EC vs. NPV - Page 10 - Talk About Marriage
Politics and Religion This is the place to discuss politics, morality, religion, and anything controversial.

User Tag List

 262Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #136 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 03:17 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,989
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve1000 View Post
They already do not need to. There are only a handful of swing states that the candidates visit repeatedly. With a popular vote, every single vote influences the election results. Currently, unless you're in a swing state, we're only voting for the free stickers.
With 270 electoral votes needed to win, those Midwestern States are important.

Yes, okay, not as important as some of the swing States...in a close election. Still, those states out west, including Hawaii and Alaska, might as well take their poison with NPV, cause they don't have any say, unless it's a close race.That's it.

If we had a great candidate, there would be no need for swing states. Under normal circumstances, with an EC, their votes count because they are needed to reach that 270. Although, with NPV and under normal circumstances, their votes don't mean much at all.

That's why the EC was put in place. To give those less populated states a chance to decide who they wanted to run the country.

This would likely not have been an issue, if Hillary was not the candidate, nor Sanders. He took votes from her in swing states. His way was more socialist than Hillary's.

In the end, what those who voted for Hillary wanted to avoid with Trump, would have gotten exactly what they were afraid about...with Hillary. Plus, they would not have gotten the transparency we have seen so far. The president isn't above the law. Hillary is.

This is the basic issue with progressives. They think they know what is best for everyone, and what will make them happy. The Constitution actually says each of us as individuals, has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Forcing all to do what some think is best, is not liberty for all. Telling some they cannot complain about ideals and new laws that reduce the rights of average citizens while giving new freedoms to others, is not liberty. It's tyranny.

It's a tough time in this country's history. We may get through it with our republic in tact. We may not. So far, there are more out there that want democratic socialism. I don't care for changing our form of government. We already have the greatest country in the world.

We need to go back to the Constitution, not forward to a new government which our Constitution can no longer apply. I like the way our country was intended.

Those who are actively trying to change our form of government are essentially traitors and should be thrown in prison. That's my opinion.


"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #137 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 03:30 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,624
Re: EC vs. NPV

Dream on.

The whole idea of NPV is one person, one vote. An NPV vote in Alaska or Hawaii counts as much as one vote in Wyoming or Texas or Illinois or Indiana...

Unlike the current system.

If not, kindly explain, preferably without references to the Constitution, traitors, or anything of the kind. We're all adults here. Simple logic will suffice.

If EC is such a great idea why not have EC for state and local elections?
john117 is online now  
post #138 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 03:37 PM
Member
 
Steve1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: The Big O / S-Hai
Posts: 1,046
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post

This is the basic issue with progressives. They think they know what is best for everyone, and what will make them happy. The Constitution actually says each of us as individuals, has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
I appreciate your thought-out reply. However, it doesn't not help anything for someone to make blanket statements like you made above. I am a progressive, but I don't think that I know what is best for everyone. I assume that you're a conservative. I assume it would not be fair to think that all conservatives do not care about the environment and want to end all worker's rights.

Most left of center and right of center voters vote based on their personal experiences. Almost everyone would agree that each of us should have the right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. However, at the time the constitution was written, these rights did not pertain to black people or gay people.
Steve1000 is offline  
 
post #139 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 04:04 PM
Member
 
Kivlor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 3,119
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
Dream on.

The whole idea of NPV is one person, one vote. An NPV vote in Alaska or Hawaii counts as much as one vote in Wyoming or Texas or Illinois or Indiana...

Unlike the current system.

If not, kindly explain, preferably without references to the Constitution, traitors, or anything of the kind. We're all adults here. Simple logic will suffice.

If EC is such a great idea why not have EC for state and local elections?
Why not? Because the individual states choose not to. Personally I'd be fine with my state having the equivalent.

