The Trump Administration

Anything at all (keep it clean) goes here that does not fit in to any of the other forums.

Moderator: eeuunikkeiexpat

john
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 6003
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 1:11 am
Location: Viña del Mar, Chile

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby john » Wed Dec 21, 2016 9:02 pm

DesertFlower wrote:The Electoral College is a unique method for indirectly electing the president of the United States. It was established by Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution and modified by the 12th and 23rd Amendments.

The Electoral College consists of a total of 538 members, one for each U.S. senator and representative, and three additional electors representing the District of Columbia. Each state has a number of electoral votes equal to the combined total of its congressional delegation, and each state legislature is free to determine the method it will use to select its own electors.

Currently, all states select electors through a popular vote (although how that vote works can differ), but that was not always the case throughout American history. In many states, the state legislature selected electors, a practice which was common until the mid-1800s.

All of the above is accurately stated.

The Electoral College is about states rights. It is about preserving the unfair advantage of small population states. The push to bypass the electoral college is an attempt to bypass states rights--a further move towards federalism. Actually, it is an attempt to provide equal rights to the citizens of all states via a "one person, one vote" voting system. The Electoral College is a federal institution.

The US senate has two senators for each state, no matter how small the state is, while the representatives in the house are divided based on population. The electoral College is thus a mixture of the two systems. Accurately stated. It keeps small states from having no say at all but allows larger states a greater say in the outcome. Its a good and fair system. The effect of this unfair system has resulted in five U.S. presidents being elected without a plurality of the national popular vote.

Without the electoral college, the USA would no longer be a representative republic. In other words, without it, we would have a completely different form of government. Without it, the U.S. would be a more representative republic as the election of the president would be based on the plurality of the nation popular vote.

The argument against the electoral college could also be used against the Senate which has 2 senators from each state. So California and New York each only get two. Places like Montana also get two. It's a good argument but one that is not currently at issue. These are states after-all and deserve to be counted as equal partners in the union. I disagree with your definition of equal partners. Take that away and you get taxation without representation which was one of the major causes of the revolutionary war. It would do nothing of the kind, wild speculation on your part.



The 3 Common Arguments For Preserving the Electoral College Are Wrong
http://www.time.com/4571626/electoral-c ... arguments/
One must care about a world one will not see.
--- Bertrand Russell

frozen-north
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 1:28 am

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby frozen-north » Wed Dec 21, 2016 9:54 pm

DesertFlower wrote:
The argument against the electoral college could also be used against the Senate which has 2 senators from each state. So California and New York each only get two. Places like Montana also get two. These are states after-all and deserve to be counted as equal partners in the union. Take that away and you get taxation without representation which was one of the major causes of the revolutionary war.



' taxation without representation'. Does it matter how much money each pays as tax? Because if we look at the economic data john provided it seems that Wyoming would only get a very small senator.

- Wyoming's economy comprised .00002% of the U.S. GDP in 2015.
- California and New York economies comprised 21.7% of the U.S. GDP in 2015.


john
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 6003
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 1:11 am
Location: Viña del Mar, Chile

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby john » Thu Dec 22, 2016 4:11 pm

Looks like we're about to return to Reagan-era economic policy with it's inevitable dire consequences.

What the US Economy Doesn't Need From Donald Trump
http://www.readersupportednews.org/opin ... nald-trump

The only way he can square higher infrastructure and defense spending with tax cuts is voodoo economics
One must care about a world one will not see.
--- Bertrand Russell

User avatar
JHyre
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 1940
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 12:08 am
Location: Columbus, Ohio

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby JHyre » Thu Dec 22, 2016 4:26 pm

Yeah. Sure. Because socialism is working so well. No, wait! This time it will work! Really!

People do so hate liberty - it means personal responsibility.

John Hyre

john
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 6003
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 1:11 am
Location: Viña del Mar, Chile

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby john » Thu Dec 22, 2016 5:08 pm

JHyre wrote:Yeah. Sure. Because socialism is working so well. No, wait! This time it will work! Really!

People do so hate liberty - it means personal responsibility.

