Donald Trump and US politics

Yes, for congress.

"

Jennik wrote:

Everyone's vote should be equally counted. All voices should be equally weighted in an election. The presidency should be decided by all Americans without unfairly favoring those who live inside certain arbitrary shapes drawn in the dirt.

Arbitrary, like the arbitrary border of the United States? Why just all Americans? Why shouldn't the people of Brazil have a say in who is the US President? Without the electoral college system, there would be no UNITED States of America, we would just have a bunch of different nation states. The Founding Parental Units feared a tyranny of the majority, so they intentionally put limits on the raw popular vote.

I rarely see people who complain about the electoral college system complaining about how most states allocate ALL of their votes to the majority winner, or complain about the number of seats allocated in Congress.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

"

Jennik wrote:

Everyone's vote should be equally counted. All voices should be equally weighted in an election. The presidency should be decided by all Americans without unfairly favoring those who live inside certain arbitrary shapes drawn in the dirt.

its feared a tyranny of the majority, so they intentionally put limits on the raw popular vote.

I rarely see people who complain about the electoral college system complaining about how most states allocate ALL of their votes to the majority winner, or complain about the number of seats allocated in Congress.

I bet there's not that many people that actually understand much of their own system, which make them complain about something else.

Just because there's not that much complaining about a specific aspect doesn't mean it's not broken.

Tyranny of the majority bad! Tyranny of the minority good!

Anyone who brings up the phrase "tyranny of the majority" in the context of the electoral college is demonstrating a shameful lack of critical thinking and reasoning skills. If you believe the choice of the majority being selected is a problem because they're only a subset of the population, how could allowing an even smaller subset of the population to make the choice possibly be better? All you're doing is representing even fewer people.

"

Jennik wrote:

Tyranny of the majority bad! Tyranny of the minority good!

Anyone who brings up the phrase "tyranny of the majority" in the context of the electoral college is demonstrating a shameful lack of critical thinking and reasoning skills. If you believe the choice of the majority being selected is a problem because they're only a subset of the population, how could allowing an even smaller subset of the population to make the choice possibly be better? All you're doing is representing even fewer people.

Gee, you really convinced me.

Allowing anybody to decide is a bad idea.

"

Jennik wrote:

Tyranny of the majority bad! Tyranny of the minority good!

Anyone who brings up the phrase "tyranny of the majority" in the context of the electoral college is demonstrating a shameful lack of critical thinking and reasoning skills. If you believe the choice of the majority being selected is a problem because they're only a subset of the population, how could allowing an even smaller subset of the population to make the choice possibly be better? All you're doing is representing even fewer people.

I thought SJWs loved tyrannical minorities? They sure love BLM.

on a more serious note:

http://www.socialstudiesforkids.com/articles/government/theelectoralcollege.htm

"

Jennik wrote:

Tyranny of the majority bad! Tyranny of the minority good!

Anyone who brings up the phrase "tyranny of the majority" in the context of the electoral college is demonstrating a shameful lack of critical thinking and reasoning skills. If you believe the choice of the majority being selected is a problem because they're only a subset of the population, how could allowing an even smaller subset of the population to make the choice possibly be better? All you're doing is representing even fewer people.

Didn't the GOP try to ban Critical Thinking in schools a while ago...


GOP Opposes Critical Thinking
Party platform paints original ideas as a liberal conspiracy

"

Jennik wrote:

Tyranny of the majority bad! Tyranny of the minority good!

Anyone who brings up the phrase "tyranny of the majority" in the context of the electoral college is demonstrating a shameful lack of critical thinking and reasoning skills. If you believe the choice of the majority being selected is a problem because they're only a subset of the population, how could allowing an even smaller subset of the population to make the choice possibly be better? All you're doing is representing even fewer people.

You are forgetting that States have rights under the Constitution, under the 10th Amendment



"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."



That is why we are the United STATES of America, and not just America. States can have their own culture, priorities and positions.

If it weren't for those differences we probably wouldn't have same sex marriage yet (the federal government would have quashed that long ago), nor would we have the environmental standards we do, especially for automobiles, etc.

Allowing states to largely make their own path is how much of progress in America is made. Imagine if the federal government did have universal power - especially right now. Trump and the GOP could just steam roll the states and force them to follow the MAGA agenda.

States' rights are important.

"

Kellog wrote:

"

Jennik wrote:

Tyranny of the majority bad! Tyranny of the minority good!

Anyone who brings up the phrase "tyranny of the majority" in the context of the electoral college is demonstrating a shameful lack of critical thinking and reasoning skills. If you believe the choice of the majority being selected is a problem because they're only a subset of the population, how could allowing an even smaller subset of the population to make the choice possibly be better? All you're doing is representing even fewer people.

Didn't the GOP try to ban Critical Thinking in schools a while ago...


GOP Opposes Critical Thinking
Party platform paints original ideas as a liberal conspiracy

If this is your idea of critical thinking, I’d try to ban it too.

I’ll outline what just transpired:
1) Fail to understand the meaning of a statement
2) Use vitriol to substantiate the misunderstanding
3) Pretend the failure is now somebody else’s responsibility.

Actual meaning of the statement: Any democratically elected decision, whether it is who should lead, or what brand of milk to buy, means somebody has to inflict their will upon somebody else. This is generally an okay idea—it is how our society has decided to resolve conflicts of direction, and it sure as hell beats how some other cultures handle their differences. Tyranny of the many, however, describes how a smaller region can inflict its will upon a larger region. Our system is a compromise between the significance of a population and the significance of a region—because yes, “arbitrary lines” are significant. Why? The dumb answer is because the problems of New York + California ( sum population 56,631,000) do not equal the problems of Louisiana + Kentucky + Oregon + Oklahoma + Connecticut + Iowa + Mississippi + Arkansas + Kansas + Utah + Nevada + New Mexico + West Virginia + Nebraska + Idaho + Hawaii + Maine + New Hampshire + Rhode Island + Montana + Delaware + South Dakota + Alaska + North Dakota + Vermont + Washington, D. C. + Wyoming (sum population 55,503,000).