Gerrymandering should be outlawed and the Electoral College repealed

And, so what ... ?

 

Morally and intellectually 'superior' US leftists will never blame themselves for the abrupt pendulum swing away from their deluded and deceitful ideology.....their losses are always due to 'something else'.

always.

They aren't smart enough or intellectually honest enough to look across the pond to see that the pendulum has obviously started to swing the other way over there, as well.

 

There are numerous "good reasons" to have an Identity Card from birth, with your ADN-key on file. It will help solve more quickly a lot of crimes. Also, it will allow for tracking in case of tax-fraud.

It makes elections also easier. You register to vote via your own National Identity Card and simply present your card to receive a ballot. One vote, one person - and according to a given geographic boundary determined by citizen headcount. The headcount could be verified every 2-years by email.

It's not Mission Impossible. In the US, however, this will not happen because it crosses too many "boundaries" (in terms of political ownership) in a country ossified by the two major parties.

This happened in France recently, until this young Monsieur Macron left the last Socialist Government, created his own Centrist Party and just won the presidential election. Change only comes when a New Wind blows hard enough to knock down the institutionalized politicians.

Macron is going to pass a law in France that forbids any politician from more than two consecutive mandates - which makes re-election at a later date all the more difficult. Renewing the body-politic by means of a law-statute makes politician wannabees understand the meaning of "doing your duty for your country and then moving right along" ...

 

Correct, the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to be amendable. So, don't like, it amend it.

 

Blah, blah, blah.

If you haven't a cogent argument - all you are doing is "name-calling".

Which is childish ...

[QUOTE="webrockk, post: 1067496394, member: 37037"They aren't smart enough or intellectually honest enough to look across the pond to see that the pendulum has obviously started to swing the other way over there, as well.[/QUOTE]

More sarcasm without any intellectual merit whatsoever.

When I accuse the Replicants of protecting their undeserved privileges - like artificially low income-taxation - I show the consequences in terms of Wealth-sharing by means of pertinent fact. Like this:
Income Earned by the Wealthiest - which shows the years in which the top 10% of income earners obtained almost half of all Individual Income generated.

 

If you don't field candidates, you don't get a say in legislative issues such as drawing districts.

 

America was never designed from the beginning to have mob rule. Everything is checked by something or someone else. We are a republic, not a democracy. democracy is just a mechanism. States can cast their electors without even having a popular vote if they want, and several have done it that way in the past.

 

Well duh, the poster explained it very well, don't show or produce an alternative you get beat and to the victor goes the spoils. Take a civics course at the very least try some common sense.

 

More sarcasm without any intellectual merit whatsoever.

When I accuse the Replicants of protecting their undeserved privileges - like artificially low income-taxation - I show the consequences in terms of Wealth-sharing by means of pertinent fact. Like this:
Income Earned by the Wealthiest - which shows the years in which the top 10% of income earners obtained almost half of all Individual Income generated.[/QUOTE]

Do you even read what you write? Castigate someone for name calling and then you do the same. Is underlined supposed to be a link?

 

We are a Constitutional Republic. Each state has a popular vote.

President Trump won 37 1/4th of the 50 popular votes.

Clinton won 12 3/4ths of the 50 popular votes.

May 20th, 2017 and Hillary Clinton is still not President.

 

I do, but so what. I vote in the US. (Meaning I have no representative in either house of Congress despite the fact that more Americans than in the state of Idaho live outside the US.

Nobody is asking anybody to scrap the Constitution, just revise it. You'd keep a car running for 226 years.

Probably, which is why it wheezes and coughs and breaks down regularly ...

 

The GOP has twice foisted losers on us due to the electoral college (once with the help of the Supreme Court), and cling to the House due to jerrymandering, so they will fight any and all attempts to make elections more fair and rational.
Democratic representatives got millions more votes in total than the GOP representatives, yet the GOP has the House majority - thanks to jerrymandering.
If they don't cheat, they'll lose, and they know it.

 

Yes, we are Constitutional Republic. Yes, we are also a Constitutional Democracy.

