Grandmas multiple Election related questions for 11/04/20

[Deleted User 289]

Feel free to answer any, all, or none of my questions.

To those who voted for Biden......
Other than vote, what did you do to help Biden win? Post shit on here and/or Facebook? How did that work out for you - and Joe? I'm not a smart guy but I'm smart enough to know that people who live outside the "swing states" - did basically nothing to help INside the "swing states". That my crimson.com friends and enemies is a major reason Donald Trump won this election. Instead of questioning how and why people could and would vote for Trump, take a good look in the mirror and blame the person you see. Yep, that ugly fucker you see in the mirror played a bigger role in the results of this election then you thought he/she did. Sucks - doesn't it?

To those who voted for Trump.....
Why did you vote for Trump?

If Hillary and Timmy couldn't beat Trump in 2016 what the fuck made people think Joey and Kamala could/would? Were they relying on Trump losing the election all on his own due to his being a total asshole and a pretty much incompetent fuck? Well, if so, how did that work for them?
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris? LOL! Except it's not really funny - is it?
ONCE AGAIN, the Dems LOST this election as much if not more than Trump won it.

I doubt Pence runs for President in 2024. I have ZERO idea who the Pubs nomination will be.
My question is how will the Dems fuck up 2024?

Last night I had a friend do some minor boasting. I responded - Go fuck yourself you morally bankrupt asshole. I was half joking - which of course means I was also half serious.
He was REALLY upset by my saying that to him. I asked him why he was so sensitive. He gave me a long winded response. I then said to him, I can understand your thinking Trump is a better President for you and our country but do you think he is a good person as a WHOLE? He responded yes. I then ended the conversation.
How the fuck can any decent human being think/believe Donald Trump is a good person?

I have a friend who lives in a northern suburb of Chicago. The past couple of weeks he and a group of people have stood on a corner in that town's "downtown" area holding Biden signs and doing their thing/s.
Many people walking and driving by were supportive, some were not.
Last night a fairly large group of Trump supporters stood on an opposite corner.
My friend went "live" on Facebook last night. One of the kids (I'm guessing High School age) who was with him and the Biden supporters could be clearly seen continuously giving the middle finger to the Trump supporters. I called her out on it. I posted - "Who is the girl giving the middle finger and why is no one telling her to stop"? No response. I then said, "She's being a bigger asshole than the people across the street (who seemed to be fairly well behaved) and clearly she's no better than they are". No response.
I then said, "She's an embarrassment to Biden and Biden supporters - you really should tell her to stop" No response.
Do you agree or disagree with my sentiment?

Will YOU survive 4 more years of Trump?

Will Trump survive the next 4 years?

[Deleted User 310]

1. I did nothing to help Biden other than give him my vote.

2. Looks like they will probably win after all, but dems once again picked a terrible ticket imo....short of trump or a trump family member running in 2024, it is not guaranteed i will vote for Biden/Harris again, but hard to say with so few good options from the GOP....my hope is that he doesn't run for a 2nd term, but his ego will probably force him to do so...there are Dem potential candidates out that i view as far superior to biden/harris (or anyone on the right presently).

3. Not sure. Probably by running 100 year old biden?

4. No idea. The hate for all things dem runs deep in some people.

5. I agree with your sentiment.

6. Yes (but don't think i will have to at the moment)

7. Yes (health wise, don't think he will have the option president wise)

[zsn]

We are going to have this predicament come every election. When was the last time any of you thought we had “good candidates”? Maybe historical revisionism would say Obama but I think even then people were complaining.

It’s embarrassing that we call ourselves a democracy when the party whose candidate has won the most votes was not the winner. The Pubs have had more votes once since 1988. 1 for 8!!

The first thing we need to do is get rid of the electoral college. Easiest way to do this is for a majority of the states to award their electors to the National popular vote winner. If PA, OH, MI, WI, NC and GA do this it would be sufficient. Several western states have already done it, pending wider adoption.

We would have a winner by now!

[Deleted User 310]

There are problems with the electoral college, undoubtedly. But there are also problems with removing it.

I go back and forth on what i think is best.

[zsn]

What purpose does the EC serve other than giving former wealthy landowners disproportionate power? Why should a vote for president in Wyoming or the Dakotas be worth 2-3x that in CA or TX?

[twocoach]

There are problems with the electoral college, undoubtedly. But there are also problems with removing it.

I go back and forth on what i think is best.

What's the problem with removing it? That elections come down to the urban voters in a few key states vs the rural vote nationwide? Isn't that exactly what is going on now?