Why do the individual states choose not to? Because power tends to concentrate at the highest level it can. The idea of our Republic was that the States were in charge of themselves primarily--excepting trade / war. This keeps power more decentralized, and the government closer to its people. Particularly, the individual States (Colonies at the time) wanted to have the final say in most of their own affairs, and so they formed a series of decentralized governments, that culminated in the Republic formed by our current Constitution.

The reason for a decentralized union of states was to prevent a recurrence of the situation wherein some far away legislative body could enforce its whims upon the peoples of this union. Don't want taxes raised? Too bad, the Crown (or in this case California) says otherwise. By keeping this decentralized (Federal) system Washington was to remain limited to a very few things, and so if California wants to raise its taxes, it can do so, while Kansas can set its own, etc.

Such a system of government ensures maximum representation. Sadly, every year we slip farther from this system, and into a centralized federal bureaucracy; farther from liberty and deeper into tyranny. Already, most people my age cannot even envision what our founding was intended to be like. In time, there will be none left who can, and the torch our forefathers lit not that long ago will finally die out.

You'll have your way John, I've no doubt, and it will end with your children, as well as mine, in chains.

Do you hear the people sing / Lost in the valley of the night?
It is the music of a people / Who are climbing to the light.
For the wretched of the earth / There is a flame that never dies.
Even the darkest night will end / And the sun will rise...
Kivlor is offline  
post #140 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 04:42 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,989
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
Dream on.

The whole idea of NPV is one person, one vote. An NPV vote in Alaska or Hawaii counts as much as one vote in Wyoming or Texas or Illinois or Indiana...

Unlike the current system.

If not, kindly explain, preferably without references to the Constitution, traitors, or anything of the kind. We're all adults here. Simple logic will suffice.

If EC is such a great idea why not have EC for state and local elections?
Because a states are in one time zone. States are not spread out for thousands of miles.

In the nation of The United States of America, NPV votes in the west have little value compared with state level elections. Time zones are different, which would necessarily cause folks to change their minds based on the results in the east.

That's not a great way to have an election. It removes the individuals personal opinions and replaces them with mob ideals. That type of thing is seen in psychology of children, married men and women and anyone who looks up to someone with more respect than they deserve.

That's what those progressive mobs have done in this election. Those in charge have told their voters what they should think is going on instead of what is. They fired them all up and caused violence. If they would have had all the truth instead of loads of emotional rhetoric, they would likely not have gotten as angry and vindictive.

Those are a quick few.

"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #141 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 04:47 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,989
Re: EC vs. NPV

@Kivlor, you do understand that progressives and socialists want the government to take charge of every aspect of our lives? They want to be guided because they cannot think for themselves. They are afraid to be left out and make a mistake. That's why laws pass like it is illegal to smoke in a car with a child. Well, why would you in the first place? We have a whole pile of folks that need told what to do and when. They can't think for themselves.

So, go socialist. They will take care of you, but, at a huge price. I'm not willing to pay that price. That is not my country's government. If it was intended that way, there wouldn't be a D of I or a Constitution. We would only need laws. And, that's what they've done so far. Make more laws until we have to have attorneys tell us if we can wipe or we have to use a bidet and then a pat dry with an Egyptian cotton towel.

I might like that. I better be careful..

"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #142 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 05:16 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,989
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve1000 View Post
I appreciate your thought-out reply. However, it doesn't not help anything for someone to make blanket statements like you made above. I am a progressive, but I don't think that I know what is best for everyone. I assume that you're a conservative. I assume it would not be fair to think that all conservatives do not care about the environment and want to end all worker's rights.

Most left of center and right of center voters vote based on their personal experiences. Almost everyone would agree that each of us should have the right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. However, at the time the constitution was written, these rights did not pertain to black people or gay people.
Steve, sorry to offend you. What you must realize is progressives want the government to be in charge of them. They want them to figure out what is best for them and force everyone to do it. Because it is best for everyone. They want the government to create laws that do the controlling, so they don't get their hands dirty.

I'd say the fundamental difference is in the manner by which these goals are accomplished.

