Exclusive: Ahead of 2020 election, a 'Blue Wave' is rising in the cities, polling analysis shows

Probably true but if I'm a democrat what I'm worried about is the DNC stiffling all enthusiasm by ignoring the likely actual winner (Sanders) to give the nomination to their handpicked choice (Bloomberg).

 

Exactly

 

POTUS has to work with the senators from those states who very much care what the people of those states think. If he wants support of the senators he has to consider the states interests as well. A senator from WY is as valuable as one from CA so he can not ignore WY interest and favor CA interest or those WY senators will not support him. If they do the good people of WY will vote them out. The founders were very intelligent in what they did.

 

The debate tonight may have some significant influence over Bloomberg's chances. This will be the first time that he gets vetted on the debate stage.

 

I find it shocking that people who live in big cities are satisfied with the way things are going in their respective locations.

But yet, every year, Democrats are voted in again and again, and the cities themselves never seem to improve.

 

Your talking about moving to a straight popular vote? That would destroy the union.

That is how I read you post. If I'm wrong about that I apologize.

 

Why would I need to bring three friends when I can just go out in the parking lot and change clothes to vote again??

Oh... right... THEY can do the same thing... I imagine the 4 of us can get upwards of 24 votes in before the stewards catch on....

Nice!!

Not that it should be needed in my district.... Trump is a 4 letter word here...

 

What are your proposed adjustments?

I personally would never want the popular vote to outweigh the EC. I'm a states rights kinda guy.

 

Actually that was the Founders' intent. To ensure the whole nation wasn't ruled over by a few pockets of urbanites...

 

I can't help but think of that Johnny Paycheck song

"Take This Liberal Crap And Shove It".... well that's how I remember it now...

 

Yikes imagine CA & NY deciding elections. Ugh.

 

All of that was true before we had a POTUS who doesn't give a crap what the Senate thinks... just that they'll vote to acquit him and pass his unqualified and inferior choices for the bench..

After that, I doubt he could name 30 Senators by name...

 

Oh I believe your definitely right on that aspect.... Also super Tuesday will be telling. Bloomberg has been able to force his name in the conversation but in order for him to having genuine support I think it's going to take more than money

It seems now either the media doesn't like Bernie or they think he cannot beat Trump so they're trying to steer voters to a candidate they think will be more viable.

If Super Tuesday comes and goes and Bernie wins and the media is still trying to steer people off Bernie, as I Democrat I think your alarm bells should be going off.

 

The EC vote depends on the number of Representatives from each State, which is based on each States' total population. The States with the largest populations get the most votes and more people live in cities than live in the rural areas (or rural States).

 

Adjust the Senate so that any states with populations under a million get two senators. A million to ten million, three senators. Over ten million people, four senators. Then hold elections.

 

Trumpism certainly is. Who has the bully pulpit these days?

 

The ole dictator thing again? It's old and untrue. Odd how you call out the R senators for rallying around the party vote but have no issue with the D congress men and women for doing it.

And again the left keeps underestimating his intelligence and he keeps slapping them down because of it? I'm wondering if they will ever learn. Not respecting you opponent is 1st step in losing every conflict.

But beyond that the U.S. and it's political system is bigger than Trump or who ever the Dems nominate if they win. I'm not supporting the changing of it based on a mere 4 or 8 year cycle.

 

Its a serious question. What has been forced on Democrats under Trump? Abortion and gay marriage are still legal. If someone asked me what liberalism is being forced down my throat, I have a list.

 

No thanks.

A union of states should be balanced by the number of states, not by state populations. You still putting more power in the hands of state A over state B, thus the balance is broken.

Why not just have the House then? Why would we need a Senate?

 

Oh, there's a list of things Trump supporters want to do. It's just Republicans are incompetent, have no mandate, and lost control of Congress. If Trump can somehow avoid a MidEast war or another financial catastrophe, I'll be ecstatic, actually. That's what I feared the most in all this. Trump seems to have the luck of the Devil himself. Who knows what other tight squeezes this country will squeak out of in the next 8 months. Well, America has always been a lucky country.
"God has a special providence for fools, drunkards, and the United States of America."

 

It would still be stacked in the small states favor. Either extreme isn't good. The small states shouldn't be able to run roughshod over the bigger ones. That's not happening, but they are, through the filibuster, stopping stuff that has a broad mandate, like small gun control reforms.

Of course, we blocked you at every turn from 2016 to 2018, so maybe it's working as intended.

It tamps down the passions of the people. Maybe it's fine, who knows. Maybe countries should only change slowly over time. Maybe if you can't convince 60 senators to go along with something, it isn't worth doing.

 

"Lucky"?

Disrespectful to so many who have paved the way and paid the price for you to be able to type that from the safety of you keyboard.

 

It's worked for a while now, I think maybe we don't need to fix what ain't broke because HRC is not POTUS and some people are mad about it. It's reactionary to the extreme and so short sighted.

Either way anybody try to change it (as some are now vocalizing) has the preverbal snowball chance in hades to do it.

 

The frequency of the use of the filibuster is unprecedented. It's become a truism that you need a super-majority to get anything non-trivial out of the Senate. That might be too much gridlock. People are frustrated.

You don't think Schumer would get rid of the filibuster if the Democrats have an amazing night, Bernie wins, and the Dems retake the Senate 52-48? And the GOP is filibustering everything the Dems are trying to do? Either Schumer does it or he gets primaried, in that scenario, and probably loses.

 

Minorities currently crawling out from under the DNC bus not withstanding.

The Trump executive has had a real impact on people's daily lives. You think they are going to vote their own experience, or what Dems tell them to believe?