John Hyre


An admirer of voodoo economics? By socialism, do you mean Social Security and Medicare? Yes, wait! This time voodoo economics will work! :lol:

People don't hate liberty - they hate inequality of opportunity (there is no level playing field) and they are tired of the lip-service they receive from the political establishment. You're a smart guy who must know that Trump's mantra of "I'll bring back the jobs" and "drain the swamp" is a con job of the highest order.
One must care about a world one will not see.
--- Bertrand Russell

AHusband
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 121
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:25 pm
Location: Valpo

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby AHusband » Thu Dec 22, 2016 5:21 pm

I know a number of people who have argued that a Trump vote is a pro-peace vote.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38410027

It's a mad mad world.

john
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 6003
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 1:11 am
Location: Viña del Mar, Chile

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby john » Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:33 pm

Arguably, a Trump vote is decidedly not a pro-peace vote.

Trump Pressures Obama Over U.N. Resolution on Israeli Settlements
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/22/world ... ments.html
One must care about a world one will not see.
--- Bertrand Russell

Andres
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 2484
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 3:09 am
Location: in transit

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby Andres » Sat Dec 24, 2016 6:22 pm

john wrote:
Andres wrote:
john wrote:
DesertFlower wrote:
Let's put a few (inconvenient) facts into perspective:

- All members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives are elected by popular vote (as are Governors of states).
. . .

I reject your first assertion; which makes all the others irrelevant.

I reject the assertion that giving people two (or sometimes more) BAD choices implies someone has been "elected by popular vote".
I reject the assertion that ANY politician elected when there is no "none of the above" on the ballot has been "elected by popular vote" and has a mandate to do anything.


I reject your rejections. :)

Of course you do.
Otherwise, you have no way of justifying using guns to force your views on others.
Chile: My expectations are low. Very low.
Blessed are they who have nothing to say and can not be persuaded to say it.

jamie_m
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 658
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 8:52 pm
Location: Santiago

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby jamie_m » Sat Dec 24, 2016 6:57 pm

Makes for good tele though.

john
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 6003
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 1:11 am
Location: Viña del Mar, Chile

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby john » Sat Dec 24, 2016 8:42 pm

Andres wrote:
john wrote:
Andres wrote:
john wrote:
DesertFlower wrote:
Let's put a few (inconvenient) facts into perspective:

- All members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives are elected by popular vote (as are Governors of states).
. . .

I reject your first assertion; which makes all the others irrelevant.

I reject the assertion that giving people two (or sometimes more) BAD choices implies someone has been "elected by popular vote".
I reject the assertion that ANY politician elected when there is no "none of the above" on the ballot has been "elected by popular vote" and has a mandate to do anything.


I reject your rejections. :)

Of course you do.
Otherwise, you have no way of justifying using guns to force your views on others.


My cryptic response was because the discussion was about the Electoral College, not specifically about the U.S. "winner-take-all" (plurality of the popular vote) voting system.
As I have opined many times on this forum, I do not justify nor do I condone the use of guns to enforce the views of any governmental institution or the views of any individual.

The U.S. has evolved into a "two-party" political system because the "winner-take-all" voting system has severely limited "third party" candidates from achieving any electoral success. The "tops down" political party apparatus (Democrat and Republican) inevitably results in many BAD choices appearing on the voting ballot (e.g., Trump and Clinton) but, nevertheless, the candidate who receives the "plurality of the popular vote" is, by law, declared the winner.
I have no personal objection to "none of the above" appearing on ballots; but, since voters can currently abstain from voting for candidates they dislike, the absence of "none of the above" does not invalidate an election outcome. A mandate for any winning candidate is a function of the magnitude of the margin of their victory. For example, Trump does not have one.

No doubt, the U.S. would be a more representative democracy if the current "winner-take-all" system were replaced by a proportional representation voting system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportio ... esentation).
One must care about a world one will not see.
--- Bertrand Russell

Billhere
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:37 am
Location: Royal County of Berkshire, England.

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby Billhere » Sun Dec 25, 2016 7:14 am

It also might help if there was some sort of limit on expenditure on these elections. It seems that those who can throw the most amount of money at it on a personal basis will probably succeed. Those who can't, and may be a better option, fall at any early stage when funds run out.

I don't pretend to follow this closely but you see what seem like likely contenders squeezed out because they run out of cash leaving those with the most funds slogging it out. That is hardly democratic either.

lost gringo
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 4:12 pm
Location: South Park, Patagonia

Re: The Trump Administration

Postby lost gringo » Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:36 am

In the USSA most anything can be bought. At the right price of course.
Senators, Judges, Mayors, etc. just as in any good banana republic.
Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.
allegedly said by Mark Twain


Return to “Lobby”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests