Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
caddieman

Ok let’s get real....The 2020 election.

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, bostonangler said:

 

 

I see someone is confused... Let me explain. The electoral college, (the system that put Trump in the white house over the popular vote), is made up of appointed people. The parties in your state get to pick who has a vote in the electoral college. So when republicans have more people controlling your state they pick?.... You guessed it republicans. Who vote?.... Yup you guessed it again, republican.

 

Now the democrats are picking up control and soon they will choose who votes for the electoral college. And yes sir you guessed it again, they will pick democrats who will vote for their party... So you see. It doesn't matter who you vote for. It matters who the electoral college votes for and what really matters is who picks the electorals for your state... GL

 

B/A

 

You might take another look at the process....it varies from State to State....your over simplification in inaccurate.....

 

CL

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, umbertino said:

 

Old Italian electoral Laws ( before Rosatellum 2017)

 

 

https://www.italyheritage.com/traditions/2013/italian-electoral-law.htm

 

 

All complicated like most things in this Country ( I think the PTB love confusing People....)

 

 Government = confusion...

seems to be a trend.....!

CL

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, umbertino said:

I'll take my risks and I'd like to bet with you

Thanks  but I don't bet...

 

14 hours ago, bostonangler said:

Let me explain

That a joke, the Popular vote has more meaning then you give it credit. The popular vote is tabulated threw counties which gives the appointee the vote of the people. The overall Popular Vote is for electing Homecoming Queens & Kings at your local high school...

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Election

Republican counties won

Democratic counties won

Independent counties won

2016

2,623

489

0

 

2016

XOhwW48KRAkxHx8zvh6XjE2LfcqXveTY1nfNTOhSJVSHwHruQBe2PeVDh5L4W03Ci74dt5SS7OwOK0bWnFOgzBOMMSAmvxmwuGaI-vQMxes3_fnR_hsVTuIrxKAp9RWXm5biDX4j

  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, yota691 said:

Thanks  but I don't bet...

 

That a joke, the Popular vote has more meaning then you give it credit. The popular vote is tabulated threw counties which gives the appointee the vote of the people. The overall Popular Vote is for electing Homecoming Queens & Kings at your local high school...

 

 

The United States of Amnesia.... How soon we forget or choose to ignore truth.

 

When did Electoral College override popular vote?
The "national popular vote" is the sum of all the votes cast in the general election, nationwide. The presidential elections of 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016 produced an Electoral College winner who did not receive the most votes in the general election.
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Trump’s victory another example of how Electoral College wins are bigger than popular vote ones

For the fifth time in U.S. history, and the second time this century, a presidential candidate has won the White House while losing the popular vote.

In this week’s Electoral College balloting, Donald Trump won 304 electoral votes to Hillarious Clinton’s 227, with five Democratic and two Republican “faithless electors” voting for other people. That result was despite the fact that Clinton received nearly 2.9 million more popular votes than Trump in November’s election, according to Pew Research Center’s tabulation of state election results. Our tally shows Clinton won 65.8 million votes (48.25%) to almost 63 million (46.15%) for Trump, with minor-party and independent candidates taking the rest.

This mismatch between the electoral and popular votes came about because Trump won several large states (such as Florida, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) by very narrow margins, gaining all their electoral votes in the process, even as Clinton claimed other large states (such as California, Illinois and New York) by much wider margins. Trump’s share of the popular vote, in fact, was the seventh-smallest winning percentage since 1828, when presidential campaigns began to resemble those of today.

In fact, the very nature of the way the U.S. picks its presidents tends to create a disconnect between the outcome in the Electoral College and the popular vote. The last time a popular-vote loser won the presidency in the Electoral College was, of course, in 2000, when George W. Bush edged out Al Gore 271-266 despite Gore winning some 537,000 more popular votes nationwide. The other electoral-popular vote mismatches came in 1876 and 1888; in all four instances the Democratic nominee ended up the loser. (In the 1824 election, which was contested between rival factions of the old Democratic-Republican Party, Andrew Jackson won a plurality of the popular and electoral vote, but because he was short of an Electoral College majority the election was thrown to the House of Representatives, which chose runner-up John Quincy Adams.)

