What's new

2020 Presidential election

The sheriff is pretty hilarious. Watch this. One minute he claims to not know much about the case and the next minute he cites a specific law. Lol... right, Im sure he knows so little about this case! Lol.

and his sympathy for the White supremacists who tried to kidnap, rape, and murder the governor is disgusting. It goes to show why BLM protests matter. We need to reform the law enforcement in this country. “Well they maybe weren’t trying to kidnap here. Maybe they were trying to just arrest her!”




Some redactions do not seem to be justified, for instance, the FBI’s conclusion that “white supremacist infiltration of law enforcement can result in other abuses of authority and passive tolerance of racism within communities served” — an apparent recognition of the potential harm to the public posed by white supremacist individuals embedded in police departments.

Hmm wonder why this was redacted...
 
4hqvz8.jpg
 
Here’s another one for you.

I've heard it all before and it's a worthless conversation. If you want two packed dirty cities to control the entire election that's on you. Trump absolutely destroyed Hillary in counties yet take away two citie and Trump destroyed the popular vote too.
 
Sadly, I feel the same way. In "Rage" Woodward says Trump made a hostile taker over of the Republican party and remade it in his image. That rang true to me. If not propped up by the Republicans, Trump would be long gone by now. It will take a long time for me to forgive them.
I'm a registered Independent but leaned left. After this recent administration and seeing how the rules are tipped in favor of minority Republican rule (gerrymandering, voter suppression, electoral college), I really can't see myself voting for a Republican again for the rest of my life.

Sent from my SM-T813 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
I've heard it all before and it's a worthless conversation. If you want two packed dirty cities to control the entire election that's on you. Trump absolutely destroyed Hillary in counties yet take away two citie and Trump destroyed the popular vote too.

So why should those in cities not have their voice matter as much? Regardless of rural, inner or suburban, each vote should be counted equally as one.
 
So why should those in cities not have their voice matter as much? Regardless of rural, inner or suburban, each vote should be counted equally as one.
I hate this conversation because it's simply common sense to me. Do people in LA know what it's like for dairy farmers in Iowa? Should a densely populated area be dictating what happens to them? Should New York be the only city responsible for ranchers in Idaho?

That's exactly what the popular vote does. Is the college perfect? Far from it but look at the population density here. Outside of a few major cities the the entire east would be making decisions for every single one of us.
Cf2LYWs.jpg

What's the point in voting if you're from Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Nevada, the Dakota's, Montana? Nobody from the East understands what the smaller states need and visa versa.

Edit and this is a little misleading as far as populatiom not encompassing the entire landmass but it really does show how densely populated areas control the popular vote. Trump crushed Hillary in counties won 2,626 to 487.

ogeoou-nationmap.png
 
Last edited:
I hate this conversation because it's simply common sense to me. Do people in LA know what it's like for dairy farmers in Iowa? Should a densely populated area be dictating what happens to them? Should New York be the only city responsible for ranchers in Idaho?

That's exactly what the popular vote does. Is the college perfect? Far from it but look at the population density here. Outside of a few major cities the the entire east would be making decisions for every single one of us.
Cf2LYWs.jpg

What's the point in voting if you're from Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Nevada, the Dakota's, Montana? Nobody from the East understands what the smaller states need and visa versa.

Edit and this is a little misleading as far as populatiom not encompassing the entire landmass but it really does show how densely populated areas control the popular vote. Trump crushed Hillary in counties won 2,626 to 487.

ogeoou-nationmap.png

I would agree that the EC is far from perfect. I think we already live in a world where elections are dictated by only a slice of the people in terms of swing states. Outside of representation at the local level, your vote for president in Alabama or Maryland is already booked.

Population density matters in terms of representation. No doubt Trump won more counties that are densely populated. These counties also slew heavily towards his core demographics just as cities would towards D’s.

There’s no perfect solution as Wyoming maybe shouldn’t have as many senators as California, but would agree that representation as a whole is impossible without considering voters regardless of township size and Cali having 19x as many senators as WY is a tough message.
 
Because like others you fake ignored me to impress friends. Then you have to tell your friends about it because these guys are all you have. You guys think telling me you ignored me hurts me then you respond like you just did because you couldn't help yourself.

It takes the world a day to revolve on its axis once. A year to revolve around the sun. How many times, in just one day, does the world revolve around you?
 
So why should those in cities not have their voice matter as much? Regardless of rural, inner or suburban, each vote should be counted equally as one.

I'm conflicted on this. I get the idea of doing away with the electoral college, it is logically sound but I also don't like the idea of 2 or 3 cities that are completely disconnected from 99% of the rest of the country basically running the country. It's a tough one.
 
It takes the world a day to revolve on its axis once. A year to revolve around the sun. How many times, in just one day, does the world revolve around you?
Every second that it's not revolving around my family.
 
Last edited:
I'm conflicted on this. I get the idea of doing away with the electoral college, it is logically sound but I also don't like the idea of 2 or 3 cities that are completely disconnected from 99% of the rest of the country basically running the country. It's a tough one.
Those 2 or 3 cities are diverse though. The people in those 2 or 3 cities don't all think exactly the same and also wouldn't all vote exactly the same.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Those 2 or 3 cities are diverse though. The people in those 2 or 3 cities don't all think exactly the same and also wouldn't all vote exactly the same.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

I'm not so sure that's true.

NYC and LA are about the same politically. Throw in the San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose area. It's the same too. Not sure where Chicago stands but I'd assume it's closer to NYC than it is Phoenix in terms of politics. So basically the top 4 biggest cities/areas are all the same. It makes it really tough to overcome.

Look at this graph. Only like 10% of the cities are conservative, and they are all on the very small end population wise.


I'm not even a conservative but there has to be some balance or you get the wackadoo left running amok. If it were completely slanted right you'd get the same wackadoo right policies. I don't know what the answer is but I do know letting NYC, LA and San Fran run the country is not a good idea.
 
I'm not so sure that's true.

NYC and LA are about the same politically. Throw in the San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose area. It's the same too. Not sure where Chicago stands but I'd assume it's closer to NYC than it is Phoenix in terms of politics. So basically the top 4 biggest cities/areas are all the same. It makes it really tough to overcome.

Look at this graph. Only like 10% of the cities are conservative, and they are all on the very small end population wise.


I'm not even a conservative but there has to be some balance or you get the wackadoo left running amok. If it were completely slanted right you'd get the same wackadoo right policies. I don't know what the answer is but I do know letting NYC, LA and San Fran run the country is not a good idea.
But you're missing the trees for the forest here. As mentioned above, the entire city of NYC doesn't all vote the same, or San Fran or Chicago or even Provo. The electoral college, as currently implemented in most states (winner take all) does assume that, and it's wrong. Maybe if more states followed the Maine example, and split it, it would be different. A city is not a monolithic entity, any more than a neighborhood or a state or the entire country.
 
Top