StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Dark Hellion wrote:Jogurt, you have to look at the fact that the East Coast Megalopolis, Chicago, and LA are basically a huge chunk of the population. There's no point to campaign in Maine or Montana or Alabama or even in a place like Rockford, IL because they are so unimportant compared to New York City or Boston. The Electoral College isn't a very good system to be sure but at least it makes people campaign in Ohio or Pennsylvania as opposed to simply campaigning in the few major cities that have some giant percentage of the US populace.

It becomes 1/100th as important to campaign in a town with 1/100th of the population? What a terrible fate for our democracy!

It doesn't become USELESS to campaign anywhere with a small amount of votes (different from the EC system where it's literally pointless to campaign in DC or Oklahoma), it instead becomes proportionate with population. So you spend a small amount of resources to campaign for a small amount of population and a large amount to reach large amounts of population... still not sounding like a bad thing.

Man, there is a full blown meltdown on the gun forums.

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:

Dark Hellion wrote:Jogurt, you have to look at the fact that the East Coast Megalopolis, Chicago, and LA are basically a huge chunk of the population. There's no point to campaign in Maine or Montana or Alabama or even in a place like Rockford, IL because they are so unimportant compared to New York City or Boston. The Electoral College isn't a very good system to be sure but at least it makes people campaign in Ohio or Pennsylvania as opposed to simply campaigning in the few major cities that have some giant percentage of the US populace.

It becomes 1/100th as important to campaign in a town with 1/100th of the population? What a terrible fate for our democracy!

It doesn't become USELESS to campaign anywhere with a small amount of votes (different from the EC system where it's literally pointless to campaign in DC or Oklahoma), it instead becomes proportionate with population. So you spend a small amount of resources to campaign for a small amount of population and a large amount to reach large amounts of population... still not sounding like a bad thing.

No, you spend NO resources on small amounts of population. So, for example, the people of Los Angeles want to dump toxic sewage into your rivers....too bad, so sad, you should have lived in a place that matters.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

fgalkin wrote:No, you spend NO resources on small amounts of population. So, for example, the people of Los Angeles want to dump toxic sewage into your rivers....too bad, so sad, you should have lived in a place that matters.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

The only reason Maine gets any attention in the presidential election is because we buck the EC trend by splitting our electoral votes. How is the EC system supposed to be an improvement here or any other state that isn't a swing state?

Why not make the places that matter more in a democratic system be the ones that have more people rather than the places that are closer to political center?

This entire argument is ridiculous because many other supposed "popular vote" states don't even have a freaking direct election presidential system. Some outright have legislatures elect their presidents still, and for most, the head of government is the guy who wins control of the lower house of parliament. I resent and reject any argument based on this ludicrous simplistic notion--what countries have a strong presidential system that elects based on a popular vote? Luminaries like Russia and Argentina and Chile, that's the answer! That's whose company you'd put us in by eliminating the electoral college.

Your argument rests that there is negative harm from having a popular vote election, which you have not demonstrated. As stated, the House of Representatives and the Senate more logically work to defend and advocate for local interests (as they are directly elected from geographically fixed ridings). How do not see how a change from the EC to PV would make a difference regarding 'suburbanization', or 'destroying regionalism', how? Just how does a 'swing' election for the President cause this? The President's powers in the United States are deceptive due to historical happenstance of the United States being a superpower.

Actually if you look to Canada, which elects the legislature that picks the Prime Minister, Canada's Stephen Harper is actually the most powerful politician in the western democratic world, moreso then the US President politically speaking, because there's virtually zero checks and balances to a majority government with a party as disciplined as the Conservative Party of Canada.

So arguing about a 'strong Presidency' seems meaningless when a) various other political positions can be described as more powerful and thus the stakes are higher, and b) the executive branch is constitutionally co-equal to the judicial and legislative branches so I'm not sure what your getting at beyond the 'Imperial presidency'; which only applies to the US's geopolitical position not domestics.

Demonstrating that your concerns seem out of place, I have, taking a brief look at Wikipedia both Argentina and Mexico have observed to have popular vote systems and no electoral college in site, but have a political system seemingly similar to that from the United States. I do not think it likely that they lack 'localism'/'regionalism' uniqueness issuewise.

Masami von Weizegger wrote:I don't know. Anything other than a honourable concession speech would draw him a lot of criticism from most quarters and I assume he'll continue to dabble in politics after this. He's likely just looking out for number one on his way out of the presidential arena.

