Trump: No Wall No DACA

Getin the ring said:
actually there is a better than 50/50 chance both are true, agreed we don't totally know you well enough to conclude.
Click to expand...

I am neither. But if it makes you feel better about yourself to indulge in this kind of thing...go for it.

BUT
based on your assertion that California and New York should be allowed to pick our president kind of puts you in harms way in regard.

And on topic, trump is working his magic, like I told you months ago he set Democrats up, and they bit. HE WINS.

There will be a wall, there will be an end to chain migration, and sanctuary cities will be a thing of the past. Dreamers. or illegals as they should be referred to will get a path, and they will have Trump to thank for it.
Is this WINNING getting more clear as time passes? you liberal loons
Click to expand...

Anyway...as I said, "the people" should be allowed to pick our president. The Electoral College favors the Republicans...so they want to keep it...even though the head of the Republican Party, Donald Trump, constantly asserts that the EC favors the Democrats.

The proof of the pudding is that your side has the means to make meaningful change in the EC...by proposing a constitutional amendment. It is possible to amend the Constitution, you realize? And your side has majority control of ALL the elements of a constitutional amendment process.

But don't wait on it, because it is not going to happen.
 
Getin the ring said:
The whole premise behind DACA is absurd.

So an illegal parent brings an illegal child, or has an illegal child in the US.
So illegal child is therefore allowed to stay.
You can not separate illegal child from illegal parent so therefore illegal parent is allowed to stay.

So "bring a child you're in" is our immigration policy, that should work well huh?
Click to expand...

nobody is saying that the illegal parent can't take the illegal child with them when they get deported......nobody is separating anyone......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
yes, does it surprise you that if you lie about WHY Wyoming has three electoral votes and two senators, someone might mention it?.....
Click to expand...

I am not a liar. This forum allows for lots of latitude in the way people conduct themselves. I like that.

But why don't you act like a grown up...you know, like an adult?
 
Frank Apisa said:
I am not a liar. This forum allows for lots of latitude in the way people conduct themselves. I like that.

But why don't you act like a grown up...you know, like an adult?
Click to expand...

they give a great deal of latitude on what people post.....but if you state something which is not true, such as "Wyoming gets three electoral votes based on the number of residents they have" we also have the latitude to point out that "you are lying".......if you continue to repeat it after your error has been pointed out, it may well expand to "you are lying out of your ass".....if it happens a third time we are free to conclude you are a lib'rul....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
they give a great deal of latitude on what people post.....but if you state something which is not true, such as "Wyoming gets three electoral votes based on the number of residents they have" we also have the latitude to point out that "you are lying".......if you continue to repeat it after your error has been pointed out, it may well expand to "you are lying out of your ass".....if it happens a third time we are free to conclude you are a lib'rul....
Click to expand...

I am not a liberal...and I am not a liar.

It appears you are addicted to name-calling...and cannot even ACT adult enough for an adult conversation.

I understand how the Electoral College votes are obtained...one for each Senator and one for each Representative. BUT the bottom line is that the 600,000 people in Wyoming, for instance, end up being represented in the EC with 3 votes.

If every 600,000 people in California had equal representation in the EC (regardless of how the number of electors is made)...they would have about 200 votes. They only have 55.

You seem to have a problem with that line of reasoning...but it is so.

In any case, you should start posting your objections to what people with whom you disagree post...like a grown up...rather than an out-of-control child.
 
EC protects against big population state tyranny. If you get rid of the EC, you virtually assure small states
get no presidential election visits/concerns..

It's a solid system. It's based on representative democracy, just like Congress itself.
 
noise said:
EC protects against big population state tyranny. If you get rid of the EC, you virtually assure small states
get no presidential election visits/concerns..

It's a solid system. It's based on representative democracy, just like Congress itself.
Click to expand...

Good argument...compelling argument...and it may carry the day.

But Donald Trump claims the EC favors the Democrats over the Republicans...and since the Republicans have majorities in ALL the factors necessary for a proposal and adoption of an amendment that would eliminate that terrible situation...

...is it not unusual that they are not making moves in that direction?

In any case, the argument that no matter where you live...one vote should carry as much weight as any other one vote. and with the EC in place...that is not happening.
 
Frank Apisa said:
You seem to have a problem with that line of reasoning...but it is so.
Click to expand...

I have a problem with it because it isn't reasoning......you could as easily say that California should have 750 electoral votes because of how many hamsters they have........electoral votes are not calculated based on how many hamsters there are or how many more people they have than Wyoming.......they both get one for every 600,000 people they have, with a minimum of one person because the last half electoral voter they had died before he could vote.......now THAT is rational......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I have a problem with it because it isn't reasoning......you could as easily say that California should have 750 electoral votes because of how many hamsters they have........electoral votes are not calculated based on how many hamsters there are or how many more people they have than Wyoming.......they both get one for every 600,000 people they have, with a minimum of one person because the last half electoral voter they had died before he could vote.......now THAT is rational......
Click to expand...

My...you do have a problem with it.

Well...at some point you may grow up...and the hurt will go away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top