Kansas Crimson

Your wants create a nation with thoughts only to the large metropolitan area.

I can’t understand why some people think a small village of rednecks should get the same input as a city of 2 million people

^^^ thats why. Think like George III

Or why the 700,000 residents of DC get no representation in the Senate, while the 600,000 Wyomingers get 2% of the Senate.

DC should be a state. Solves that.

I believe there is a bill for that very thing on mitch's desk. He's concerned that they won't vote the right way.

There’s a lot of bills on Mitch’s desk

jhawks99 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:49 pm I believe there is a bill for that very thing on mitch's desk. He's concerned that they won't vote the right way.

But both sides do it

-illy

I feel like much of the gop has reduced themselves to being obstructionist assholes, but if anyone tries to call them out on it, they respond, “I know you are but what am I?”

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:06 pm Your wants create a nation with thoughts only to the large metropolitan area.

That is the result, yes, at least at present. But that result sort of follows the basic intent of things, right? Because...at present, that's where a majority of the people live.

Simple majority rule isn't perfect, but I'm not sure there's an approach that would be. I certainly know that a system where a vanishingly-small percentage of the population carries this much weight does not seem to be desirable.

Perhaps some hybrid system, where if one candidate fails to get >50%, it goes to a simple majority of states (voting by House state-by-state delegations).

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:06 pm Your wants create a nation with thoughts only to the large metropolitan area.

No, it doesn't at all. My proposal would only be for the election of our President. It means that smaller, more rural areas will need to pay attention to their state and local politics to ensure that their state and local needs are met. We elect members of Congress to speak up for us and represent our areas at the federal level, not the President. That would not change at all.

The President is equally all of ours and our votes for that person should be treated as such.

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:47 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:06 pm Your wants create a nation with thoughts only to the large metropolitan area.

No, it doesn't at all. My proposal would only be for the election of our President. It means that smaller, more rural areas will need to pay attention to their state and local politics to ensure that their state and local needs are met. We elect members of Congress to speak up for us and represent our areas at the federal level, not the President. That would not change at all.

The President is equally all of ours and our votes for that person should be treated as such.

So you agree more control should be given to local jurisdictionsand states. Careful. Might get labeled.

more control of what, exactly?

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:51 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:47 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:06 pm Your wants create a nation with thoughts only to the large metropolitan area.

No, it doesn't at all. My proposal would only be for the election of our President. It means that smaller, more rural areas will need to pay attention to their state and local politics to ensure that their state and local needs are met. We elect members of Congress to speak up for us and represent our areas at the federal level, not the President. That would not change at all.

The President is equally all of ours and our votes for that person should be treated as such.

So you agree more control should be given to local jurisdictions and states. Careful. Might get labeled.

No, I believe that local and state elections are where concerns about local and state issues should be addressed. No additional power needs to be granted for that, it is already the way that it is. Don't vote for President because you think they are the person that needs to address your local problem. They aren't.

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:54 pm more control of what, exactly?

Less federally contolled policy and more locally controlled policy

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:56 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:51 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:47 pm

No, it doesn't at all. My proposal would only be for the election of our President. It means that smaller, more rural areas will need to pay attention to their state and local politics to ensure that their state and local needs are met. We elect members of Congress to speak up for us and represent our areas at the federal level, not the President. That would not change at all.

The President is equally all of ours and our votes for that person should be treated as such.

So you agree more control should be given to local jurisdictions and states. Careful. Might get labeled.

No, I believe that local and state elections are where concerns about local and state issues should be addressed. No additional power needs to be granted for that, it is already the way that it is. Don't vote for President because you think they are the person that needs to address your local problem. They aren't.

all while being handcuffed by federal powers

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:59 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:56 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:51 pm

So you agree more control should be given to local jurisdictions and states. Careful. Might get labeled.

No, I believe that local and state elections are where concerns about local and state issues should be addressed. No additional power needs to be granted for that, it is already the way that it is. Don't vote for President because you think they are the person that needs to address your local problem. They aren't.

all while being handcuffed by federal powers

That's a different issue entirely that is unchanged by how we elect our President.

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:01 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:59 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:56 pm
No, I believe that local and state elections are where concerns about local and state issues should be addressed. No additional power needs to be granted for that, it is already the way that it is. Don't vote for President because you think they are the person that needs to address your local problem. They aren't.

all while being handcuffed by federal powers

That's a different issue entirely that is unchanged by how we elect our President.

But it has a large impact or why did you spend the last 4 years fretting?

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:03 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:01 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:59 pm

all while being handcuffed by federal powers

That's a different issue entirely that is unchanged by how we elect our President.

But it has a large impact or why did you spend the last 4 years fretting?

At this point you're just kind of blindly throwing poop at the wall so I am going to go back outside and work on my Christmas lights. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:06 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:03 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:01 pm

That's a different issue entirely that is unchanged by how we elect our President.

But it has a large impact or why did you spend the last 4 years fretting?

At this point you're just kind of blindly throwing poop at the wall so I am going to go back outside and work on my Christmas lights. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

My point being that if we are going to ignore less populated areas in the general election then we need to give local powers more responsibility and control.