Even in the vast majority of U.S. elections, in which the same candidate won both the popular and the electoral vote, the system usually makes the winner’s victory margin in the former a lot wider than in the latter. In 2012, for example, Barack Obama won 51% of the nationwide popular vote but nearly 62% of the electoral votes, or 332 out of 538.

Looking back at all presidential elections since 1828, the winner’s electoral vote share has, on average, been 1.36 times his popular vote share – what we’ll call the electoral vote (EV) inflation factor. Trump’s EV inflation factor, based on his winning 56.5% of the electoral votes (304 out of 538) is 1.22, similar to Obama’s in 2012 (1.21).

A quick Electoral College refresher: The 538 electors allocated (mainly by population) among the 50 states and the District of Columbia actually choose the president and vice president, with a majority of electoral votes (i.e., 270) needed for an outright win. All but two states use a plurality winner-take-all system to pick their presidential electors – whoever receives the most votes in a state wins all of its electoral votes, even if he or she got less than a majority of the popular vote. (Maine and Nebraska award some of their electoral votes by congressional district rather than statewide; that enabled Trump to win one of Maine’s four electoral votes, for the state’s 2nd District, even though Clinton won the state overall.)

The biggest disparity between the winning electoral and popular votes, with an EV inflation factor of 1.96, came in 1912 in the four-way slugfest between Democrat Woodrow Wilson, Republican incumbent William Howard Taft, Progressive Theodore Roosevelt (who had bolted from the Republicans) and Socialist Eugene V. Debs. Wilson won a whopping 82% of the electoral votes – 435 out of 531 – with less than 42% of the overall popular vote. (In fact, Wilson won popular vote majorities in only 11 of the 40 states he carried – all in what was then the solidly Democratic South.)

The next biggest gap was the 1980 “Reagan landslide.” In that three-way contest, Ronald Reagan took just under 51% of the popular vote, to Jimmy Carter’s 41% and independent John Anderson’s 6.6%. But Reagan soared past Carter in the Electoral College: 489 electoral votes (91% of the total) to 49, for an EV inflation factor of 1.79.

Many of the elections with the most-inflated electoral votes featured prominent third-party candidates, who served to hold down the winners’ popular vote share without being significant Electoral College players themselves. On the other hand, when the two major-party nominees ran fairly evenly and there were no notable independents or third parties, the Electoral College vote has tended to be much closer to the popular tally. In 2004, for instance, incumbent Bush won a second term with just under 51% of the popular vote and 53% of the electoral votes (286 out of 538).

A notable feature of the 2016 Electoral College vote was the record number of so-called “faithless electors” – electors who cast their ballots for someone other than the official nominee of the party they’re pledged to represent. The five Democratic electors who voted for people other than Clinton included three from Washington State who chose Colin Powell and another who chose Yankton Sioux tribal elder Faith Spotted Eagle, and one from Hawaii who voted for Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Clinton’s rival in the primaries. In addition, the two Texas electors who spurned Trump voted instead for Ohio Gov. John Kasich (whom Trump had defeated in the primaries) and former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul.

 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/12/20/why-electoral-college-landslides-are-easier-to-win-than-popular-vote-ones/

 

B/A

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

Those colored maps are seriously flawed, as they represent land, not people.....Everybody knows this.

 

GO RV, then BV

Coloring in Political Science 101 was always a favorite for me......the red crayons always were worn down faster than the blue ones......    CL

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

How soon we forget

Please don't include me with anything you say. I'm 100% America just the opposite of the Hate America Party...Move on...

  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, coorslite21 said:

Coloring in Political Science 101 was always a favorite for me......the red crayons always were worn down faster than the blue ones......    CL

 

Okay that made me laugh... Sorry out of trophies.

 

B/A

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, yota691 said:

Please don't include me with anything you say. I'm 100% America just the opposite of the Hate America Party...Move on...

 

You support Trump... The man with policies taking down America faster than any president in history... That's 100% foolish.

 

 

U.S. Budget Deficit Already Exceeds Last Year’s Total Figure

 

The U.S. fiscal deficit has already exceeded the full-year figure for last year, as spending growth outpaces revenue.

 
 

The gap grew to $866.8 billion in the first 10 months of the fiscal year, up 27% from the same period a year earlier, the Treasury Department said in its monthly budget report on Monday. That’s wider than last fiscal year’s shortfall of $779 billion -- which was the largest federal deficit since 2012.


U.S. budget deficit widened in July from a year ago

So far in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1, a revenue increase of 3% hasn’t kept pace with a 8% rise in spending. While still a modest source of income, tariffs imposed by the Trump administration helped almost double customs duties to $57 billion in the period.

 

Trump Signs Budget and Debt-Limit Legislation, White House Says

 
 

Republican tax cuts, increased federal spending and an aging population have contributed to the fiscal strains, though the GOP says tax reform enacted last year will spur economic growth and lift government revenue. Corporate income-tax receipts rose 3% between October and July, while individual income taxes gained 1%, according to Treasury data.

Wider Than 2018

After just 10 months, the U.S. budget deficit has grown to $866.8 billion

Source: Treasury Department, data compiled by Bloomberg

 

The annual budget deficit is expected to exceed $1 trillion starting in 2022, the Congressional Budget Office has said. The non-partisan agency is scheduled to update its latest 10-year budget and economic forecasts on Aug. 21.

For the month of July, the budget deficit was $119.7 billion, compared with $76.9 billion a year earlier, according to Treasury. Still, “July 2019 was a record receipts month, and the month is generally a deficit month -- 63 of the last 65 times,” a senior Treasury official said in an accompanying statement.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-12/u-s-budget-deficit-already-exceeds-last-year-s-total-figure

 

B/A

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, bostonangler said:

My only problem with the electoral college is those who represent it are appointed. So due to the fact one party or the other has an advantage in a state they control the entire process. The system is like many things outdated and needs revisiting.

THE CONSTITUTION

Article II

Section 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

 

 

So, your in favor of changing the Constitution? We just might as well stick the whole thing in the shredder. That's what the left wants to do anyway...Right? We can start with the electoral college, then we can move to the Bill of Rights, a few of those need changing, then we can move on to...... No, I think it is just fine as it is right now. It has worked for over 200 years and there is no need to change it. It is working exactly as designed. The problem is you and your little lefty friends are upset that it hasn't worked for you in the last couple of decades.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOooppps......Sorry for the duplicate post...

Edited by 8th ID
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 8th ID said:

THE CONSTITUTION

Article II

Section 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

 

 

So, your in favor of changing the Constitution? We just might as well stick the whole thing in the shredder. That's what the left wants to do anyway...Right? We can start with the electoral college, then we can move to the Bill of Rights, a few of those need changing, then we can move on to...... No, I think it is just fine as it is right now. It has worked for over 200 years and there is no need to change it. It is working exactly as designed. The problem is you and your little lefty friends are upset that it hasn't worked for you in the last couple of decades.

 

 

 

That's exactly what our president has been doing.... Shredding the constitution. Take the census for example. According to the constitution the census which is to count people not just citizens is to be used for many things including taxes... But he doesn't like it so he wants to shred it.

 

Here is a great resource to search the constitution and it's meanings.

 

https://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/

 

B/A

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using the polls to date for an election that is to be held 15 months from now is like asking the Weather Man to predict the weather a year out. It holds very little weight, but yet the LAME-STREAM Media treats it like it's real news and not a side show of the 2020 Presidential Elections.

 

Also, if you are so inclined to put weight behind the current polling, then if you are honest with yourself you must go back to 2017 to see how many points Hillarious was leading Trump at that time...I believe the margins were higher for Hillarious and we all know who is currently flying on Air Force 1

 

@Shabibilicious, who has truthfully acknowledged the validity and importance of polls at this point in the election season.

 

Indy

Edited by Indraman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Indraman said:

 

@Shabibilicious, who has truthfully acknowledged the validity and importance of polls at this point in the election season.

 

Indy

 

I don't quite understand the question as polls are seldom conducted by non-bias groups and also contain margins of error and therefore truth is subjective.  Liberal news touts polls that fit their narrative, just as Fox News, fringe Right sites and Trump tout polls that fit their own needs.  Polls are essentially useless....though Donald does immensely enjoy tweeting about them, good and bad.

 

GO RV, then BV

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

Take the census for example. According to the constitution the census which is to count people not just citizens is to be used for many things including taxes... But he doesn't like it so he wants to shred it.

