CA to secede from the union

[PokerGuy]

Ummmm, how did you arrive at this figure? If it is a reference to Trump winning the election, not only didn't he get 50.1% of the vote, he got 200,000 plus less votes than Hillary did. Just sayin'.

He said what CA wants is not what 50.1% of the rest of the country wants. Lets assume he means just voters (because otherwise, nobody would ever have more than 16-20% of the total). If you take CA votes out of the total, it leaves "the rest". At last count, Trump has slightly more than 51% of the rest, illary has slightly under 49% of the rest.

 

[Chiropteran]

And lets dispel this stupid argument about Trump losing the popular vote. He didn't lose the popular vote because it wasn't his goal to win the popular vote. It would be a goal with no reward, it served no purpose. Trump is smart, he didn't waste more resources than he needed to.

Pretty sure Clinton's campaign cost more than 3 times as much as Trump's, and she still lost.

 

[cbrunny]

So would it still be fair if awarded proportional electorates per state?
For example...California is 55 votes.

Clinton took 61%
Trump 33%
Johnson 3%
Stein 1.7%

Give Clinton 34 votes.
Trump 18
Johnson 2
Stein 1

Fair right?

The part that burns me is a state like Florida with 29 electorates coming down in Gores case...700 votes short out of 6,000,000 and the winner getting all 29. For me it takes some of the emphasis out of the heave swing state campaigning and lets candidates put more focus into underreached markets. It also ends some of the eventual butthurt and "firewall" nature of states blocking any progress. It also minimizes the wild impact third parties can have on a tight race.

if you're going to do that just go straight popular vote wins. FPTP style.

 

[MrSquished]

Sad, that is all you have to cling to is the popular vote. The cities of this country will not dictate how the rural folk live, the sooner you get that through the brain the better.

You rail about how you defend the rights of the rural areas to not be dictated to by the cities, but you are just fine with the rural areas being able to dictate to the cities when they win a vote. All that makes you is a hypocrite.

You don't want it done to one side but it's fine done to the other because that suits you.

 

[MikeMike]

Nope, not according to their ongoing tally. And, also nope, here it's the headline of their story. In fact, as of right now they have her with 300,000 more votes than Trump.

Saaaay, are you one of those low information voters?

No, I'm not. I did not vote for the president this year and would not have voted for Trump.

If you click on "Popular" do you see the red bar that says "Projected Winner" and "Trump" with a checkbox next to it?

Saaaaay, are you one of those baby boomers who need their prescription checked?

 

[ivwshane]

Stupid talk is stupid.

 

[Ns1]

And lets dispel this stupid argument about Trump losing the popular vote.

This is a stupid argument on multiple levels - Clinton knew the game better than anyone else, she knows the game is to 270, not the popular vote.

 

[ivwshane]

No, I'm not. I did not vote for the president this year and would not have voted for Trump.

If you click on "Popular" do you see the red bar that says "Projected Winner" and "Trump" with a checkbox next to it?

Saaaaay, are you one of those baby boomers who need their prescription checked?

In that case I'd like to extend a big FUCK YOU, to you. Thanks for trump!

 

[MikeMike]

In that case I'd like to extend a big FUCK YOU, to you. Thanks for trump!

That's appreciated. I am CERTAIN my single vote in California would have swung this state her way...

 

[AznAnarchy99]

How the hell does CA, which elected Arnold as governator, have any ground to stand on to criticize Trump?

Action movie star okay, but businessman reality TV star not okay?

Because we are judging them by what they say and not their professions.

 

[Maxima1]

The electoral college was made to placate the slave owning class, since the North had more votes. It had nothing to do with big and small states. The US was an agrarian society prior, but has urbanized and now party lines are distinctly divided by urban and rural areas.

 

[vi edit]

if you're going to do that just go straight popular vote wins. FPTP style.

Problem is that ending it entirely takes a constitutional amendment. Something that is incredibly difficult to pass. Tweaking it has some room for interpretation.

 

[Chiropteran]

So would it still be fair if awarded proportional electorates per state?
For example...California is 55 votes.

Clinton took 61%
Trump 33%
Johnson 3%
Stein 1.7%

Give Clinton 34 votes.
Trump 18
Johnson 2
Stein 1

Fair right?

No. If they are going to do it like that, it needs to be based on percentage of total state population. For example, if a 5 million pop state has 10 votes, and a 2 million pop state has 4 votes, but if 70% of the people in the 2M pop state vote they will be underrepresented compared to the 5M pop state in which only 30% of the population votes.