I'd say the "real" Romney is the one who says and does what he needs to do to get ahead, just like he did during the campaign and just like he's doing with this concession speech.

I'd be amazed if Mittens continues in politics after this. I mean, he was crushed in the GOP Presidential Primary in 2008. He won the GOP Presidential primary in 2012 by saying anything to anyone, creating so many potential avenues of attack that Obama handily wiped the floor with him. There are people in the GOP who are going to be really, really, hungry for the White House in 2016, and all of them are going to avoid ol' Mittens like a syphilitic whore; given his track record of fail, and his crippling handicap of having the personality of a smarmy robot asshole.

Lonestar wrote:Man, there is a full blown meltdown on the gun forums.

Well, fuck. Guess the terrified little lemmings are going to continue driving ammo prices into low-Earth orbit. Wish I has a better reloading press.

Obama takes the stage to give his second acceptance speech.

IT'S THE SECOND TERM. HE CAN DO ANYTHING WITHOUT REPERCUSSIONS NOW.

THE FEMA DEATHCAMPS WILL SURELY HAPPEN SOON.

BUY AMMO NOW.

And the man of the hour takes the stage at last.

IT'S THE SECOND TERM. HE CAN DO ANYTHING WITHOUT REPERCUSSIONS NOW.

THE FEMA DEATHCAMPS WILL SURELY HAPPEN SOON.

BUY AMMO NOW.

weemadando wrote:IT'S THE SECOND TERM. HE CAN DO ANYTHING WITHOUT REPERCUSSIONS NOW.

THE FEMA DEATHCAMPS WILL SURELY HAPPEN SOON.

BUY AMMO NOW.

AND GUNS FOR WHEN YOUR FIRST FOUR GUNS JAM!

And I hereby declare Sharia law to be in effect in all counties throughout the United States! Oh wait... I don't think that's how that works.

Awww man, now ammo's gonna get expensive :(

"Whether you voted for the very first time, or waited to vote for a very long time... By the way we need to fix that."

Awesome.

I wonder how the lunatics like Rush are going to spin this tomorrow. Assuming he doesn't get a heart attack.

From the sig and ruger forums:

Never give up, was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor...posted by Baran

Fuck this country and it's stupid citizens.
~~~GO COLTS~~~posted by stickman428

can guarantee that there was massive voter fraud in Ohio. In any case, it doesn't matter. I never dreamed I'd live to see the death of my Country.

Evil has won. God will remove His protection from this Country. If you think the last four years were bad, you've seen nothing yet. posted by synthrob

The GOP didn't pick Romney... the liberal media did, again... just like they did with John McLame.

Our Nation is Done, Finished, kaput

I hope the first one was a joke but I'm not too sure.

I'm told the Saiga-12 messageboard went full KKK but I'm not logging into that at work.

Idiots say they're moving to Australia if Obama wins. And the Australian reply:

RaygunBrown wrote:Attention Romney supporters. Australia has mandatory voting, an unmarried female Prime Minister and spiders outnumber us 10,000 to 1.

Now all the President has to do is kludge the House into working. Now that he don't have to worry about re-election, he can start putting boot to ass.

Hahahaha "99 Problems But Mitt Ain't One" shirt.

weemadando wrote:Idiots say they're moving to Australia if Obama wins. And the Australian reply:

RaygunBrown wrote:Attention Romney supporters. Australia has mandatory voting, an unmarried female Prime Minister and spiders outnumber us 10,000 to 1.

Excellent. Is it appropriate I'm wearing my "Beware of the Drop Bears" t-shirt today?

So, putting an extra star on all those millions of flags, badges and other icons... Best stimulus program for the US right now, or just another bunch of jobs outsourced to Burma or slave prison labour?

Obama going full on inspirational for his acceptance speech.
*Edit
And it's over, at 1:59 AM Eastern it's all over but the crying.

Great speech.

Havok wrote:Great speech.

Romney's concession doesn't hold a candle.

That's what happens when one speech isn't written backstage on a paper towel.

NBC has called Virginia for Obama and Alaska for Romney.

Well, this thread was an interesting read. Too bad I couldn't stay up and watch the lot of it.

Regarding the Electoral College system, if you actually had a national popular vote for the presidency, then you could have more than two serious candidates and they would have meaningful shares of the results. Since the EC only affects the vote for the office of president, the change would do nothing to alter local politics in the different states. Legislation about toxic waste dumps and so forth wouyld still be decided by the state parliaments and federal legislation by Congress.

Don't conflate issues that do not belong together.