[pdub]

It does a better job of gauging the general thoughts across the whole country rather than condensed pockets of it.

[NewtonHawk11]

It does a better job of gauging the general thoughts across the whole country rather than condensed pockets of it.

Correct. Without EC, the rural vote would mean nothing. It actually helps the Republicans more than anything.

[Deleted User 310]

What purpose does the EC serve other than giving former wealthy landowners disproportionate power? Why should a vote for president in Wyoming or the Dakotas be worth 2-3x that in CA or TX?

Because we are a collection of 50 states. The electoral college keeps smaller states relevant to national politics and gives them a voice (albeit a very small one). It means all the states and their needs/wants/desires matter, rather than just a handful of large cities.


I will say an obvious con is that it keep the 2 party system strong.



Hard to say what changes would occur with voter turnout if the popular vote was the decider....there is a lot of the "my vote doesn't count" attitude in places like California Illinois and New York by Republicans because they know their state is going blue....conversely the same can be said about some minority voters in traditionally red states.


I do not think our country should be controlled by 5 or 6 major cities....but i also don't think it should disproportionately be controlled by a handful of swing states either. So no easy fix in my eyes.

[defixione]

Getting money out of politics and reinstating the fairness doctrine would be a good start.

[Deleted User 289]

I apologize! A lot of other threads to discuss the election and I probably could/should have asked my questions on those.

Three more questions.....

1) As far as our current Presidential voting system in this country - I feel it sucks.
The crazy thing to me is - this is something pretty much EVERYONE who is 18 or older and is a legal US citizen has a say in - in terms of who is elected. So..... Why do we as country allow it to be left up to the STATES to decide who is the winner?

2) Shouldn't EVERYONE's individual vote ultimately count exactly the same?

3) Think about it. In a fair election of any kind. How the fuck can someone or something have LESS votes than someone or something else - and be declared the winner?

[Deleted User 310]

Getting money out of politics and reinstating the fairness doctrine would be a good start.

But to do so (get the money out of politics) we would need to politicians to be on board...which we know won't happen. Or we would need to elect politicians who want to get the money out of politics...which we know won't happen becuase it is impossible to campaign/win without the big money backers.

[Deleted User 310]

I apologize! A lot of other threads to discuss the election and I probably could/should have asked my questions on those.

Three more questions.....

1) As far as our current Presidential voting system in this country - I feel it sucks.
The crazy thing to me is - this is something pretty much EVERYONE who is 18 or older and is a legal US citizen has a say in - in terms of who is elected. So..... Why do we as country allow it to be left up to the STATES to decide who is the winner?

2) Shouldn't EVERYONE's individual vote ultimately count exactly the same?

3) Think about it. In a fair election of any kind. How the fuck can someone or something have LESS votes than someone or something else - and be declared the winner?

1. Because we are a collection of 50 somewhat independent states.

2. It does...in their state.

3. They don't...in their state.


As long as we never run into rogue electors from the electoral college i do not have a big issue with it (although i do understand the issues some have with it)...the moment electors start going against the will of the people from their state i would want it immediately abolished.

[twocoach]

It does a better job of gauging the general thoughts across the whole country rather than condensed pockets of it.

Correct. Without EC, the rural vote would mean nothing. It actually helps the Republicans more than anything.

They would matter exactly as much as they do now? Rural votes in MI, WI, PA, AZ and GS vs. urban votes in those states will decide the election.

[twocoach]

Getting money out of politics and reinstating the fairness doctrine would be a good start.

Take money out of an election and you eliminate advertising,, which forcesvoters to manually research everything to determine who to vote for. As we have seen, this would be disastrous. The vast majority dont give a shit enough to make that effort. We as a nation would be dumber, if that's even possible.

[defixione]

Ah, but that's where the second part of my proposal enters the picture.

[pdub]

Money should be controlled/delved out equally by a neutral branch of the government at a certain state of the election process and there shouldn't be any extra money allowed in.

[Mjl]

Money should be controlled/delved out equally by a neutral branch of the government at a certain state of the election process and there shouldn't be any extra money allowed in.

What's equal? Currently people in the major cities pay a lot more total in taxes, and that gets distributed equally between states. Is that equal, the major population centers funding rural areas?

[pdub]

Equal means every candidate gets say 25 million ( x amount ) at one stage and at that point cannot spend any private money/publicly raised money, and then, in the next stage gets another 100-300 million.

Make the candidacy more about who you are as a candidate and not how much you spend.

[Mjl]

Oh. I completely misunderstood your previous post.