Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: Why we need the electoral college

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    District 9
    Posts
    550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bear View Post
    Calling names now are we? No logical response? no facts?
    The Electoral College was written into the fabric of the Nations Electoral system. It needs no proof of its validity, certainly not by a foul smelling ass winded blowhard shill without an iota of reason or valid argument against it.
    You fail.

    Again.
    You're totally fixated on "proof," at least when it comes to arguments you can't answer. It seems to be your only defense and mode of attack: "YOU CAN'T PROVE IT! YOU CAN'T PROVE IT!"

    It's not about proof, foolish one. It's about discussing what's the best policy, and why. You talk about the electoral college as if it's the undisputed Word of God that can't be questioned. "The Founders wrote it, I believe it, and that settles it!" That's totally stupid.
    "If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity." --Deuteronomy 25:11-12

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    District 9
    Posts
    550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty34 View Post
    Your kind is not worth the effort anymore is probably why you are not drawing a proper response. We all know you are thoroughly brainwashed and none of us here wants to live in your vision of America so why don't you buzz off?
    The funny thing about responses like this is that I could just as easily, and with equal justice and reason, say exactly the same about you: "You're thoroughly brainwashed!" "Nobody wants to live in your vision of America!" "Why don't you buzz off!"

    I think you forgot, "And your sister is ugly and your feet smell bad!" (Actually, my own sister is quite pretty.)

    Again, if you don't like somebody's arguments or stances, it seems like there are a couple of reasonable things to do: either engage them to show that their ideas are wrong and that yours are better (which is sort of what I like to do), or, if you think the whole thing is hopeless, find a different discussion you like better. The unreasonable response is to attack somebody personally because you don't like their ideas or disagree with them. When normal people see such a response they tend to conclude that the speaker is frustrated and unhappy, but doesn't have the wherewithal to defend or even explain his own ideas.
    "If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity." --Deuteronomy 25:11-12

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    5,574

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mugwump View Post
    Sure. Because there's no justification why a smaller number of people who happen to live in rural areas have more say in who becomes president than a greater number of people who happen to live in cities. Of course there are other even more reasons, but those other reasons aren't illustrated so starkly by the graphic.
    Not more but an equal chance to be heard.I am sure many of us would welcome the mason dixon line again not for slavery but as a barrier to the crime laden cities you idolize and a chance to remove ourselves from your progressive socialist ideas.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mugwump View Post
    ..."Why don't you buzz off!"...
    Why is because we won the election and you didn't. We get to choose now.


    Icom IC-7800; $10,000 New
    King of the Hill & Best Available
    Until Just Recently

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    District 9
    Posts
    550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmyb View Post
    Not more but an equal chance to be heard.I am sure many of us would welcome the mason dixon line again not for slavery but as a barrier to the crime laden cities you idolize and a chance to remove ourselves from your progressive socialist ideas.
    Where did I give the impression I "idolize" cities? That's silly. I do happen to live in a big urban area, and I like it pretty well, though it does have its downsides. Housing costs are high and traffic is awful, for instance. And it's relatively expensive. On the other hand, there's a lot of neat stuff to do, lots of diversity, and many different economic opportunities.

    When it comes to crime, as a practical matter most cities aren't so heavily afflicted as they were even 25 years ago. For instance, although you may find it surprising, you're about twice as likely to be murdered in a lot of the states below the Mason-Dixon line as you are in New York City or Boston. The murder rates in the Southern states are horrible when compared to New England or the Pacific Northwest, for instance. It's especially bad because homicide rates tend to be higher with higher population density, so more urban states would normally have higher murder rates than rural states. Unfortunately that doesn't hold true of the South. That's because they have much higher rates of poverty, ignorance, high gun ownership, and poor economic opportunities in the rural areas. Plus history has left them with an unfortunate "pride culture" and a tendency to prefer solutions to problems that are based on force and violence.

    The more progressive "socialist" states have put programs and policies in place to make things more livable, though so far I don't think anybody has figured out a way to stop the slow economic decline of the countryside.
    "If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity." --Deuteronomy 25:11-12

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    District 9
    Posts
    550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty34 View Post
    Why is because we won the election and you didn't. We get to choose now.
    I don't see what that has to do with the actual discussion, unless all you want to say is "nyah nyah nyah, YOU LOST!" Did I mistake you for an adult?
    "If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity." --Deuteronomy 25:11-12

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    5,002

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mugwump View Post
    Where did I give the impression I "idolize" cities? That's silly. I do happen to live in a big urban area, and I like it pretty well, though it does have its downsides. Housing costs are high and traffic is awful, for instance. And it's relatively expensive. On the other hand, there's a lot of neat stuff to do, lots of diversity, and many different economic opportunities.

    When it comes to crime, as a practical matter most cities aren't so heavily afflicted as they were even 25 years ago. For instance, although you may find it surprising, you're about twice as likely to be murdered in a lot of the states below the Mason-Dixon line as you are in New York City or Boston. The murder rates in the Southern states are horrible when compared to New England or the Pacific Northwest, for instance. It's especially bad because homicide rates tend to be higher with higher population density, so more urban states would normally have higher murder rates than rural states. Unfortunately that doesn't hold true of the South. That's because they have much higher rates of poverty, ignorance, high gun ownership, and poor economic opportunities in the rural areas. Plus history has left them with an unfortunate "pride culture" and a tendency to prefer solutions to problems that are based on force and violence.

    The more progressive "socialist" states have put programs and policies in place to make things more livable, though so far I don't think anybody has figured out a way to stop the slow economic decline of the countryside.

    Betting you are following statistic put out by the FBI?

    They have been manipulating the crime rate since Clinton admin, they left the cities out of the national rate to try to show crime rate was dropping.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •