The Nissan Club banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
.
Joined
·
14,455 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Joined
·
1,407 Posts
I disagree. Winner take all is the way it has been for 220 years and that is the way it should stay.
 

·
Golden Member
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
the argument that states will be ignored is a good one.. but it goes 2 ways...

it will avoid the yucky idea that Bush will spend $$ to fix florida after the storm and ride the kickback during the election as the people affected think "whoa bush is a nice guy"...

it will fix the problem of big contested states esp. like california getting all the attention and $$ in election years, which is unfair anyway you look at it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
The founding fathers understood the problem of "mob rule"and that is one reason that we have the electoral college. The system works! dont be so blinded by politics as to try and change it now b/c your guy lost. If enough people throughout the country want the person to be elected he will be. Instead of changing the system, everyone should take part, i.e. VOTE! only about 50% of eligible voters vote, now what is up with that? Get people to vote and that will change the election. Just my 2 cents
 

·
.
Joined
·
14,455 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I don't vote for mainly one reason, NY 99% of the time votes democratic for the president. If i wanted to vote for anyone else, i would be basically wasting my time because i know he/she will most likly not win it and all the electoral college votes go to the democrat.

Now if they split up the votes for different areas in the state and my vote may actually mean something, then i would be first in line to vote.

I guess if i lived in a state where it wasn't always going one way, i would be voting and feeling differently. :dunno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
That is exactly why we have an electoral college!! The majority of votes in a district determine the winner in that district and if the majority of districts in that state vote that same way then the states votes go for that candidate! i.e. you can have 2 million people in one district that votes 100% for candidate A but if you have the rest of the districts(combined total less than 2 million voters) in that state vote for candidate B, Candidate B wins the state!! Chris, You just described the way we have it so get out there and vote! realize that your vote counts just as much as everybody else, ONE! Everybody just needs to get out there and vote. With that attitude there will never be any new ideas or challenges for candidates, you have to speak up to be heard! Just Vote!
 
Joined
·
1,407 Posts
Chris said:
I don't vote for mainly one reason, NY 99% of the time votes democratic for the president. If i wanted to vote for anyone else, i would be basically wasting my time because i know he/she will most likly not win it and all the electoral college votes go to the democrat.

Now if they split up the votes for different areas in the state and my vote may actually mean something, then i would be first in line to vote.

I guess if i lived in a state where it wasn't always going one way, i would be voting and feeling differently. :dunno:
Move to AZ Chris. Once my house is built you can stay with me until you find a place of yor own. They primarily vote Republican.
 

·
Hispanic Causin Panic
Joined
·
1,747 Posts
Hey i do have a question though and maybe griff could answer.

ok , why is it that the perception of democrats usually "are for the poor" and republicans "are for the rich". do you think thats stereo typical or just some malarky that persons running for office want you to percieve so they can earn your vote either way ?
 

·
Golden Member
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
it is prolly b/c of what they've been campaigning for over the years...

dems like to push low politics.. health care, education etc...

republicans like to push high politics of national security, free trade and tax breaks... obviously this doesnt bode well for poorer people who realise the rich mostly benefit from this, and are more concerned about paying for bills and the high cost of medication, than whether or not a terrorist is gunna off them. Its mainly an issue for cocooned rich people who now, for teh first time, face the prospect of an early death that are hitting the fan over this one.. the media is doing a good job of pushing it as a holistic 'us' vs 'them' issue tho.. :p
 
Joined
·
1,407 Posts
Dems want to spend billions on social programs to help the poor by making it ok for them to stay at home and be non productive and take "free" money. Republicans want to give money to businesses to create jobs to make it possible for the poor to move up in class if they are so inclined to do so. it is about giving hand outs r giving opportunities.
 

·
.
Joined
·
14,455 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Al Bundy's Friend Griff said:
Move to AZ Chris. Once my house is built you can stay with me until you find a place of yor own. They primarily vote Republican.
haha, well AZ will be one of the states i look at to relocate to soon.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
4,733 Posts
Al Bundy's Friend Griff said:
Dems want to spend billions on social programs to help the poor by making it ok for them to stay at home and be non productive and take "free" money. Republicans want to give money to businesses to create jobs to make it possible for the poor to move up in class if they are so inclined to do so. it is about giving hand outs r giving opportunities.
repubs have been saying that giving tax cuts to the rich creates jobs since the Regan years and it has never worked.

Look at the job market now. With all of the tax cuts given to the rich in the Bush admin, we should be overwhelmed with avail jobs shouldn't we?

Oh wait, Clinton and 9/11 happened so its their fault. Wrong, that logic has never worked, do some research. It never worked with Regan, BUsh #1 and its not working now.

its failed logic. It's just the excuse they use to keep the rich richer and the poor poorer
 
Joined
·
1,407 Posts
If that is true Willdogs then why under the Clinton years did the rick get richer and the poor get poorer? Why did the middle class for the first time in US industrialized history shrink? Why were there more people living in poverty durring Clinton than ever before?

The answer is simple. Under Clinton he raised taxes so much on manufacturing businesses that they fled America like rats on a sinking ship. They went to cost friendly countries taking all the good paying manufacturing jobs with them. In the past there ws always provisions for business to keep jobs here in the US but under Clinton those tax incentives went away in exchange for in helping information companies. Guess that work out well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Wait a minute there willdogs, listen to what you said. 8 years of a presidency(clinton) doesnt affect the economy? but you blame Bush for today's economy? think about it! you cant have it both ways , No double standard. And you cant say with a straight face that over three thousand people dying as a result of the worst terrorist attack in history is not affecting the economy either, I bet even you went out and bought duct tape and plastic during the anthrax scare. Because it changed your perspective. 9/11 did change the economy and no one can deny that! What is impressive is that thanks to the tax cuts we are now regaining jobs and in a few years (by the end of his next term)it will be better than before 9/11. Remind you that unemployment has not gone up more than half a percent during Bush's administration. THAT IS A PRESIDENT!! Seriously your argument isnt fact its opinion and we need the facts when deciding a president.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top