Have you been asleep the last few months? The President does want to count everyone in the country. He wants to know how many illegals are here to be exact, and I would like to know as well. I am betting it will be a shocker to everyone. I am betting it will be more than the 11 million the left keeps spouting. It was the party of the left that did not want to include the citizenship question, so the President had to find another way to get the most accurate census count.

 

15 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

Here is a great resource to search the constitution and it's meanings.

 

https://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/

Yes...it is a good source. I have looked at it quite a few times. Maybe you should look at it sometime. ;)

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, 8th ID said:

The President does want to count everyone in the country. He wants to know how many illegals are here to be exact, and I would like to know as well.

 

But why does he want a citizen question? To collect taxes? To gerrymander districts? To effects states? I'm asking, because I really don't know.

 

B/A

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

 

 

But why does he want a citizen question? To collect taxes? To gerrymander districts? To effects states? I'm asking, because I really don't know.

 

B/A

For the same reason I do along with many others, and that is to find out how many illegals are in our country. They have put a drain on our whole social system, ie. welfare, healthcare and so on. Believe me, I am for helping those that need it, but we need to take care of American citizens first, not those that come here illegally looking for a handout or trying to play our broken system. The whole immigration system is and has been broken for a long time. You know it and I know it. In order to fix it you have to start somewhere.

 

You mention collecting taxes...Yes. Imagine how many taxes could be collected if you found out how many where here, issued some type of work visa then we're able to collect taxes. I believe they should automatically start collecting taxes on any money being sent to these foreign countries.

 

Will it effect districts and states? Yes. States like Kalifornia have been notoriously bad in counting illegals as citizens and letting them vote in some cases. That is wrong in all senses and I believe you know and will agree that is not right. Steps have to be taken to fix things. Sometimes the hardest step is the first step.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 8th ID said:

For the same reason I do along with many others, and that is to find out how many illegals are in our country. They have put a drain on our whole social system, ie. welfare, healthcare and so on. Believe me, I am for helping those that need it, but we need to take care of American citizens first, not those that come here illegally looking for a handout or trying to play our broken system. The whole immigration system is and has been broken for a long time. You know it and I know it. In order to fix it you have to start somewhere.

 

You mention collecting taxes...Yes. Imagine how many taxes could be collected if you found out how many where here, issued some type of work visa then we're able to collect taxes. I believe they should automatically start collecting taxes on any money being sent to these foreign countries.

 

Will it effect districts and states? Yes. States like Kalifornia have been notoriously bad in counting illegals as citizens and letting them vote in some cases. That is wrong in all senses and I believe you know and will agree that is not right. Steps have to be taken to fix things. Sometimes the hardest step is the first step.

 

I agree with most of that.. How about Koch and the ICE raids... I read no one has been charged... There is the true problem..

 

B/A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

 

I agree with most of that.. How about Koch and the ICE raids... I read no one has been charged... There is the true problem..

 

B/A

Yep, I agree with you on that. If no one is charged, then that is a real problem. Break the law, go to jail. It should be as simple as that.

 

OMG...I'm agreeing with you and your agreeing with me! It's gonna rain! ;):D That's OK though. I could use a little rain. Fields are getting really dry here in this 100+ heat. Heat indexes the last 5 days have been 105-110-degrees and expected to be that for the next 5-7 days. Stay cool my friend!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, 8th ID said:

Yep, I agree with you on that. If no one is charged, then that is a real problem. Break the law, go to jail. It should be as simple as that.

 

OMG...I'm agreeing with you and your agreeing with me! It's gonna rain! ;):D That's OK though. I could use a little rain. Fields are getting really dry here in this 100+ heat. Heat indexes the last 5 days have been 105-110-degrees and expected to be that for the next 5-7 days. Stay cool my friend!

 

Yup we are hoping for rain tonight. Need it bad.

 

B/A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, coorslite21 said:

 

 Government = confusion...

seems to be a trend.....!

CL

 

You're absolutely right, CL  ....I do believe many electoral results we get in this Country are infact a consequence of the complications due to our electoral laws.....Which is worrisome.....

 

 

Just think of the fact that among all Gov'ts we had in this Country after the 2nd WW, where the normal time length is supposed to be five years ( before voting again) it only happened twice that this normal time length was respected ...In all the other times we had Gov't crises and the Gov't in charge fell ( got in a crisis)...That started in 1946....

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1946_Italian_institutional_referendum

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Italy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.