"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #143 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 05:19 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,989
Re: EC vs. NPV

John,

A traitor is someone who commits treason. What is treason? In general it is:

Definition of treason
1
:* the betrayal of a trust :* treachery
2
:* the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason

Now, how could someone as intelligent as you, not realize that's what has been going on for the last twenty five or more years? Forget their political affiliations, like Democrat or Republican.

Democrat makes me disgusted, just the word, since we do not have a democracy in this, the United States of America, and never did, or were never supposed to have one.

"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #144 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 05:34 PM
Member
 
Kivlor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 3,119
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
@Kivlor, you do understand that progressives and socialists want the government to take charge of every aspect of our lives? They want to be guided because they cannot think for themselves. They are afraid to be left out and make a mistake. That's why laws pass like it is illegal to smoke in a car with a child. Well, why would you in the first place? We have a whole pile of folks that need told what to do and when. They can't think for themselves.

So, go socialist. They will take care of you, but, at a huge price. I'm not willing to pay that price. That is not my country's government. If it was intended that way, there wouldn't be a D of I or a Constitution. We would only need laws. And, that's what they've done so far. Make more laws until we have to have attorneys tell us if we can wipe or we have to use a bidet and then a pat dry with an Egyptian cotton towel.

I might like that. I better be careful..
I'm with you.

I just think we lost 100 years ago in the Wilson Administration. Maybe farther back than that. Today when people discuss Liberty they are discussing your "Liberty" to get a Government Issued paper approving of your choice to have sexual relations with someone of the same gender as you. When our Founders fought a war for Independence, they were talking about Liberty, and discussing your Liberty to not be taxed by a Government that doesn't represent you. Of the Liberty to worship openly and freely. Of the Liberty to own property and to defend it; to live your life unimpeded so long as you don't violate the property of others.

They don't even speak the same language. They are usurpers. Traitors. And they'll put us (and themselves) in chains when they get their way. Already freedom is so far eroded that most people can't envision a life without the bureaucracy to tell them us all how to live and how not to in all things. It is not enough to have a suitable, functioning government authority that offers us an environment of Liberty, all must be brought under its control, for the experts know what is right and wrong, and can better live your life for you, than you can live it yourself.

Do you hear the people sing / Lost in the valley of the night?
It is the music of a people / Who are climbing to the light.
For the wretched of the earth / There is a flame that never dies.
Even the darkest night will end / And the sun will rise...
Kivlor is offline  
post #145 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 05:44 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,989
Re: EC vs. NPV

That's how I figure it, too, Kivlor.

I thought about Wilson after I posted that. He was extremely progressive and helped usher in the second world war through his involvement in the Treaty that ended the first world war. In fact, he insisted on the very things that caused Germany to be crushed with debt and recession, as well as look for a scape goat like the Jews and follow a maniac into destruction.

Hardly a great president.


"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #146 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 05:54 PM
Member
 
Steve1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: The Big O / S-Hai
Posts: 1,046
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
Steve, sorry to offend you. What you must realize is progressives want the government to be in charge of them. They want them to figure out what is best for them and force everyone to do it. Because it is best for everyone. They want the government to create laws that do the controlling, so they don't get their hands dirty.

I'd say the fundamental difference is in the manner by which these goals are accomplished.
Are you saying that I must realize that I want the government to be in charge of myself? But I don't want that. I believe in decreasing pollution by continuing the path of clean and renewable energies. I'm not gay, but I think that two gay people who want to get married should have to endure marriage like the rest of us. I don't want the government in charge of saying who can and cannot get married. I don't want the government to tell us that we need to treat pain with opioids from pharmaceutical companies, but not with marijuana based treatment. And while we're at it, why are cigarettes and vodka ok, but marijuana isn't?

Finally, I think that there is a problem with the system if the top 2% is moving farther and farther away from the bottom 98%. I work for a research institution. The people who make more than $250,000 per year make the rules of annual pay increases. It is a percentage-based system so the more wealthy you are, the bigger pay raise you receive.

