Cal-exit

[max225]

Because we have the highest population of any state and in a democracy that should matter the most.

This country is a "representative democracy", last i checked the translation of the word democracy means majority rule.

The fact that trump got 290 votes vs 228 for Clinton while getting 600,000 less actual votes further demonstrates how fucked up the electoral collage is.

Solution? Just do a popular vote. Majority wins

Popular vote doesn't work either, Mr. McBoatface.

Right let's just get dictators or bring monarchies back

[razr390]

No one cares? Why the hell would anyone campaign in California when it is decidedly ALWAYS Democratic?

I agree with you, can you imagine how frustrated Drumpf supporters in California feel whenever they cast their vote?

Because we have the highest population of any state and in a democracy that should matter the most.

This country is a "representative democracy", last i checked the translation of the word democracy means majority rule.

The fact that trump got 290 votes vs 228 for Clinton while getting 600,000 less actual votes further demonstrates how fucked up the electoral collage is.

Solution? Just do a popular vote. Majority wins

you are not grasping the concept.

[max225]

Because we have the highest population of any state and in a democracy that should matter the most.

This country is a "representative democracy", last i checked the translation of the word democracy means majority rule.

The fact that trump got 290 votes vs 228 for Clinton while getting 600,000 less actual votes further demonstrates how fucked up the electoral collage is.

Solution? Just do a popular vote. Majority wins

you are not grasping the concept.

I fully understand how the system works, but I don't agree with it.

[troyguitar]

Popular vote doesn't work either, Mr. McBoatface.

Right let's just get dictators or bring monarchies back

Dat philosopher king

Alternatively use poll tests. The simplest one:

All ballots are write-in only. You get a list of the positions up for election and have to write in your choice of candidate. If you can't even remember the name of the person you want, then your vote does not deserve to count.

[max225]

Because we have the highest population of any state and in a democracy that should matter the most.

This country is a "representative democracy", last i checked the translation of the word democracy means majority rule.

The fact that trump got 290 votes vs 228 for Clinton while getting 600,000 less actual votes further demonstrates how fucked up the electoral collage is.

Solution? Just do a popular vote. Majority wins

We are a democratic REPUBLIC specifically designed to prevent tyranny of the majority.

I don't like the loss any more than anyone else, but trying to plan a change to the Constitution is wasted effort that could be going to winning the midterms which are less than two years away.

Explain the tyranny part please, and how not giving victory to the majority is an outcome without consequences ?!

[razr390]

Popular vote doesn't work either, Mr. McBoatface.

Right let's just get dictators or bring monarchies back

dude... lol

if it was only popular vote half of the country's citizens' needs and wants would not even be considered as important. Try, for a second, I know it's hard, but try to imagine that you're living in the midwest, maybe in a state like Montana or the like, and every election, you'd go vote and you'd realize that in reality your vote doesn't count for shit because BOTH candidates would not even consider your votes, they'd go and fight in major population areas.

You know what would happen? Instead of swing states you'd have swing cities or counties. It'll be the same monster, with lower voter turnout based off of the overall population as a whole. People would stop showing up to vote, and you'd get elections where instead of ~5x,xxx,xxx votes on each side you'll have maybe 5-10million on each side. The population areas will get further divided.

Electoral college, however flawed it is, encourages people to participate in their civic duties.

[max225]

Countless ppl don't end up voting out here because "my vote doesn't matter anyways"

I'm just saying our system is need of a refresh. Does it work ? Mainly yes. But it needs to be updated

[troyguitar]

Because we have the highest population of any state and in a democracy that should matter the most.

This country is a "representative democracy", last i checked the translation of the word democracy means majority rule.

The fact that trump got 290 votes vs 228 for Clinton while getting 600,000 less actual votes further demonstrates how fucked up the electoral collage is.

Solution? Just do a popular vote. Majority wins

We are a democratic REPUBLIC specifically designed to prevent tyranny of the majority.

I don't like the loss any more than anyone else, but trying to plan a change to the Constitution is wasted effort that could be going to winning the midterms which are less than two years away.

You mean fighting for what you believe in is a waste of time because it's impossible to achieve? I was trying to say the same exact thing to you when you claimed that my having that attitude made you sad as a friend and as an American... but it's OK now?

[max225]

Right let's just get dictators or bring monarchies back

dude... lol

if it was only popular vote half of the country's citizens' needs and wants would not even be considered as important. Try, for a second, I know it's hard, but try to imagine that you're living in the midwest, maybe in a state like Montana or the like, and every election, you'd go vote and you'd realize that in reality your vote doesn't count for shit because BOTH candidates would not even consider your votes, they'd go and fight in major population areas.

You know what would happen? Instead of swing states you'd have swing cities or counties. It'll be the same monster, with lower voter turnout based off of the overall population as a whole. People would stop showing up to vote, and you'd get elections where instead of ~5x,xxx,xxx votes on each side you'll have maybe 5-10million on each side. The population areas will get further divided.

Electoral college, however flawed it is, encourages people to participate in their civic duties.

I willing to argue the complete opposite. And in a democracy majority rules, who cares about Montana?!

[razr390]

Countless ppl don't end up voting out here because "my vote doesn't matter anyways"

I'm just saying our system is need of a refresh. Does it work ? Mainly yes. But it needs to be updated

Mainly = when your candidate wins, doesn't work when candidate doesn't?

My candidate did not win, yet I am able to provide a rational understanding as to why she lost this election, and the easiest thing to do is blame the electoral college, or FBI, but in reality she has an unprecedented history of unpopularity, then the e-mails, then the cozing up to wall street and courting celebrity endorsements (as if that did anything), pandering to minorities (HOT SAUCE IN MY POCKET, WTF?!?), rigging the primaries against another anti-establishment candidate (albeit farfetched policies, he had more popularity than she did). She represented the "same ol' same ol' politics" and many people were tired of that. A Republican did not win the election, either. Donald Trump won the election. RNC and DNC super volatile, and this was the reality check both parties needed to show them that people are really sick of their shit. Whether or not they take the message and improve come 2018 elections, it is up to them. But I know that blame gaming and rioting in the street furthers the fact that these elections will get more and more volatile because people are scared to accept criticism of themselves and god forbid they could've done something better.

[max225]

Countless ppl don't end up voting out here because "my vote doesn't matter anyways"

I'm just saying our system is need of a refresh. Does it work ? Mainly yes. But it needs to be updated

Mainly = when your candidate wins, doesn't work when candidate doesn't?

My candidate did not win, yet I am able to provide a rational understanding as to why she lost this election, and the easiest thing to do is blame the electoral college, or FBI, but in reality she has an unprecedented history of unpopularity, then the e-mails, then the cozing up to wall street and courting celebrity endorsements (as if that did anything), pandering to minorities (HOT SAUCE IN MY POCKET, WTF?!?), rigging the primaries against another anti-establishment candidate (albeit farfetched policies, he had more popularity than she did). She represented the "same ol' same ol' politics" and many people were tired of that. A Republican did not win the election, either. Donald Trump won the election. RNC and DNC super volatile, and this was the reality check both parties needed to show them that people are really sick of their shit. Whether or not they take the message and improve come 2018 elections, it is up to them. But I know that blame gaming and rioting in the street furthers the fact that these elections will get more and more volatile because people are scared to accept criticism of themselves and god forbid they could've done something better.

That's not the point though. The point is SHE DID WIN the majority of votes. The outcome of this election is nto democracy.

[razr390]

dude... lol

if it was only popular vote half of the country's citizens' needs and wants would not even be considered as important. Try, for a second, I know it's hard, but try to imagine that you're living in the midwest, maybe in a state like Montana or the like, and every election, you'd go vote and you'd realize that in reality your vote doesn't count for shit because BOTH candidates would not even consider your votes, they'd go and fight in major population areas.

You know what would happen? Instead of swing states you'd have swing cities or counties. It'll be the same monster, with lower voter turnout based off of the overall population as a whole. People would stop showing up to vote, and you'd get elections where instead of ~5x,xxx,xxx votes on each side you'll have maybe 5-10million on each side. The population areas will get further divided.

Electoral college, however flawed it is, encourages people to participate in their civic duties.

I willing to argue the complete opposite. And in a democracy majority rules, who cares about Montana?!

That is not how the system of federalism and "United States" works. If that were the case then each state should just be its own country, right?

Oh wow, what about California? "Who cares about Los Angeles county? majority rules?"!

[razr390]

Mainly = when your candidate wins, doesn't work when candidate doesn't?

My candidate did not win, yet I am able to provide a rational understanding as to why she lost this election, and the easiest thing to do is blame the electoral college, or FBI, but in reality she has an unprecedented history of unpopularity, then the e-mails, then the cozing up to wall street and courting celebrity endorsements (as if that did anything), pandering to minorities (HOT SAUCE IN MY POCKET, WTF?!?), rigging the primaries against another anti-establishment candidate (albeit farfetched policies, he had more popularity than she did). She represented the "same ol' same ol' politics" and many people were tired of that. A Republican did not win the election, either. Donald Drumpf won the election. RNC and DNC super volatile, and this was the reality check both parties needed to show them that people are really sick of their shit. Whether or not they take the message and improve come 2018 elections, it is up to them. But I know that blame gaming and rioting in the street furthers the fact that these elections will get more and more volatile because people are scared to accept criticism of themselves and god forbid they could've done something better.

That's not the point though. The point is SHE DID WIN the majority of votes. The outcome of this election is nto democracy.

She won the majority of votes because of the disproportionate spread of population, easily those extra votes could've come from California or New York... no surprise, but it was based on popular vote PER STATE, not cumulative.

[max225]

I willing to argue the complete opposite. And in a democracy majority rules, who cares about Montana?!

That is not how the system of federalism and "United States" works. If that were the case then each state should just be its own country, right?

Oh wow, what about California? "Who cares about Los Angeles county? majority rules?"!

I don't understand what you're saying

[razr390]

That is not how the system of federalism and "United States" works. If that were the case then each state should just be its own country, right?

Oh wow, what about California? "Who cares about Los Angeles county? majority rules?"!

I don't understand what you're saying

Your "who cares about Montana" comment can be applied to microscopic levels. As long as Montana is part of the United States, the people that live in Montana have just as much value as those who live in California.

[razr390]

You mean fighting for what you believe in is a waste of time because it's impossible to achieve? I was trying to say the same exact thing to you when you claimed that my having that attitude made you sad as a friend and as an American... but it's OK now?

Incorrect. A constitutional amendment is extremely difficult especially when you aren't in power. Focus on taking power FIRST then you can work on something that was designed to be far more difficult to change than law.

But when the other side wins (taking power) via the Electoral College, there is no more cause for concern about it

[max225]

I don't understand what you're saying

Your "who cares about Montana" comment can be applied to microscopic levels. As long as Montana is part of the United States, the people that live in Montana have just as much value as those who live in California.

A singular person yes everyone is equal. However what 38 million Californians want carries 38x the weight of what 1million Montanians?! want. That's how democracies work

[razr390]

Your "who cares about Montana" comment can be applied to microscopic levels. As long as Montana is part of the United States, the people that live in Montana have just as much value as those who live in California.

A singular person yes everyone is equal. However what 38 million Californians want carries 38x the weight of what 1million Montanians?! want. That's how democracies work

That's why you have local elections too. Beauty of federalism. States have insane powers to make their own constitutions and laws and whatnot. What 38 million californians want is in the constitution of california, the laws of california, and the amendments they pass. Federally, what 38 million californians want has to play nice to the rest of the 49 states in our country.

[troyguitar]

A singular person yes everyone is equal. However what 38 million Californians want carries 38x the weight of what 1million Montanians?! want. That's how democracies work

And thank God we aren't a democracy.

God is the whole problem with this country (and most of the planet).

...and that's why nothing I want will EVER come to pass. Step 0 is get rid of religion. Rational thought will never dominate until religion is relegated to the obscure lunatic cult status it deserves. Won't happen, and trying to make it happen would be a waste of my own life.

[max225]

God is the whole problem with this country (and most of the planet).

...and that's why nothing I want will EVER come to pass. Step 0 is get rid of religion. Rational thought will never dominate until religion is relegated to the obscure lunatic cult status it deserves. Won't happen, and trying to make it happen would be a waste of my own life.

As long as we actually get it out of government, who cares what people believe?

Also, this is my whole point, if we were a pure democracy the religious would totally take over in a way that makes right now look like child's play.

You mean like banning abortions in certain states having god on our currency and putting your hand on the Bible when becoming president... yea it would be crazy

[troyguitar]

God is the whole problem with this country (and most of the planet).

...and that's why nothing I want will EVER come to pass. Step 0 is get rid of religion. Rational thought will never dominate until religion is relegated to the obscure lunatic cult status it deserves. Won't happen, and trying to make it happen would be a waste of my own life.

As long as we actually get it out of government, who cares what people believe?

Also, this is my whole point, if we were a pure democracy the religious would totally take over in a way that makes right now look like child's play.

You can't get it out of government without getting it out of the majority of people's minds... unless you take away their right to vote on the grounds of religious belief being a dangerous mental illness.

In case you hadn't noticed, it's impossible to win even a local election in the vast majority of the world without demonstrating and supporting religious belief.

[troyguitar]

As long as we actually get it out of government, who cares what people believe?

Also, this is my whole point, if we were a pure democracy the religious would totally take over in a way that makes right now look like child's play.

You mean like banning abortions in certain states having god on our currency and putting your hand on the Bible when becoming president... yea it would be crazy

E pluribus unum, motherfuckers.

Neil deGrasse Tyson 2020

"Make America Smart Again"

[troyguitar]

You mean like banning abortions in certain states having god on our currency and putting your hand on the Bible when becoming president... yea it would be crazy

Try things like forced church attendance. Censorship on the internet.

Etc.

As far as those folks are concerned we are a hedonistic nation on the verge of hell. Our opinions here are far far from the mainstream.

Those people belong in asylums. How do you propose we put them there?

[max225]

You mean like banning abortions in certain states having god on our currency and putting your hand on the Bible when becoming president... yea it would be crazy

Try things like forced church attendance. Censorship on the internet.

Etc.

As far as those folks are concerned we are a hedonistic nation on the verge of hell. Our opinions here are far far from the mainstream.

I dunno bruh, you must not have attended some our colorful public events here like the Folsom street fair.

Religion is still prominent but this nation was supposedly built on the premise of you can believe whatever you want so no way in hell(pun intended ) will a democacry cause some kind of religious fananticism

[max225]

I dunno bruh, you must not have attended some our colorful public events here like the Folsom street fair.

Religion is still prominent but this nation was supposedly built on the premise of you can believe whatever you want so no way in hell(pun intended ) will a democacry cause some kind of religious fananticism

Oh agreed!! But this is protected by the fact we DONT have pure democracy.

Hmm don't know if i can intelligently disagree with what you're saying, because i frankly don't know where this country would be with pure democracy.

I am just thinking out loud when I am discussing the electoral college and it's current role in the election. I think there are some strong pros and cons for the institution.

However I do think the cons outweigh the pros.

But that's just my opinion on the internet