wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
12 years ago

Frankly, I have seen nothing to change the opinions I set forth and updates I recommended a year ago. Rather than go on again at length and bore everyone, I'll just tell everyone to re-read what I said there if they are interested.

I will only say that I'm even less optimistic than I was then.

While those of you who have pointed out that "we're a republic, not a democracy" are correct as a matter of original intent, I don't think that's relevant any more. Because most Americans (a) don't know the difference, (b) believe in populist/progressivist enable-the-power-of-all "democracy" notions far more than they believe in Madisonian/Jeffersonian "limitation-the-power-of-any" constitutional republicanism, or (c) both.

Any constitutional change today, whether tinkering through individual amendments or radical change through open constitutional convention, facebooking, whatever, is going to follow paths formed from the ideals of populist/progressive/social democracy. Not the paths of Burke/Paine/Madison/Jefferson republicanism.

And we've got far too many people who are perfectly capable of being the next Maximilien François Marie Isidore de Robespierre.

I'm not sure we have any who are capable of being George Washington.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



Amen brother. And that is a shame.
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
12 years ago
Update the constitution for what?

Like the current and recent administrations adhere to it anyway. 🤦
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Zero2Cool
12 years ago

Update the constitution for what?

Like the current and recent administrations adhere to it anyway. #-o

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 



update it to ... the President has to get the Packers logo tattooed on their forehead and pledge allegiance to green and gold everyday when he wakes up.
UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
12 years ago

Indirectly, yes. The number of Electoral Votes per state is equal to the number of representatives and senators that state sends to Washington, D.C.

By the way, I forgot to mention in my previous post that it is the states' own fault that the Electoral College is not as democratic as it could be. In almost every state, Electoral College votes are apportioned on a "winner-take-all" basis, rather than proportionately according to the popular vote in that state. As far as I know, these rules are established by the state electoral commissions, as opposed to being written into the state constitutions, and thus could be amended at will. If the states wanted to make the Electoral College more responsive to the popular vote, they could accomplish that quite easily.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



I have said for a while that the all or none electoral systems most states use isn't the way it should be.

Use CA for example, nobody campaigns there because it always goes Democrat. When watching the results live. When the CA polls closed, they gave Obama the win the next minute. 55 electoral votes, BAM. What should be done is, look at look at how much of the popular vote each candidate gets, and using percentage, divide and give the electorals.

Obama 59.3%, or 32 electorals.
Romney 38.3%, or 21 electorals.

Which is 53 leaving 2 unallocated. Any unallocated electorals would go to whoever wins the state popular vote.

This should remove the "My vote doesn't count" line of thinking because one vote could be the difference between getting 21 or 22 electoral votes. It would make each state important so candidates would need to go to them all.

The thing is, I've gone back and through Reagan, all results would have been the same. Close in most cases but still the same results.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
vikesrule
12 years ago

I have said for a while that the all or none electoral systems most states use isn't the way it should be.
...The thing is, I've gone back and through Reagan, all results would have been the same. Close in most cases but still the same results.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



Hot damn, item #1 is something that I agree with PackFanWithTwins on.
Document this one folks, it will probably be one of the very few time that this occurs.[grin1]


I'd like to see your breakdown of the 2000 Presidential election.

Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
12 years ago

I have said for a while that the all or none electoral systems most states use isn't the way it should be.

Use CA for example, nobody campaigns there because it always goes Democrat. When watching the results live. When the CA polls closed, they gave Obama the win the next minute. 55 electoral votes, BAM. What should be done is, look at look at how much of the popular vote each candidate gets, and using percentage, divide and give the electorals.

Obama 59.3%, or 32 electorals.
Romney 38.3%, or 21 electorals.

Which is 53 leaving 2 unallocated. Any unallocated electorals would go to whoever wins the state popular vote.

This should remove the "My vote doesn't count" line of thinking because one vote could be the difference between getting 21 or 22 electoral votes. It would make each state important so candidates would need to go to them all.

The thing is, I've gone back and through Reagan, all results would have been the same. Close in most cases but still the same results.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



I'm curious. Does your method here take into account that voting patterns might be different if people knew going in that electoral votes would be proportionately assigned? Would the popular vote in California fall into the same percentages if they knew vote counting would take more than a minute after poll closing?

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
PackFanWithTwins
12 years ago

I'm curious. Does your method here take into account that voting patterns might be different if people knew going in that electoral votes would be proportionately assigned? Would the popular vote in California fall into the same percentages if they knew vote counting would take more than a minute after poll closing?

Originally Posted by: Wade 



I don't think the method cares :)

There is no way to tell what the percentages would do. My guess is, they would not change a bunch. I just see it as making each vote more important and each state more equal in importance. I think it would help with better turnout, and keeping more of the population involved. There would be no excuse for saying, I'm not voting because my state always does this or that.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : Aaron Rodgers’s first pass of first team period was picked off
    Mucky Tundra (9h) : tbh I didn't hear of his passing
    Zero2Cool (9h) : Cosby Show. Malcom Jamal Warner I think is real name
    Mucky Tundra (9h) : I was thinking of Ozzy and Hulk
    Mucky Tundra (9h) : Who's Theo?
    Zero2Cool (10h) : How is Theo alliteration?
    Mucky Tundra (10h) : Bad week for people whose names are alliterations
    Zero2Cool (12h) : Hulk Hogan gone too.
    Zero2Cool (13h) : Oh, it's toe injury
    Zero2Cool (14h) : Hope it's not serious. that would stink
    dfosterf (14h) : Sounds like an ankle not a knee for Fields
    dfosterf (14h) : Ya Flaccp on Browns
    Zero2Cool (14h) : Maybe Tyrod Taylor instead
    Zero2Cool (14h) : He's on Browns, right?
    dfosterf (14h) : They would probably go with Flacco is my guess if Fields out
    dfosterf (14h) : Fleece 'em again!
    Zero2Cool (14h) : Malik Willis might be someone Jets come after
    packerfanoutwest (14h) : Packers introduce 1923-inspired classic uniform, leather-look helmet
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Both LB Quay Walker and Rookie DB Micah Robinson have passed their physicals
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Happy to see site feels more snappy snappy
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : No sir. I did not.
    dfosterf (23-Jul) : You didn't get free childcare when you were at work?
    wpr (23-Jul) : These guys make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Pay for their own childcare.
    dfosterf (23-Jul) : 2nd issue. Number 1 issue was no gameday childcare. 1 of 3 teams not providing it
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Suppose if locker room is main issue, we sitting pretty
    wpr (23-Jul) : I thought so Mucky. In those useless player polls GB always rates high overall. Locker is a part of it.
    Mucky Tundra (23-Jul) : Wasn't the locker room just updated like 6 or 7 years ago?
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : I have forum updated on different site. We'll see how this one goes before going to that
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Elgton Jenkins has a back injury, is expect to end contract dispute
    wpr (23-Jul) : It's funny the PA complained about the locker room. It wasn't that long ago it was top shelf. Things change in a hurry.
    wpr (23-Jul) : The site is much more better.
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : NFLPA report said Packers lockerroom needed upgrade. Whining bout where you change?
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : I saw that and thought it was kind of lame.
    dfosterf (23-Jul) : Packers new locker room is pretty awesome. Great for morale, imo
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Shuffled things on the web server. Hope it makes it faster.
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Other times, it's turtle ass
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Sometimes it's snappy, like now.
    beast (23-Jul) : I feel like it's loading at the top of the next minute, or something like that.
    beast (23-Jul) : Also the thanks/heart takes FOREVER to load, and posting in the shout box takes three times FOREVER!
    beast (23-Jul) : Thanks for saying something, I thought it was slow, but assumed it was on my end
    beast (23-Jul) : Thanks for saying something, I thought it was slow, but assumed it was on my end
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Yeah, I noticed that too. Is it slow for PackerPeople.com too?
    wpr (23-Jul) : I don't know what you IT guys call it but the page loading is very slow for me today.
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : SSL might be settled now.
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Still working through SSL cert issues
    wpr (23-Jul) : Glad to be back
    Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : I think PH original finally working.
    dfosterf (22-Jul) : Can tell you are having a fun day Kev
    Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : Yep, I had to manually move them. It'll fix itself after more posts.
    Mucky Tundra (22-Jul) : Same deal with the songs/videos thread, says you replied last but when I go there it's what I posted earlier is last
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2025 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
    COMMANDERS
    Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
    Browns
    Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
    Cowboys
    Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
    BENGALS
    Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
    Cardinals
    Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
    PANTHERS
    Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
    EAGLES
    Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
    Bears
    Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
    RAVENS
    Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
    Vikings
    Recent Topics
    2h / Around The NFL / wpr

    8h / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

    9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    22h / Around The NFL / beast

    23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    22-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    18-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.