Each state has popular-vote elections with the sole exception of the presidential election where the popular-vote is carried over into the Electoral College. There the election is transformed into a winner-take-all vote of the electors based upon disproportionate representation.

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by a sizable margin of 2% - the highest of any presidential election where the popular-vote did not result in the election of its winner! Why? Because the Electoral College distorts the popular-vote by its winner-take-all rule!

The Electoral College vote compared to state-populations thus distorted then looks like this geographically:



The vote loses all sense of proportion due to the "winner takes all rule" of the Electoral College. I call that "willful manipulation of the electoral process" ...

 

Texas offsets California

we're all Americans, why should not the one with the most Americans voting for them win?

we do not need affirmative action in our Presidential elections, the last two Presidents to win that way were Trump and Bush

 

How wpuld you like to see it amended? Seems to work just fine to me.

 

A popular-vote plebiscite victory of Hillary Clinton was rescinded and replaced by that of an incongruous "Electoral College" vote (a mischievous winner-take-all manipulation of the popular vote) to elect into office Trump.

And you don't see through it? What planet do you live on ... ?

 

Oh really? Is that how California would pick the Prez, because Texas offsets them? LOL

 

oh really, republican states are not a issue to you, only dem ones?

every American vote should count.. some votes should not count more then others

 

Ah, you don't like the fact that California can't pick every president.

 

It would take a Constitutional Amendment to do away with the electoral college. Something that isn't going to happen as that would leave all the power to the big states with the most population. As for gerrymandering, the states control that. No Constitutional Amendment needed. Each state can if they decide to, outlaw gerrymandering. Each state also has the power to decide how their electoral votes are allocated. 48 states now have a winner take all system along with D.C. But Maine and Nebraska are by congressional district. They award one electoral vote to each congressional district winner and two electoral votes to whomever wins the state. Each and every state could follow Maine's and Nebraska's example if they had a mind to.

Pennsylvania debated that a couple of years ago. But Pennsylvania decided that would dilute their voting strength on a national scale. If Pennsylvania had gone to the congressional district awarding of electoral votes, Pennsylvania would have given Trump 11, Clinton 9 instead of all 20 to Trump.

States could also go to direct proportional on their own, not based on congressional districts. In which case Pennsylvania's results would have been Trump 10, Clinton 9, Johnson 1.

 

This is absolutely false.

Each state decides how to allocate its electors; nothing other than the laws of each state dictate the electoral votes of the state go to the winner.of the election in said state. Each state can change its laws whenever it wants.

And, just to be clear, a state can decide to allocate is electors by coin toss rather than an election.

You proceed under the false premise that the election of the President is a democratic process, when in fact the only votes cast in the actual election are those by appointed electors.

Now, you can try to eliminate the electoral college, but just 13 states can stop you; the 13 states most likely to oppose this represent 7% of the population.

 

Every American vote -did- count -- congrats to Hillary for her big win in CA!

 

From here: The Electoral College, Unfair From Day One - excerpt:

The Electoral College system has NEVER BEEN FAIR & EQUITABLE - and we are deceiving ourselves that it is. Just like believing that ours is the "best" in the world, when in fact it is objectively not even close to best. The Economist's Intelligence Unit did construct a model of voting fairness, and the US is seen to be a Flawed Democracy. See here its Democracy Index, select "United States".

Read the result ...

*But only because of a cockamamie Electoral College that emphasizes each states relative importance - when the central focus should be not on the state but the competing individuals seeking the White House.

 

You miss the point.
The electoral college is not inherently a "winner states all" system - in fact, it isn't inherently related to democracy at all.
Any argument against it on that point immediately fails.

Now, you can try to eliminate the electoral college, but just 13 states can stop you; the 13 states most likely to oppose this represent 7% of the population.

 

International gun-related deaths chart:


Now look at the the US in the upper-left quadrant at 10.64 (gun-related deaths per 100K of population). Then look at the EU countries (with far more difficult gun-ownership laws) in the much smaller outer bluish-green circles with values a third or a tenth of that of the US.

The facts speak for themselves. The US is a very dangerous country in which to live despite the fact that it is highly developed.

Explain that please - because experts think it is due to the lack of control regarding gun-ownership that is the principle cause ...