Those are some of the reasons why I consider myself a progressive.

I'm not offended and I appreciate the dialogue. It's never a bad thing when people have frank communication. I assume that you're a decent person.
Steve1000 is offline  
post #147 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 06:35 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,989
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve1000 View Post
Are you saying that I must realize that I want the government to be in charge of myself? But I don't want that.

Pretty much.


I believe in decreasing pollution by continuing the path of clean and renewable energies.

How would you go about getting everyone on board without raising the cost of living for everyone, offering tax breaks which will end, or creating new laws that will only stifle the economy? Please, don't tell me that it will create jobs. More will be lost than are gained. The lowered wages from the new jobs will decrease revenue in the government. Taxes will have to be raised somewhere else, so as not to make it look like the changes cost us anything.


I'm not gay, but I think that two gay people who want to get married should have to endure marriage like the rest of us.

I only have disagreement due to my beliefs. I'm not their judge. On the other hand, I would not want to be involved in the ceremony or procurement of licensing.

I have no hatred, fear or resentment for them.

How do you reconcile marrying them in a church or forcing someone to do something for them, when it is a sin for them to be involved? That sin is willful and therefore jeopardizes their eternal reward.

Don't believe in religion? Why then, can you not respect those who do, when you expect them to respect your beliefs, or lack thereof?

Isn't that concept of acceptance a progressive policy and belief?



I don't want the government in charge of saying who can and cannot get married.

So, it's okay if a brother and sister marry, a mother and son or a father and daughter? How about cousins who might bear children with birth defects? That's pretty much why the government got involved. They didn't want any of that going on. Is that a religious thing or just common sense?


I don't want the government to tell us that we need to treat pain with opioids from pharmaceutical companies, but not with marijuana based treatment.

The FDA was created to keep edibles, potables and medications safe for us to take. I'm not sure they can stay out of it. I'm not sure there are many who would want the to stay out of it.


And while we're at it, why are cigarettes and vodka ok, but marijuana isn't?

I suppose because tobacco was a major cash crop of the south for many years. Vodka, not so much, but there are many laws which apply to both tobacco and alcohol. They range from driving while drinking to smoking while driving. It isn't as simple as, "they are okay". Tobacco generates huge amounts of revenue for states. Nothing else we purchase or consume generates as much and does so little.


Finally, I think that there is a problem with the system if the top 2% is moving farther and farther away from the bottom 98%. I work for a research institution. The people who make more than $250,000 per year make the rules of annual pay increases. It is a percentage-based system so the more wealthy you are, the bigger pay raise you receive.

I think folks have been trying to figure out how to stifle greed since humans have been on the earth. Sharing it all with everyone will not work. Look at Russia. Look at the old Soviet Union. Look at Venezuela.

Those are some of the reasons why I consider myself a progressive.

I don't believe you. You call yourself a progressive because of the manner in which you want change to take place, not in your personal beliefs. How do you want to accomplish these things?

I'm not offended and I appreciate the dialogue. It's never a bad thing when people have frank communication. I assume that you're a decent person.
I try to be a decent person. I hope you see the attempts at fairness in many of my posts. Some, I admit are not so fair or nice. At heart, I am sarcastic. I come by it honestly.

"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #148 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 06:57 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,863
Re: EC vs. NPV

[Rosanna Rosannadanna Voice] Never Mind[/Rosanna Rosannadanna Voice]

Last edited by Thor; 01-03-2017 at 07:03 PM.
Thor is offline  
post #149 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 08:00 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,989
Re: EC vs. NPV


"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #150 of 331 (permalink) Old 01-03-2017, 08:37 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,624
Re: EC vs. NPV

Once we get to the point that any suggestion of, or consideration of, different election systems is akin to treason, and time zones are used to justify an archaic system that greatly distorts the will of the people, rationality goes out the window.

Conservatives would have you believe the USA is a loose confederation of states, not a unified country.

Maybe United States could better be served by turning into a Commonwealth of Independent States...
john117 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome