Changing Democracy

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24533
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Wabash » Fri Apr 26, 2019 7:48 pm

Just as soon as you show me in the Constitution that says one is innocent till proven guilty......Wabash
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19718
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by John Q. Public » Fri Apr 26, 2019 8:07 pm

It's in the paragraph right after the one that addresses speeding.

I'll get this one for you too, Luca............. WTF?
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24533
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Wabash » Fri Apr 26, 2019 8:14 pm

That makes no sense.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

Luca
Posts: 6667
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Luca » Fri Apr 26, 2019 8:39 pm

Geez, you know your Constitution. I thought it came after the part about noise pollution.

Y’know, Wabash, the difference between you and Kevin Hart is he’s trying to be funny...........Luca

User avatar
ShiftyMutt
Posts: 1853
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:46 pm

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by ShiftyMutt » Fri Apr 26, 2019 8:49 pm

Luca wrote: Look at a map of the US in the 2016 election and see how many states favored the President as opposed to Clinton. 3: 2 in favor of the President.
You can't compare vast swaths of empty land as the majority vote. But I'm not talking about the electoral college really (even thought that should be revisited), just comparative representation in the senate.

Luca
Posts: 6667
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Luca » Fri Apr 26, 2019 9:07 pm

I didn’t use the analogy of the map to imply that empty land was equivalent to votes. It was to point out that only 20 of the 50 states supported Clinton.

The electoral college and the Senate are actually based on a similar principle: that states as entities are entitled to a role, just as individual citizens are. And majority vote is not what elects a US president. It never has been. The US is a representative republic. I think it’s six presidents who were elected without a national majority, including the greatest of them all................Luca

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19718
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by John Q. Public » Fri Apr 26, 2019 9:34 pm

The Senate was never meant to be representative of population. It's meant to represent each state equally, whether it's Rhode Island or Alabama or New York. Giving each state two Senators was actually meant to compensate for unequal populations - just the opposite of what you're arguing.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19718
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by John Q. Public » Fri Apr 26, 2019 9:58 pm

And the electoral college was actually sort of a colonial deep state conspiracy to keep the final electoral power out of the hands of the uneducated masses. As time passed, states decided the people were savvy enough that they switched from state legislators being the electors and they went with the popular vote by state, and eventually they all went to winner-take-all. It worked well until 2016, which was exactly what the founders were trying to prevent with it.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24533
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Wabash » Sat Apr 27, 2019 2:29 am

Luca wrote: Geez, you know your Constitution. I thought it came after the part about noise pollution.

Y’know, Wabash, the difference between you and Kevin Hart is he’s trying to be funny...........Luca
Not sure what you mean by this. Who is Kevin Hart?

You are trying to be your usual pedantic self.

Just because something isn't explicitly written in the documents you are citing doesn't mean the issue wasn't part of the reason it exists. We believe that one is innocent till proven guilty. We believe that church and state are separated. Yet neither is explicitly written in the Constitution.

As I pointed out earlier. Legit historians recognize that slavery was one of the issues that was the cause of the creation of the Electoral College. Unlike dilettantes like yourself. I'll trust those who have committed their life's work to the topic instead of you...........Wabash
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

User avatar
Vilepagan
Posts: 12548
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:07 am

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Vilepagan » Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:01 am

Luca wrote: Pagan, can you produce any evidence that the electoral college is not as popular now as it once was?
No. On the other hand, since I made no comment whatsoever about the EC I see no reason to provide any.
I've never seen polls comparing the 18th, 19th and 20th century opinions versus today.
Neither have I.
You seem to imply that because people move around more than they used to (which I will grant you) that therefore the states are not as culturally or politically homogeneous as they once were.
Correct. I'll go even further and say I'm not implying it, I'm stating it as a fact. Using Robert E. Lee as an example, one of the big reasons he joined the Confederacy despite being invited to command the Union armies was his strong desire not to fight in a war against his native Virginia. It would be very odd to hear someone express that strong of a sentiment towards their home state today. One of the memories I have of living in California was how everyone is from someplace else.
In that event, you would not see the dramatic divide between the relative handful of coastal states and the entire center of the country.
I see no such divide. As a people we are divided by politics and somewhat divided due to generational differences, but I see no geographical divide. The notion that it's the "coastal elite" versus "the heartland" is a FOX news notion...like the "war on Christmas' and "the deep state"...good for their ratings but not very valuable ideas otherwise.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24533
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Wabash » Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:08 am

Vilepagan wrote: The notion that it's the "coastal elite" versus "the heartland"....
One has to appreciate the irony of those in the "heartland" calling those on the coasts "elite" at the same time those in the "heartland" demand their votes be weighted heavier.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

Luca
Posts: 6667
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Luca » Sat Apr 27, 2019 8:43 am

If you do not see a divide, then I would encourage you to look at that map once again.

When I said
Luca wrote:The name chosen in 1789 was "The United States" and the states as entities are entitled to representation as are the individual citizens...................... Luca
You responded with “That idea is not as popular now as it was in 1789.”

“That idea” is represented by the US Senate and the electoral college. Which of the two is not as popular and how do we know that?

