have long since lost theirs.
So you want to talk about ethics? Maybe I should ban him full time from commchat. That would be the most ethical course of action. I mean it's been made pretty fucking obvious to me multiple times that other people don't particularly like him here. Yet here I am, giving him slap on the wrist after slap on the wrist after slap on the wrist because he has been a member here a long time. I am pretty much punishing everyone else by allowing him to stay, even with the occasional breaks. Yet let him stay I do.
Don't ask me why. I'm starting to second guess myself here, question my...obvious flagrant misconceptions.
Pyrian on 17/2/2018 at 07:03
Quote Posted by Renzatic
...wouldn't make a huge amount of difference. ...George Bush, ..., and Trump...
I don't think your facts support your position.
Renzatic on 17/2/2018 at 07:31
Yeah, well...uh, touche.
I guess if the electoral college is good for anything, it's giving the appearance of a fair shake. Without it, you'd have California, New York, Texas, Illinois, and Florida determining the elections year after year after year. With the EC in place, battleground states can rotate somewhat, giving the impression that different can at least playing a part in the election.
Starker on 17/2/2018 at 07:43
Not that there's a huge amount of difference between a right wing party and an extra right wing party in the first place.
Renzatic on 17/2/2018 at 08:03
You know, I can't even muster up enough enthusiasm to really defend it. If we were to get rid of it, elections would go about the same as they always do. The only difference would be we wouldn't see these (previously) rare instances where wins in the right places determine the outcome in lieu than the most votes.