Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Genius!
it wont work,its unconstitutional it says so in the bible
have a listen and have a link to my discord serverI have a question. Under the popular vote, every president from Clinton onwards would be a Democrat. Is one party allowed to be in power for so long?
Edited by Spinosegnosaurus77 on Mar 29th 2019 at 2:51:04 PM
Peace is the only battle worth waging.Its not ideal to have one party in power in a liberal democracy, but the hope is that the opposition party will smarten up, moderate and broaden their appeal once they realize that the popular vote is out of reach. But since this is the GOP we are talking about...
Plus, you have to factor in fatigue and blaming the incumbents on the part of the voters, chances are after 16 years of Democratic Presidents, there would be some backlash, etc.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Yeah, if Republicans couldn't count on the Electoral College to hand them wins against the popular vote, then they might actually have to change themselves to appeal to more voters.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Trump is threatening to close down the US-Mexico border if Mexico doesn't stop illegal immigration by next week.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/politics/donald-trump-border-closure-again/index.html
I wonder what his plan is to close down thousands of miles of border all at once. Post a soldier every twenty feet? He could close the official crossings, I guess, but I'm not sure what that would accomplish other than to stop legal migration.
Edited by Fighteer on Mar 29th 2019 at 3:25:57 PM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
X5 Bush lost the PV in 2000, so he wouldn’t have been president in the first place.
You’re assuming he even has a plan.
Edited by Spinosegnosaurus77 on Mar 29th 2019 at 3:29:14 PM
Peace is the only battle worth waging.I don't think Trump will be satisfied until he's enclosed the entire U.S. under a giant steel dome.
Proportionally assigning votes without the Electoral College. It's a radical idea, but here's my pitch. For every vote that is cast for a candidate, we assign 1 vote to that candidate. Then the candidate with the highest number of proportionally 1:1 assigned votes becomes President.
It depends on your definition of better. If they were equally viable then you'd be correct, but they aren't.
The Electoral College is here to stay unless we can get the necessary support for a Senate Vote+State agreement or a Constitutional convention, I shouldn't have to explain how that isn't possible. On the other hand making the electoral college proportional just requires states to sign onto it, which is much more viable as a means of reform.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang![]()
I don't think that's actually true. How many electors each state gets (equal to number of representation in Congress) is in the Constitution, I think. You'd have to amend the Constitution to make it more proportionate, in which case, if that's an option why not just get rid of it?
Anyway, there is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC)
in which states pledge their electoral votes to which ever candidate wins the popular vote overall, instead of which wins the state in particular. But that only kicks in when there 276 electors pledged (enough to win) and so far the combined total of all the agreed states are just 184.
Edited by LSBK on Mar 29th 2019 at 2:39:23 PM
Anyway, there is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) in which states pledge their electoral votes to which ever candidate wins the popular vote overall, instead of which wins the state in particular. But that only kicks in when there 276 electors pledged (enough to win) and so far the combined total of all the agreed states are just 184.
You seem to have misunderstood me, I'm not talking about changing how many electors each state gets. I was specifically talking about the NPVIC and how unlike Abolishing the Electoral College it's actually possible.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Mar 29th 2019 at 12:44:11 PM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangI basically just worry about a Hunger Games scenario where 51.08 of the people vote to have 48.00 enslaved.
Because the popular vote is unrestricted versus one that guarantees protections for smaller states.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Mar 29th 2019 at 1:23:10 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.So what if 48 percent of the population votes to enslave 52 percent, but wins the EC and gets it anyway? These hypotheticals fail to demonstrate anything wrong with simple majority voting that isn't also wrong with our current system.
Heck, at least in your hypothetical, it can be legitimately said that the will of the people is in favor of slavery.
Anyway, we can keep the Senate as-is, and it can do the job it is supposed to do: be the voice of the smaller states. Any hypothetical institution of slavery would have to pass it.
Edited by Fighteer on Mar 29th 2019 at 4:28:29 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"U.S. Attorney General Barr will release redacted copy of Mueller report by mid-April
