Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 209 of 213 FirstFirst ... 109159199207208209210211 ... LastLast
Results 3,121 to 3,135 of 3189

Thread: Ilhan Omar

  1. #3121
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    13,159
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Why? Why break things up into identities in any way like that? What about religion? Race? What about by sexual orientation? Should we do it that way too since some might not be as represented as others?

    Everyone has tons of differences that can play into what they would vote for, especially if we stereotype based on one of the above/assume. I think the assumption should be no matter who we are voting in it is for the best interest of this country when we vote POTUS.

    We do have the senate which gives equal representation via states (some may be more rural than others) as well in part to ensure there isn't a couple states leading the governing as well.
    well...everybody eats..so it's not like saying farming is a minority
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  2. #3122
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,700
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    well...everybody eats..so it's not like saying farming is a minority
    What? There are tons of resources people use everyday, we don't divide it up and decide which ones deserve more of a vote than others. Farming in America is a massive source of food but I don't get why that means more than many other areas that provide people needs. What about medical help? Teachers? Should their votes be worth more since everyone needs education and medical help in their lives too?

    Farming is the minority in the amount of people doing it like those professions even if the resource those professions bring are used by many.

  3. #3123
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Mile High
    Posts
    17,448
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    Earlier valade mention California vs Wyoming, Montana, and the Dakotas (not directly in the way I'm mentioning it now)...well California gets 55 votes in the electoral college while those other 4 states get 12 combined. In fact you can take 11 states up thru the heart of farm country from OK and AR up thru the Dakotas and MN and they still don't combine to CA's 55.
    thats still nowhere close to proportional or fair for California

    I dont get your whole farming issue, but california produces more food than any other state
    Last edited by rhino17; 07-24-2020 at 06:12 PM.
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
    <><><><><><><>
    <><><><>

  4. #3124
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    13,159
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    thats still nowhere close to proportional or fair for California

    I dont get your whole farming issue, but california produces more food than any other state
    well gee, then they're part of the rural vote, too

    I give up. You guys all have your minds made up and this won't be changed by a PSD vote.
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  5. #3125
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Hell on Earth- Missouri
    Posts
    14,534
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    thats still nowhere close to proportional or fair for California

    I dont get your whole farming issue, but california produces more food than any other state
    By volume, you're absolutely correct. Per capita, not even in the realm of discussion purposes.
    GJO- You will never be forgotten. "MORE THAN MINFINITY"!

  6. #3126
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    33,874
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    thats still nowhere close to proportional or fair for California

    I dont get your whole farming issue, but california produces more food than any other state
    California is being sold to other countries by huge farming corporations once gallon at a time. And while CA produces more money from food than any other state, I don't know that it produces more calories consumed by people in the US than any other state ... I think Iowa may produce more.

    There is no such thing as "fair" someone will always be screwed. If the states apportioned their EC votes relative to the district voting it would be far more equitable but they don't want to do that. Also, if congress had the number of members the constitution called for the results would be far more equitable. Both of those things can be done without a constitutional amendment (which is essentially impossible).

  7. #3127
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Mile High
    Posts
    17,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    California is being sold to other countries by huge farming corporations once gallon at a time. And while CA produces more money from food than any other state, I don't know that it produces more calories consumed by people in the US than any other state ... I think Iowa may produce more.

    There is no such thing as "fair" someone will always be screwed. If the states apportioned their EC votes relative to the district voting it would be far more equitable but they don't want to do that. Also, if congress had the number of members the constitution called for the results would be far more equitable. Both of those things can be done without a constitutional amendment (which is essentially impossible).
    There absolutely is a "fair" solution - one person one vote.

    Popular vote is the only thing that makes sense. The only arguments against it in here have been, "well my rural vote should be worth 3x that of other people." Thats not valid
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
    <><><><><><><>
    <><><><>

  8. #3128
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    33,874
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    There absolutely is a "fair" solution - one person one vote.

    Popular vote is the only thing that makes sense. The only arguments against it in here have been, "well my rural vote should be worth 3x that of other people." Thats not valid
    The definition of "fair" is always a problem.

    I can tell you an easy reason the popular vote isn't the only thing that makes sense ... it's not going to happen. It's nearly impossible to amend the constitution. We hold no national elections, we hold elections within states only. The states can change how the EC votes are apportioned however they want. If they were done proportionally a president would never have been elected without the popular vote. Congress decided to stop growing because they ran out of space in the room, had they followed the constitution there never would have been a president elected without winning the popular vote. The system isn't fundamentally broken, the players in the system have twisted it and are blaming the system.

  9. #3129
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Mile High
    Posts
    17,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    The definition of "fair" is always a problem.

    I can tell you an easy reason the popular vote isn't the only thing that makes sense ... it's not going to happen. It's nearly impossible to amend the constitution. We hold no national elections, we hold elections within states only. The states can change how the EC votes are apportioned however they want. If they were done proportionally a president would never have been elected without the popular vote. Congress decided to stop growing because they ran out of space in the room, had they followed the constitution there never would have been a president elected without winning the popular vote. The system isn't fundamentally broken, the players in the system have twisted it and are blaming the system.
    Fair means equal. Its pretty easy. Idk what you are pushing back against.

    Anything that means your vote doesn't count as much as mine means it is not equal
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
    <><><><><><><>
    <><><><>

  10. #3130
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,935
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    Fair means equal. Its pretty easy. Idk what you are pushing back against.

    Anything that means your vote doesn't count as much as mine means it is not equal
    'Fair' does not, and has never, meant 'equal.' Probably why you're confused.

  11. #3131
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    32,839
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    There absolutely is a "fair" solution - one person one vote.

    Popular vote is the only thing that makes sense. The only arguments against it in here have been, "well my rural vote should be worth 3x that of other people." Thats not valid
    In theory what youre saying sounds fair, but in reality things are more complex. It sounds paradoxical but I dont think one to one vote necessarily makes things fair.

    To give an analogy, I believe for a healthy free market to exist you must enforce numerous regulations.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    RAIDERS, SHARKS, WARRIORS

    "i don't believe in mysteries but still i pray for my sister, when speaking to the higher power that listens, to the lifeless vision of freedom everytime we're imprisoned, to the righteous victims of people of a higher position" - planet asia, old timer thoughts

    "God is Universal he is the Ruler Universal" - gangstarr (rip guru), robbin hood theory

    "don't gain the world and lose your soul, wisdom is better than silver and gold" - bob marley, zion train

  12. #3132
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Mile High
    Posts
    17,448
    Quote Originally Posted by nastynice View Post
    In theory what youre saying sounds fair, but in reality things are more complex. It sounds paradoxical but I dont think one to one vote necessarily makes things fair.

    To give an analogy, I believe for a healthy free market to exist you must enforce numerous regulations.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    Except voting isn't nearly as complex as that.

    No one has been able to say why equal voting is unfair......
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
    <><><><><><><>
    <><><><>

  13. #3133
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,379
    Quote Originally Posted by flea View Post
    'Fair' does not, and has never, meant 'equal.' Probably why you're confused.
    That’s why a flat income tax is not considered to be a fair income tax.

    Still, a good argument can be made that “one person, one vote” is fair.

  14. #3134
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    32,839
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    Except voting isn't nearly as complex as that.

    No one has been able to say why equal voting is unfair......
    It can be unfair as smaller and under represented groups can have their needs/wants repetitively overlooked and ignored by the majority voting population.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    RAIDERS, SHARKS, WARRIORS

    "i don't believe in mysteries but still i pray for my sister, when speaking to the higher power that listens, to the lifeless vision of freedom everytime we're imprisoned, to the righteous victims of people of a higher position" - planet asia, old timer thoughts

    "God is Universal he is the Ruler Universal" - gangstarr (rip guru), robbin hood theory

    "don't gain the world and lose your soul, wisdom is better than silver and gold" - bob marley, zion train

  15. #3135
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Mile High
    Posts
    17,448
    Quote Originally Posted by nastynice View Post
    It can be unfair as smaller and under represented groups can have their needs/wants repetitively overlooked and ignored by the majority voting population.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    So the answer is to disadvantage the larger, more diverse, more vulnerable group?

    dumb
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
    <><><><><><><>
    <><><><>

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •