Id for fishing license (Page 2): You have a scewed vue of v****g. The popular v**e results in the majority of American citizens deciding the presidency. Where they live is...

Frank T Loc: New York, NY

anotherview wrote:

Your screed overlooks the popular v**e resulting in a handful of states deciding the presidency.

You have a scewed vue of v****g. The popular v**e results in the majority of American citizens deciding the presidency. Where they live is inconsequential. One person, one v**e. That's the way it should be.
With the E*******l College the e******n is decided by a few states also, but they are the least populated.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

anotherview wrote:

The EC functions inclusively to spread political power. In contrast, the popular v**e for President by effect concentrates political power in a few heavily populated states. Your text makes no mention of this distortion.

Your complaint seems to be that when people congregate and discuss things, they come to conclusions that you don't like.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

Frank T wrote:

You have a scewed vue of v****g. The popular v**e results in the majority of American citizens deciding the presidency. Where they live is inconsequential. One person, one v**e. That's the way it should be.
With the E*******l College the e******n is decided by a few states also, but they are the least populated.

We have a Federal government. That's why we are the United States and not the United People.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

Fotoartist wrote:

We have a Federal government. That's why we are the United States and not the United People.

So you believe the essence of America is it government.
I believe the people are the most important element and the essence of our country.

Frank T Loc: New York, NY

Fotoartist wrote:

We have a Federal government. That's why we are the United States and not the United People.

I hope you realize that makes absolutely no sense.

cwp3420

thom w wrote:

There are many excuses I would accept for typos. Being too lazy isn't one of them, and as long as that is how much respect you have for your readers, I refuse to be one. On my laziest day, I wouldn't try to use lazy as an excuse. I find your attitude contemptible.

You’ve made plenty of typos in your time on here, troll, and you just described how we feel about you.

wilpharm Loc: Oklahoma

cwp3420 wrote:

You’ve made plenty of typos in your time on here, troll, and you just described how we feel about you.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

cwp3420 wrote:

You’ve made plenty of typos in your time on here, troll, and you just described how we feel about you.

and none of them was because I just couldn't be bothered. You are one of the reasons I know Rose isn't a serious person. She never calls you out, and you come here exclusively to troll. Just who is "we"?

cwp3420

thom w wrote:

and none of them was because I just couldn't be bothered. You are one of the reasons I know Rose isn't a serious person. She never calls you out, and you come here exclusively to troll. Just who is "we"?

“We” are all the conservatives who disagree vehemently with your picture of what America should be. As far as trolling, I read, ask, and answer questions and respond to those that do. You on the other hand write crap with your snide little innuendos, and then no one hears from you again until you feebly try and insult one of us. However, when someone engages you in an attempt to have a conversation with you, you run quickly to mommy’s basement until she can soothe your frayed, tender feelings. Now, true to self, you attack Rose when she isn’t even in this conversation. You’re a h**eful little man. Funny that no other liberal on here never comes to your defense or even gives you a thumbs up for your posts. Face it, even “your” side doesn’t support you. Ergo, you’re the true definition of a troll. You’re just not intelligent enough to realize it. Now, Princess, run back to mommy and hide under her skirt.

Rose42

thom w wrote:

and none of them was because I just couldn't be bothered. You are one of the reasons I know Rose isn't a serious person. She never calls you out, and you come here exclusively to troll. Just who is "we"?

Oh but I have...troll. You never call out Frank, mjmoore (wh**ever) or any other left winger no matter how depraved the comment.

anotherview Loc: California

Wikipedia has a useful write-up of the the E*******l College: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_E*******l_College. It touches on your concern regarding proportionality.

CWGordon wrote:

another view: I disagree in part with your conclusions.

a.). I think small states get an e*******l v**e for far fewer people than are needed to get a larger state a v**e.

b.). I think it is part of Democracy that the majority should win e******ns.

trainspotter Loc: Oregon

cwp3420 wrote:

You’ve made plenty of typos in your time on here, troll, and you just described how we feel about you.

neillaubenthal

Frank T wrote:

The e*******l college is a throwback to appeasing ... (show quote)

They were all s***e states when the Constitution was ratified…so your argument is bogus.

That said…there's a way to get rid of the E*******l College…it's called a constitutional amendment…and that very document spells out the procedure for doing so. I suggest that those in favor of eliminating it and going with popular v**e…simply follow the approved process.

The National Popular V**e Compact will never be passed…because the small states won't v**e to eliminate their ability to have a say in the e******n of the President…and even if it was approved it is very likely unconstitutional since the EC is specified in the constitition. Several states have withdrawn from the pact and been told that their entrance is permanent and cannot be rescinded…again most likely unconstitutional.

anotherview Loc: California

Good points to keep in mind. The EC is here to stay for sound political reasons. It has worked in our dear nation for more than 200 years.

neillaubenthal wrote:

They were all s***e states when the Constitution w... (show quote)