RockRaines Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:34 PM) They already are. Electoral college being removed does not change this. All it changes is that if you live in a state where you are a huge political minority, you can still impact the national race. Right now Ohioans, Floridians, Virginians and Tarheels votes are more important than ALL of ours. Is everyone ok with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:36 PM) but dont you see how much EASIER that would be for the Dem? the Dem can go to LA, NYC, Chicago, big cities. That's it. And be fine. The GOP candidate has to go EVERYWHERE ELSE in order to "motivate the base" and GOTV Not at all. First, the Dems already hold big sway in the cities of those areas you mentioned. So they won't go there too often either. The prize is the swing voters, who are spread out all over the country anyway. For both parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:37 PM) ??? it's... not... 50/50 in NY... it's very heavily liberal. Last I checked Bloomberg is a Republican, or is that not true? Just because a southern republican cant win NY, doesnt mean a northern republican cant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 03:37 PM) Last I checked Bloomberg is a Republican, or is that not true? Just because a southern republican cant win NY, doesnt mean a northern republican cant. he's Independent now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:37 PM) Last I checked Bloomberg is a Republican, or is that not true? Just because a southern republican cant win NY, doesnt mean a northern republican cant. Not anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:36 PM) Wrong question. See my post above. And for more evidence, see Iowa and New Hampshire. Very rural areas, of great importance because they have so many swing/moderate voters. Most NYC urbanites are going to vote Dem, most Wyomingers (or whatever they call themselves) will vote GOP, in the current landscape. In reality, if you want to make a good argument for the weakness of the popular vote model, it is that the candidates will focus on suburbanites more than either urban or rural extremes. And Reddy's point is that if you change it to popular, NONE of the small states would matter ever again. Campaigns would take place in NY, Chicago and LA, etc. At least right now there are a few small states that DO matter. And I'm not saying the current system is perfect...but I believe it's better than the alternative you pose. I think you're trying to fix a problem and making it even worse. You should run for office...you'd fit in well in Washington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 03:37 PM) Not at all. First, the Dems already hold big sway in the cities of those areas you mentioned. So they won't go there too often either. The prize is the swing voters, who are spread out all over the country anyway. For both parties. that's not actually true. the whole myth of the "undecided voter" is a fallacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:37 PM) Right now Ohioans, Floridians, Virginians and Tarheels votes are more important than ALL of ours. Is everyone ok with that? And none of those states have metro areas according to Reddy. You are dead Miami, Cleveland, Orlando, Cincinnati Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Im sorry I meant that Bloomberg was voted in as a Republican. I could have just said Giuliani. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 03:39 PM) And none of those states have metro areas according to Reddy. You are dead Miami, Cleveland, Orlando, Cincinnati i didn't say they don't have metro areas, but they in NO way compare to LA/NYC/Chicago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:40 PM) Im sorry I meant that Bloomberg was voted in as a Republican. I could have just said Giuliani. And someday the Cubs will win the World Series. Every once in a while a blind squirrel finds a nut, but would be we ready to say the Cubs are awesome? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:39 PM) And none of those states have metro areas according to Reddy. You are dead Miami, Cleveland, Orlando, Cincinnati Columbus is actually the largest city in Ohio. Virginia has several urban areas too like Richmond and Alexandria. Dont forget Fla has Tallahasse (sp?) and Tampa as well. It just sucks that MY vote for a national election essentially means dick living in Cook county. If we went popular every vote across the nation counts equally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:41 PM) Columbus is actually the largest city in Ohio. Virginia has several urban areas too like Richmond and Alexandria. Dont forget Fla has Tallahasse (sp?) and Tampa as well. It just sucks that MY vote for a national election essentially means dick living in Cook county. If we went popular every vote across the nation counts equally. This is why I feel the EC just needs to vote proportionately. I'm simply not ready to hand over that much power to the masses... Because... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 03:41 PM) Columbus is actually the largest city in Ohio. Virginia has several urban areas too like Richmond and Alexandria. Dont forget Fla has Tallahasse (sp?) and Tampa as well. It just sucks that MY vote for a national election essentially means dick living in Cook county. If we went popular every vote across the nation counts equally. yes. each VOTE counts the same as any other. BUT I still truly believe that the issues that matter to rural america will be glossed over in favor of those issues that matter to suburban and urban america, thus causing voter apathy, thus shifting the power to the metro areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:41 PM) i didn't say they don't have metro areas, but they in NO way compare to LA/NYC/Chicago If you think those 3 cities can control the US popular vote, there is nothing I can say. I dont even believe they account for 10% of the US population, and even at their most drastic splits, it would be 70/30. Big cities have diverse points of view. You cant just put them in the Democratic column. From 72'-88 Cali and Il voted Republican in every election. Its arguable but for Perot, it might have continued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:44 PM) yes. each VOTE counts the same as any other. BUT I still truly believe that the issues that matter to rural america will be glossed over in favor of those issues that matter to suburban and urban america, thus causing voter apathy, thus shifting the power to the metro areas. It would. That's why I'm saying while I don't think the EC is perfect, and