Owly Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said: The EC is not gerrymandered by either party. You don't even know what it is, you confuse the EC for the House of Representatives districts, which are gerrymandered, but that isn't the Electoral College, you just think it is. Historical evidence will prove you wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Owly said: Historical evidence will prove you wrong. No it won't. Historical evidence will prove you wrong, a simple wikipedia article will show you don't know what you are talking about. But you have done so little research on the EC, that you don't even know what you are arguing against, you just take the word of people who also have no idea what the EC is, because they are arguing against it, and Trump benefitted from the EC, so it must be rigged in his favor, but that's nonsense, pure feels, not facts. The EC used to benefit the Democrats when they did better with rural voters, and it wasn't rigged in their favor then either. All parties know the rules, and are free to exploit them to their benefit, some parties are better than others at doing that during certain elections, but that isn't gerrymandering. That's a feature, not a bug. Edited April 10, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 (edited) Candace Owens (Turning Point USA) torches Democrats at yesterday's House Judiciary Committee hearing. "White nationalism" is the newest way for leftists to silence conservative views and deflect failed policies that impact African Americans and other groups while Democrats insist that they keep voting for them. "They blame social media which has disrupted their monopoly on minds." Edited April 10, 2019 by bush_cheney2004 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 4 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Candace Owens (Turning Point USA) torches Democrats at yesterday's House Judiciary Committee hearing. "White nationalism" is the newest way for leftists to silence conservative views and deflect failed policies that impact African Americans and other groups while Democrats insist that they keep voting for them. "They blame social media which has disrupted their monopoly on minds." She has triggered her opponents into saying some pretty stupid things. Brilliant. According to her enemies....she's... a] Hitler b] KKK c] A White Supremacist d] An Uncle Tom e] Race Traitor f] Whatever Bubber posts... Keep-up the great work, I say. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realitycheck Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 1 minute ago, DogOnPorch said: She has triggered her opponents into saying some pretty stupid things. Brilliant. According to her enemies....she's... a] Hitler b] KKK c] A White Supremacist d] An Uncle Tom e] Race Traitor f] Whatever Bubber posts... Keep-up the great work, I say. Links? Or just another mind fart? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 (edited) Or we have some of Candace's enemies playing coy... "Gosh...we all admire Candace here in Lefty La-La Land. We never would refer to a black lady as literally Hitler in heels." It's going to be a long...minimum...six years. Edited April 10, 2019 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realitycheck Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 5 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said: Or we have some of Candace's enemies playing coy... "Gosh...we all admire Candace here in Lefty La-La Land. We never would refer to a black lady as literally Hitler in heels." It's going to be a long...minimum...six years. Still waiting for links. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 Just now, Realitycheck said: Still waiting for links. Oddly enough, I don't take orders from my enemies. I don't need or want to convince you about anything. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realitycheck Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 Just now, DogOnPorch said: Oddly enough, I don't take orders from my enemies. I don't need or want to convince you about anything. OK. Mind fart then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 Not surprisingly Bill Barr made an ass of himself again today spewing out comments he thinks the FBI "spied" on Trumps campaign in 2016, with absolutely no evidence to back any of that up. He is obviously towing his boss's line and somehow has gotten confused over the fact of who's lawyer the AG is supposed to be. That would be the people, not the POTUS. Lets get that Mueller report out into the light so we can clear up the BS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realitycheck Posted April 10, 2019 Report Share Posted April 10, 2019 19 minutes ago, Owly said: Not surprisingly Bill Barr made an ass of himself again today spewing out comments he thinks the FBI "spied" on Trumps campaign in 2016, with absolutely no evidence to back any of that up. He is obviously towing his boss's line and somehow has gotten confused over the fact of who's lawyer the AG is supposed to be. That would be the people, not the POTUS. Lets get that Mueller report out into the light so we can clear up the BS. "Toeing" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 Got yet another giggle out of Trump stupidity while he was recently visiting Mt. Vernon where he suggested Washington should have put his name on a few things. I'll assume he got any history training from his own school, otherwise he might not be so stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realitycheck Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 17 hours ago, Owly said: Historical evidence will prove you wrong. Link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 8 minutes ago, Realitycheck said: Link? But that’s not what happened. The results were tilted toward Republicans. When the Republican-controlled State Legislature and Republican governor redrew the congressional map in 2011, they distorted how voters are distributed. They packed voters who tended to vote Democratic into four districts (the Third, Ninth, 11th and 13th). The remaining left-leaning voters were scattered among across a large number of districts in which Republicans won by safe margins. The map was still in effect this year. The gerrymandering advantage built by Republicans withstood the blue wave. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/07/opinion/midterm-elections-2018-republican-gerrymandering.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, Owly said: But that’s not what happened. The results were tilted toward Republicans. When the Republican-controlled State Legislature and Republican governor redrew the congressional map in 2011, they distorted how voters are distributed. They packed voters who tended to vote Democratic into four districts (the Third, Ninth, 11th and 13th). The remaining left-leaning voters were scattered among across a large number of districts in which Republicans won by safe margins. The map was still in effect this year. The gerrymandering advantage built by Republicans withstood the blue wave. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/07/opinion/midterm-elections-2018-republican-gerrymandering.html The Electoral college has nothing to do with the congressional map, or that map being redrawn. Only Maine and Nebraska have districts, every other state awards their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in that state.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Electoral_College Congress and the Electoral College are not the same thing. Congress flipped to Democrats in 2018, despite the gerrymandering, and Trump won the electoral college in 2016, by winning the popular vote in 30 of 50 states. You don't know what the Electoral College is, you just listen to EC haters who also don't know what the Electoral College is, nor why it exists. Maybe you should listen to both sides of the argument, and actually learn what EC is, before you jump to ridiculous conclusions because you don't even know what it is. Edited April 11, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 10 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: The Electoral college has nothing to do with the congressional map, or that map being redrawn. Only Maine and Nebraska have districts, every other state awards their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in that state.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Electoral_College Congress and the Electoral College are not the same thing. Congress flipped to Democrats in 2018, despite the gerrymandering, and Trump won the electoral college in 2016, by winning the popular vote in 30 of 50 states. You don't know what the Electoral College is, you just listen to EC haters who also don't know what the Electoral College is, nor why it exists. Maybe you should listen to both sides of the argument, and actually learn what EC is, before you jump to ridiculous conclusions because you don't even know what it is. The EC was not designed for a two party system and that is why it was able to be used for gerrymandering. Or you can call it redistricting if that suits you better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Owly said: The EC was not designed for a two party system and that is why it was able to be used for gerrymandering. Or you can call it redistricting if that suits you better. The EC isn't gerrymandered, except in Maine and Nebraska, neither of which swung the election. There is no redistricting going on in the EC, except when states are redrawn or added to the Union, that's it. You are referring to Congress, and confusing Congress with the EC. They are not the same thing. Edited April 11, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 5 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: The EC isn't gerrymandered, except in Maine and Nebraska, neither of which swung the election. There is no redistricting going on in the EC, except when states are redrawn or added to the Union, that's it. You are referring to Congress, and confusing Congress with the EC. They are not the same thing. Redistricting in the US really became prevelant after Blacks were given the right to vote. redistricting takes place in every state every ten years or so. You need to study up a bit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Owly said: Redistricting in the US really became prevelant after Blacks were given the right to vote. redistricting takes place in every state every ten years or so. You need to study up a bit. That's Congressional districts. There aren't any congressional districts in the EC. Every other state than Maine and Nebraska awards their electoral votes by popular vote, within the state. You need to study up a bit. Seriously, just go to wikipedia, you'll see that you are completely wrong about redistricting applying to the EC. Stop confusing Congress with the Electoral College, the electoral college decides who is President, Congressional districts decide who gets a seat in which district in Congress. Only once has Congress decided who the President is, in 1824. Congressional districts have otherwise had nothing to do with who is elected President. Therefore, redistricting did not effect who was elected President in 2016. Edited April 11, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 (edited) Quote The United States Electoral College is a body of electors established by the United States Constitution, constituted every four years for the sole purpose of electing the president and vice president of the United States. Nothing to do with congressional redistricting, whatsoever. Congressional redistricting effects congressional elections, that happen every two years, and have nothing to do with who is elected President. The Electoral College and Congress, are not the same thing. Edited April 11, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 5 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: Nothing to do with congressional redistricting, whatsoever. Congressional redistricting effects congressional elections, that happen every two years, and have nothing to do with who is elected President. The Electoral College and Congress, are not the same thing. Partisan gerrymandering, which refers to redistricting that favors one political party, has a long tradition in the United States that precedes the 1789 election of the First U.S. Congress. In 1788, Patrick Henry and his Anti-Federalist allies were in control of the Virginia House of Delegates. They drew the boundaries of Virginia's 5th congressional district in an unsuccessful attempt to keep James Madison out of the U.S. House of Representatives.[6] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering_in_the_United_States Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Owly said: Partisan gerrymandering, which refers to redistricting that favors one political party, has a long tradition in the United States that precedes the 1789 election of the First U.S. Congress. In 1788, Patrick Henry and his Anti-Federalist allies were in control of the Virginia House of Delegates. They drew the boundaries of Virginia's 5th congressional district in an unsuccessful attempt to keep James Madison out of the U.S. House of Representatives.[6] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering_in_the_United_States I am aware of gerrymandering of congressional districts, which is what the link you sent talks about. That has nothing to do with the Electoral College. The House of Representatives is not the Electoral College, one elects Congressmen, the other elects the President, two completely different things. Redistricting in the House hasn't effected Presidential elections, except in 1824, but that was because no one won a majority of electoral votes. Edited April 11, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 From what I am hearing now is that the POTUS does have the right to grant himself a pardon, and so I guess one reason he is being so stupidly arrogant is because his lawyers have advised him of that. Not sure how that works in the SDNY though Donald. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 1 minute ago, Owly said: From what I am hearing now is that the POTUS does have the right to grant himself a pardon, and so I guess one reason he is being so stupidly arrogant is because his lawyers have advised him of that. Not sure how that works in the SDNY though Donald. He could pardon himself, but he doesn't need to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 11, 2019 Report Share Posted April 11, 2019 5 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: He could pardon himself, but he doesn't need to. True, he could decide to deal with indictment. But why would he with his history? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.