 

[SP33Demon]

You rail about how you defend the rights of the rural areas to not be dictated to by the cities, but you are just fine with the rural areas being able to dictate to the cities when they win a vote. All that makes you is a hypocrite.

You don't want it done to one side but it's fine done to the other because that suits you.

Considering the majority of wealth in this country revolves around 7 major cities, no they shouldn't be able to dictate to rural folks who are hurting. If you truly care about equality and being progressive, they are hurting a lot worse than city folk. Hence they should be able to switch parties and swing elections - I have zero problem with that since I'm able to empathize with how bad they have it. You really don't know shit unless you talk to people in these states. I have friends who have decent IT jobs there and they tell me how shitty it is for their families and friends. Whereas here in the DC metro beltway area, "roughing it" is comprised of having to buy something used vs new. Give me a fucking break. Democrats forgot about their own and their own told them to F off. This gives them the right to dictate to snobby city fucks who they want to run the country and help them, because their previous party (D's) sure as hell did not.

 

[cbrunny]

Problem is that ending it entirely takes a constitutional amendment. Something that is incredibly difficult to pass. Tweaking it has some room for interpretation.

yeah. i get it. you've passed 27 though. that's 27 more than Canada since repatriation.

well. i guess that's techincally not true given that our constitution has had amendments to areas of it that only affect a specific province... but in terms of stuff that affects everyone, none have successfully passed. been close though.

 

[gus6464]

Considering the majority of wealth in this country revolves around 7 major cities, no they shouldn't be able to dictate to rural folks who are hurting. If you truly care about equality and being progressive, they are hurting a lot worse than city folk. Hence they should be able to switch parties and swing elections - I have zero problem with that since I'm able to empathize with how bad they have it. You really don't know shit unless you talk to people in these states. I have friends who have decent IT jobs there and they tell me how shitty it is for their families and friends. Whereas here in the DC metro beltway area, "roughing it" is comprised of having to buy something used vs new. Give me a fucking break. Democrats forgot about their own and their own told them to F off. This gives them the right to dictate to snobby city fucks who they want to run the country and help them, because their previous party (D's) sure as hell did not.

And Trump will help these people how exactly? Doing a massive tax break for people that make considerably more than them?

 

[brycejones]

just more venting....ignore it and move on

 

[cbrunny]

And Trump will help these people how exactly? Doing a massive tax break for people that make considerably more than them?

 

[agent00f]

Here's what I don't understand. The coasts clearly don't care for the flyovers, and the flyover don't care for the coasts, so why continue this relationship like a hostile marriage? Let's just split and be done with it.

I suspect the rubes aren't as dumb as they look, and realize to some extent that their white welfare comes from the places with money. So like the worthless yet hostile spouse always bitching about their better half, they dig their claws in and refuse to let go despite the bluster. They know what's good for them regardless of what they choose to mouth off about.

 

[highland145]

Looks like it worked too well. Insulin anyone?

 

[JM Aggie08]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ecession-movement-is-getting-kind-of-serious/

No insider information, just the internet.

(PS: I'm aware that it never really had a chance of moving that way, but given that it was being voted on I think it was a little more serious than just the occasional redneck)

The reasons are fairly obvious, but we’ll spell them out anyway: Texas Republicans think that the secession movement is unrealistic and unconstitutional and that it opens them up to Democratic attacks that they’re wasting their time on extreme ideas instead of actually governing the state.

Texas Republican leaders would much rather ignore this pesky secession movement. But in recent years they’ve been forced to deal with it.

Sadly, some of those rednecks are in positions of power as well.

 

[nakedfrog]

And Trump will help these people how exactly? Doing a massive tax break for people that make considerably more than them?

Hand out free bootstraps to the hurting rural folks, so they can pull themselves up by them?

 

[SP33Demon]

And Trump will help these people how exactly? Doing a massive tax break for people that make considerably more than them?

That and bringing back jobs and/or helping them get more educational assistance so they can get better paying jobs. I don't think Trump is going to be able to increase wages that much on a national scale, but obviously that would be the best thing to do. The next best thing is getting more tech (or hot industries like medical sector) companies brought into these states as well as more educational assistance to provide the workforce. That would be my plan.

But back to my original point, if people in higher cost of living areas like major cities are doing better, then why should they be able to dictate policy onto rural america? Especially when policies that will help rural America would probably help urban America as well (e.g. more educational assistance for those at poverty levels).

 

[highland145]

Hand out free bootstraps to the hurting rural folks, so they can pull themselves up by them?



Beats what they got from the dems all these years.

 

[ivwshane]

That's appreciated. I am CERTAIN my single vote in California would have swung this state her way...

Nope but your attitude, of which many people shared, certainly did. So again, fuck you!