could probably be tweaked for better representation, I'm not ready to get rid of it and just end up with the polar opposite of what we have not without actually fixing anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:38 PM) And Reddy's point is that if you change it to popular, NONE of the small states would matter ever again. Campaigns would take place in NY, Chicago and LA, etc. At least right now there are a few small states that DO matter. And I'm not saying the current system is perfect...but I believe it's better than the alternative you pose. I think you're trying to fix a problem and making it even worse. You should run for office...you'd fit in well in Washington. And I vehemently disagree with that point. Small states vs large states should be irrelevant in this case, first of all. Second, the voters in North Dakota or other small states will matter MORE, not less, with a popular vote, for the reasons I have laid out. QUOTE (Reddy @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:38 PM) that's not actually true. the whole myth of the "undecided voter" is a fallacy. lol wut? This is fundamental stuff. You win by getting your base out, and by winning swing voters. The only reason some people feel the latter is a falacy is because they conflate independents with moderates. They are not nearly the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 So, I skipped the last 10 pages but... 1) I was told I wasted my vote by not voting for Johnson, because I voted in Missouri and it didn't matter here or if I had voted in Illinois. And Johnson needed that 5%! That's equally as stupid as saying voting for Johnson is bad in non-swing states. 2) Todd Akin's loss was celebrated around here. Lot's of legitimate jokes. 3) I voted strictly Democrat this time, because that's how my political views lineup. We get a kick out of lambasting people for voting along party lines...but what if those are just your views? Back home I vote for a few Republicans on the local level cause some of the Democrats, here I voted all Democrat. 4) We need a new flag. Damn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:45 PM) It would. That's why I'm saying while I don't think the EC is perfect, and could probably be tweaked for better representation, I'm not ready to get rid of it and just end up with the polar opposite of what we have not without actually fixing anything. Unless you think that 1 vote 1 person is fixing something, and then you actually are fixing the problem of unproportional representation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:46 PM) So, I skipped the last 10 pages but... 1) I was told I wasted my vote by not voting for Johnson, because I voted in Missouri and it didn't matter here or if I had voted in Illinois. And Johnson needed that 5%! That's equally as stupid as saying voting for Johnson is bad in non-swing states. 2) Todd Akin's loss was celebrated around here. Lot's of legitimate jokes. 3) I voted strictly Democrat this time, because that's how my political views lineup. We get a kick out of lambasting people for voting along party lines...but what if those are just your views? Back home I vote for a few Republicans on the local level cause some of the Democrats, here I voted all Democrat. 4) We need a new flag. Damn. If you skipped the last 10 pages, you missed some of the best discussion I've seen in a long time in here. And what's with #4? New flag? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:44 PM) If you think those 3 cities can control the US popular vote, there is nothing I can say. I dont even believe they account for 10% of the US population, and even at their most drastic splits, it would be 70/30. Big cities have diverse points of view. You cant just put them in the Democratic column. From 72'-88 Cali and Il voted Republican in every election. Its arguable but for Perot, it might have continued. He's not saying that. Also, they can't control it now...but what of in 50 years? I happen to own a DeLorean with time circuits and a flux capacitor, and in 2048, the population of Chicago alone is 95% of the US. New York was buried in a flood caused by AGW, and California fell into the ocean from a 12.0 magnitude quake. Chicago is all that's left, so everyone came here. Except the people living out in the farm lands...but nobody cares what they think or need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:41 PM) i didn't say they don't have metro areas, but they in NO way compare to LA/NYC/Chicago Yes, instead they have multiple areas that are urban instead of essentially the one we have in illinois. Columbus and Cleveland combined is about the population of chicago. Add in Dayton, Toledo and Cincy and you have a decently urban population. Miami-Dade country in Florida is HUGE, about 2.5 million people. (chicago is about 2.7) Orlando and Tampa are over the million mark. Virginia has the DC urban area which is huge but not part. But still over a million in Richmonda, Alexandria, Virginia beach etc. Obviously the 3 largest cities in the country arent going to have any comparison because thats why they are ranked that high, but its not like those states have no big cities to speak of and in general in their states they have more areas that classify as "urban" than Illinois. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:47 PM) He's not saying that. Also, they can't control it now...but what of in 50 years? I happen to own a DeLorean with time circuits and a flux capacitor, and in 2048, the population of Chicago alone is 95% of the US. New York was buried in a flood caused by AGW, and California fell into the ocean from a 12.0 magnitude quake. Chicago is all that's left, so everyone came here. Except the people living out in the farm lands...but nobody cares what they think or need. Let me guess, the President is a Daley? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:47 PM) He's not saying that. Also, they can't control it now...but what of in 50 years? I happen to own a DeLorean with time circuits and a flux capacitor, and in 2048, the population of Chicago alone is 95% of the US. New York was buried in a flood caused by AGW, and California fell into the ocean from a 12.0 magnitude quake. Chicago is all that's left, so everyone came here. Except the people living out in the farm lands...but nobody cares what they think or need. On the bright side, the Cubs still haven't won s***. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 02:48 PM) Let me guess, the President is a Daley? Actually, you're President. Consider this your Mayor Goldie Wilson moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts