Why The Electoral College Is Fair

[Monk Of Reason]

I should have qualified "majority" as the majority of the country living in non-urban areas.

Still. Same question just revised. Would you, with the tables flipped, support the inflation of value of urban votes if the majority of urban voters dissagreed with the majority of rural areas?

 

[Nous]

Because I and a majority of the country do not care for the political ideology of people living in New York and Settle and other mega metropolitan areas

I should have qualified "majority" as the majority of the country living in non-urban areas.

The myth of big cities controlling election results has already been discussed on this board too.

The population of the 20 largest cities accounts for only 10% of the US population. The population of the 50 largest cities make up on only 15% of the nation’s population

9.5.1 MYTH: Big cities, such as Los Angeles, would control a nationwide popular vote for President.


QUICK ANSWER:

• Under a national popular vote, every vote would be equal throughout the United States. A vote cast in a big city would be no more (or less) valuable or controlling than a vote cast anywhere else.

• Los Angeles does not control the outcome of statewide elections in California and therefore is hardly in a position to dominate a nationwide election. The fact that Los Angeles does not control the outcome of statewide elections in its own state is evidenced by the fact that Republicans such as Ronald Reagan, George Deukmejian, Pete Wilson, and Arnold Schwarzenegger were elected Governor in recent years without ever winning Los Angeles.

• The origins of the myth about big cities may stem from the misconceptions that big cities are bigger than they actually are, and that big cities account for a greater fraction of the nation’s population than they actually do. In fact, 85% of the population of the United States lives in places with a population of fewer than 365,000 (the population of Arlington, Texas—the nation’s 50th biggest city).​

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/sites/default/files/eve-4th-ed-ch-9-myths-2013-2-21.pdf

(My underlining)

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Is your point that minorities don't deserve representation because some are in the Klan?

I think you're trying to be unnecessarily difficult. Why would you think my point would be minorities don't deserve representation because of the existence of the Klan?

 

[suncowiam]

Thank you for the source.

I do not consider the Huffington Post quoting from Buzz Feed to be very reliable.

The Huffington Post and Buzz Feed only focused on two sentences of Pence's "The Great American Smoke Out".

They did not quote Pence when he said,

"This is not to say that smoking is good for you.... news flash: smoking is not good for you. If you are reading this article through the blue haze of cigarette smoke you should quit."

Pence is merely against the idea that the Federal Government should have the power to "protect us from ourselves". If someone wants to smoke, and thus lessen their lifespan, they should be free to do so. Just as anyone should be able to eat fast food, sky dive, ski, have consensual unprotected sex or go deep sea diving - which could also pose fatal health risks.

Pence said in closing,

"Even a conservative like me would support government big enough to protect us from foreign threats and threats to our domestic tranquility but the tobacco deal goes to the next level. Government big enough to protect us from our own stubborn wills. And a government of such plenary power, once conceived will hardly stop at tobacco. Surely the scourge of fatty foods and their attendant cost to the health care economy bears some consideration. How about the role of caffeine in fomenting greater stress in the lives of working Americans? Don't get me started about the dangers of sports utility vehicles!
Those of you who find the tobacco deal acceptable should be warned as you sit, reading this magazine, sipping a cup of hot coffee with a hamburger on your mind for lunch. A government big enough to go after smokers is big enough to go after you."

http://web.archive.org/web/20010415085348/http://mikepence.com/smoke.html

Let's assume you're right, which I can believe... but....

Why then does he argue against LGBT? If individuals can choose to smoke then why can't individuals even choose a sexual orientation? I'm not placing any value on sexual orientation or preference. I'm just strictly focusing on the choice.

Pence is not a man of his own word by your account.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Because city people are all disgusting bums, prostitutes or lawyers. But country folk are all good wholesome real Americans.

They like to claim that, but the meth-rotted teeth, plethora of strip clubs, rows of bars, and disregard for the poor say otherwise.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Pence is not a man of his own word by your account.

With so much evidence, including direct quotations and legislation and voting records, how is it possible for you to deny Pence is staunchly anti-LBGT?

 

[esmith]

Still. Same question just revised. Would you, with the tables flipped, support the inflation of value of urban votes if the majority of urban voters dissagreed with the majority of rural areas?

It would all depend on what values you are talking about.
We all have prejudices and those prejudices reflect how we act, live, and vote. I have no problem with people who have opposite ideas as long as they don't go as far as the ultra-left and ultra-right.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Let's assume you're right, which I can believe... but....

Why then does he argue against LGBT? If individuals can choose to smoke then why can't individuals even choose a sexual orientation? I'm not placing any value on sexual orientation or preference. I'm just strictly focusing on the choice.

Pence is not a man of his own word by your account.

It is demonstrably not a choice. This has been covered. If it is a choice can a strait person choose to be gay? Can you choose to be transgender? If you can to the first I think one needs to look up bisexuality and its definition.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

It would all depend on what values you are talking about.
We all have prejudices and those prejudices reflect how we act, live, and vote. I have no problem with people who have opposite ideas as long as they don't go as far as the ultra-left and ultra-right.

The values themselves don't matter to the question. Or perhaps they do? What if the "values" of the urban and rural areas fipped? The highly democratic rural areas are afraid that the highly conservative urban areas will sway elections. Would you still be for the EC? How would you have felt if Obama lost the popular vote by a fair margin but still won the elction against Romney? Because the liberal rural areas got inflated vote values?

I think my question was answered. Is it the fact that a certain kind of value is being inflated in voting power or is it because you believe the system is more "fair"?

 

[suncowiam]

It is demonstrably not a choice. This has been covered. If it is a choice can a strait person choose to be gay? Can you choose to be transgender? If you can to the first I think one needs to look up bisexuality and its definition.

I"m not making an argument that it is a choice or not a choice.

I'm saying, even if it was a choice, it's not evil like the right paints it to be. I don't care if it was a choice, but the religioners and even the lbgt community focus on this issue way too much to give it too much credence. The non-choice is to confirm a deity who we cannot prove to exist. Who freakin cares. Sexual preference or orientation does not hurt anyone, so who gives a rat's behind that it is a choice or not.

 

[suncowiam]

With so much evidence, including direct quotations and legislation and voting records, how is it possible for you to deny Pence is staunchly anti-LBGT?

Are you talking to me?

I never denied it. He's a Christian and have been spewing out LBGT hatred for a while now. Maybe I'm reading your comment wrong or vice versa?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Are you talking to me?

I never denied it. He's a Christian and have been spewing out LBGT hatred for a while now. Maybe I'm reading your comment wrong or vice versa?

I have seem to have mistakenly read too much into "Let's assume your correct."

 

[Revoltingest]

I think you're trying to be unnecessarily difficult. Why would you think my point would be minorities don't deserve representation because of the existence of the Klan?

In a sense, you're right about my being difficult....it's cuz I prefer that a
standard of criticism (or defense) be applied uniformly to all candidates.
So I asked about your thoughts behind the posts.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I"m not making an argument that it is a choice or not a choice.

I'm saying, even if it was a choice, it's not evil like the right paints it to be. I don't care if it was a choice, but the religioners and even the lbgt community focus on this issue way too much to give it too much credence. The non-choice is to confirm a deity who we cannot prove to exist. Who freakin cares. Sexual preference or orientation does not hurt anyone, so who gives a rat's behind that it is a choice or not.

Ah. I think I misunderstood your post. Apologies.

 

[suncowiam]

I have seem to have mistakenly read too much into "Let's assume your correct."

That was about Pence's view concerning Tobacco.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So I asked about your thoughts behind the posts.

My thoughts are that groups that promote hatred, segregation, fear, and violence shouldn't be given consideration when it comes to legislation. Just as religion should not be given consideration when it comes to legislation (be it the majority Christians or myriad of minority religious groups).

 

[Revoltingest]

My thoughts are that groups that promote hatred, segregation, fear, and violence shouldn't be given consideration when it comes to legislation. Just as religion should not be given consideration when it comes to legislation (be it the majority Christians or myriad of minority religious groups).

I understand.
I'd like to see no power given groups who promote sexism, tolerate violence, oppose gun
rights, favor war, want micro-economic regulation, & are riddled with corruption & incompetence.
But such are the people who ran for office. We cannot look at the sins of one, & automatically
presume the other is better.

 

[Prestor John]

Let's assume you're right, which I can believe... but....

Why then does he argue against LGBT? If individuals can choose to smoke then why can't individuals even choose a sexual orientation? I'm not placing any value on sexual orientation or preference. I'm just strictly focusing on the choice.

Pence is not a man of his own word by your account.

What has he said about LGBT?

 

[Revoltingest]

Jill Stein wants a recount here.
Hillary now wants one too....
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...gn-will-participate-in-stein-s-state-recounts
And our EC voters are being threatened if they vote for Trump....
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/17/elector-threats/94003176/
It's so odd that Dems believe that only Pubs traffic in hate & violence.

 

[esmith]

The values themselves don't matter to the question. Or perhaps they do? What if the "values" of the urban and rural areas fipped? The highly democratic rural areas are afraid that the highly conservative urban areas will sway elections. Would you still be for the EC? How would you have felt if Obama lost the popular vote by a fair margin but still won the elction against Romney? Because the liberal rural areas got inflated vote values?

I think my question was answered. Is it the fact that a certain kind of value is being inflated in voting power or is it because you believe the system is more "fair"?

Don't quite understand what you are attempting to put forth. So I can't have an answer