User avatar
John Q. Public
Site Admin
Posts: 19718
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by John Q. Public » Sat Apr 27, 2019 8:47 am

Luca wrote: You seem to imply that because people move around more than they used to (which I will grant you) that therefore the states are not as culturally or politically homogeneous as they once were.
Vilepagan wrote: Correct. I'll go even further and say I'm not implying it, I'm stating it as a fact.
Agreeing with Luca again. Except the homogeneity isn't so much by state as it is by region. And 200-300 years later, it still goes back to who settled them. NorCal and SoCal, eastern and western Pennsylvania, northern and southern Indiana and Ohio and the coastal and inland Carolinas all have different cultures and it's because they fall into different regions. There's a lot of similarity within the regions but a strong divide between them. Minnesota will never have the same priorities as Alabama. Iowa won't even agree with Missouri on some issues, even though they share a border. Look at any electoral map (except for the landslides) for an example. The one of the states Bernie won vs. the states Hillary won is especially telling.

And Robert E. Lee's allegiance to Virginia is very easy to understand, especially at the time and especially since it was Virginia. It was settled by English aristocrats and it was very different even from the states around it. But still, hardly anyone actually fighting in the Civil War had dogs in the fight over slavery. The state governments chose which side they were on and the people fought for their states and that's it. Anything beyond that is Hollywood's version of the story.
Don't look at me, I just work here.

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24533
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Wabash » Sat Apr 27, 2019 9:08 am

John Q. Public wrote: But still, hardly anyone actually fighting in the Civil War had dogs in the fight over slavery.
That may be true. Many of those making the decisions of whether to secede did have dogs in the fight over slavery.
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

User avatar
Vilepagan
Posts: 12548
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:07 am

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Vilepagan » Sat Apr 27, 2019 11:44 am

Luca wrote: If you do not see a divide, then I would encourage you to look at that map once again.
What could I possibly see on a map other than geographical features?
You responded with “That idea is not as popular now as it was in 1789.”
Yes, the idea being that states are entitled to representation in the same way that individuals are.
“That idea” is represented by the US Senate and the electoral college.
Indeed.
Which of the two is not as popular and how do we know that?
The Electoral College...we know that because while their have been suggestions floated over the years to abolish the Electoral College or go around it*, there has been no such effort to abolish the Senate.





*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_ ... te_Compact
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada

User avatar
Vilepagan
Posts: 12548
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:07 am

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Vilepagan » Sat Apr 27, 2019 11:52 am

John Q. Public wrote: Agreeing with Luca again. Except the homogeneity isn't so much by state as it is by region. And 200-300 years later, it still goes back to who settled them.
Except that people move around a heck of a lot more than they used to.

John Q. Public wrote: And Robert E. Lee's allegiance to Virginia is very easy to understand...
Yes it is, as easy as it is to understand that his attitudes towards his home state are not shared by many today.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada

Luca
Posts: 6667
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Luca » Sat Apr 27, 2019 1:54 pm

Vilepagan wrote:What could I possibly see on a map other than geographical features?
I am going to assume that you do understand that maps are used for illustrating more than simply geographical features. You can see evidence of the political divide in the United States in the map below (assuming I am able to get the thing displayed). Of the 20 states that supported Clinton all but 4 of them are on the east and west coast. 30 of the remaining 34 supported the President. This illustrates the divide that you have said you cannot see.

Image
Vilepagan wrote:The Electoral College...we know that because while their have been suggestions floated over the years to abolish the Electoral College or go around it*, there has been no such effort to abolish the Senate.
Okay, so it was the electoral college that you were referring to, then. Your observation that "Their (sic) have been suggestions floated over the years……" is not evidence that the college has either increased or decreased in "popularity" unless you know what the opinions were in the 19th and 20th centuries. Maybe there has been a change but unless you can produce evidence of Its standing over time then neither one of us knows.

But it's rather an academic point. The college was instituted for a specific purpose and that purpose is still valid. It requires a presidential candidate to appeal to a wide cross-section of the populace, not simply an urban corridor on opposite ends of the country...............................Luca
Last edited by John Q. Public on Sat Apr 27, 2019 2:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Inserted the image

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 18155
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Fordama » Sat Apr 27, 2019 2:35 pm

Luca wrote:Of course I can.

Why would the electoral college have made sense previously but not now?.................Luca
One, we don't have slave states to protect any longer.
Two, it wasn't designed in a winner-take-all manner it is executed in now.
Three, it didn't fulfill its promise of having "informed electors" over ride the popular vote if an unfit individual was elected by the masses.

So, being a complete failure is a good reason to give it the boot.
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

Luca
Posts: 6667
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Luca » Sat Apr 27, 2019 2:49 pm

Slavery has nothing to do with it, historical revisionism notwithstanding

Various states have chosen to utilize a winner take all protocol, and not all of them do. They can change it if they want but the purpose behind an electoral college remains.

There has not been any reason to override a popular vote, so it could not have failed on that point

It has not failed and it continues to serve its intended purpose.............................Luca

User avatar
Wabash
Posts: 24533
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:29 am
Has thanked: 2 times

Re: Changing Democracy

Post by Wabash » Sat Apr 27, 2019 2:59 pm

Luca wrote: Slavery has nothing to do with it, historical revisionism notwithstanding
Slavery had a lot to do with it. Your denials to the contrary.
Luca wrote: But it's rather an academic point. The college was instituted for a specific purpose and that purpose is still valid. It requires a presidential candidate to appeal to a wide cross-section of the populace, not simply an urban corridor on opposite ends of the country...............................Luca
In the era the Electoral College was created that might have been an issue. In the modern era of mass communication that is no longer the case........Wabash
They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

Post Reply