The Electoral College system is quite elegant. I agree that the popular vote shouldn't determine who is president. The Electoral College limits the effect of one state/region on the national election. You are forced to have wide appeal, something that Gore lacked. He couldn't even win his own freakin' state!
and this is different from how it is now how?Originally posted by: shinerburke
That's the problem? So I guess you want the few large population states to decide every Presidential election? That's a great idea!
shiner
Lifer
- Jul 18, 2000
- 17,112
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: tweakmm
and this is different from how it is now because?Originally posted by: shinerburke
That's the problem? So I guess you want the few large population states to decide every Presidential election? That's a great idea!
Because the small states still count. A Candidate still needs to appeal to those in the small states if he/she wants to win the election. Yes a large state or two is still needed, but there is such a thing as the small state strategy. It's what Bush did in 2000 and it worked.
shiner
Lifer
- Jul 18, 2000
- 17,112
- 1
- 0
For proof of the first post I made read this. It was posted here by a Democrat that ran for Senate here in Oklahoma and lost in the primary.
The Treasonous Paradox that has been eroding and increasingly dominating the Democratic party for nearly 30 years !
My reason for posting this is to again expose the treasonous paradox that has been dominating the Democratic party for nearly 30 years. This is the policy of deserting the FDR tradition, by supporting New Democrats and Blue Dogs, which is nothing more than supporting a one super- Republican party agenda.
This has been going on since the Demoratic party leadership swindled Democrats by promoting the Jimmy Carter agenda, which was the Democratic version of the Nixon Southern Strategy. Nixon and Kissinger made deals with the Southern Planter Class, Dixiecrats and the Financial elite on Wall Street to get elected. This resulted in the unpegging of the dollar from the value of gold, which allowed the Wall Street speculators, free-trade and slave labor agenda to be carried forth. The Carter-Brezenski continued this agenda by ushering in the de-regulation side of the coin, along with the information age of consumerism and radical ecology movement.
The financial elite operated this from think-tank influence, and popular opinion manipulation, while continuing to buy up the political agenda in both parties.
The tragedy of this, is that it was intended to dismantle the American System, well regulated economy that was brought into place by FDR's leadership during the 30's and 40's, and also finish off the original Bretton-Woods monetary system, that operated successfully into the mid to late 1960's. Then JFK, MLK, and RFK, were assassinated and Nixon was elected by the backing of the partnership between the Wall Street elite, and the Southern Planter Class.
So this is my appeal, to Democrats of all stripes, which is to quit going along with these deals, by deluding yourselves that you have no choice. The Henry campaign and the election of 13 new house Democrats, is the result of a Democratic reflex that is rooted in the Franklin Roosevelt tradition, which is the only thing that will save our Party, State, and Nation.
Wake up Gray Dogs, and learn to tell the difference between a Brad Carson, Blue Dog, a Vince Orza, New Democrat, and Real Democrats like Mike Mass, Kelly Haney, Jim Dunnegan, and Brad Henry.
George Gentry, an FDR and LaRouche Democrat
The Treasonous Paradox that has been eroding and increasingly dominating the Democratic party for nearly 30 years !
My reason for posting this is to again expose the treasonous paradox that has been dominating the Democratic party for nearly 30 years. This is the policy of deserting the FDR tradition, by supporting New Democrats and Blue Dogs, which is nothing more than supporting a one super- Republican party agenda.
This has been going on since the Demoratic party leadership swindled Democrats by promoting the Jimmy Carter agenda, which was the Democratic version of the Nixon Southern Strategy. Nixon and Kissinger made deals with the Southern Planter Class, Dixiecrats and the Financial elite on Wall Street to get elected. This resulted in the unpegging of the dollar from the value of gold, which allowed the Wall Street speculators, free-trade and slave labor agenda to be carried forth. The Carter-Brezenski continued this agenda by ushering in the de-regulation side of the coin, along with the information age of consumerism and radical ecology movement.
The financial elite operated this from think-tank influence, and popular opinion manipulation, while continuing to buy up the political agenda in both parties.
The tragedy of this, is that it was intended to dismantle the American System, well regulated economy that was brought into place by FDR's leadership during the 30's and 40's, and also finish off the original Bretton-Woods monetary system, that operated successfully into the mid to late 1960's. Then JFK, MLK, and RFK, were assassinated and Nixon was elected by the backing of the partnership between the Wall Street elite, and the Southern Planter Class.
So this is my appeal, to Democrats of all stripes, which is to quit going along with these deals, by deluding yourselves that you have no choice. The Henry campaign and the election of 13 new house Democrats, is the result of a Democratic reflex that is rooted in the Franklin Roosevelt tradition, which is the only thing that will save our Party, State, and Nation.
Wake up Gray Dogs, and learn to tell the difference between a Brad Carson, Blue Dog, a Vince Orza, New Democrat, and Real Democrats like Mike Mass, Kelly Haney, Jim Dunnegan, and Brad Henry.
George Gentry, an FDR and LaRouche Democrat
Well as a Democrat and liberal at that except for the Gun Control issue where I am firmly with the R's I look at the loss as a complete disinchantment with the Democratic party. It is not that so much that the pholosphy is wrong as most R's would have you believe but a lack of leadership and bad decisions make by the party leaders. It is pretty obvious that Min. was lost because of the D's actions at the wake for Wellstone and The Gov had a fit as he should have, I think that this affected a lot of the races in other states. In my state Nebraska the D's had a pretty good candidate for Gov. and did not give him one dime for his run for the statehouse. The Clinton bashers can go to hell as far as I am conserned, Get over it. It did not hurt you or your family or your income so dont you think it is time to rant on something else that is maybe more important? Gloat all you want, we will see what happens in the next 2 years and then it is time to decide if the R's are doing a good job or not.
Bleep
Bleep
Well one thing is for sure. The GOP has no one to blame for their failures now. They cant blame Clinton or any other democrat. But if the last 18 months are any indication of how they will lead this country we all are in trouble. The only things growing under this administration is the louder cry for war, the deficit, and unemployment.
Today the president hoped for a peacefull resolution with iraq, fiscal restraint and a few tax cuts to get business going again. You are right, the next 24 months will be interesting.
How did Clinton's inability to keep his pants up affect your take home pay? I'm assuming that the original poster was referring to Monica.
shiner
Lifer
- Jul 18, 2000
- 17,112
- 1
- 0
He may have been referring to Monica but his saying that Clinton didn't hurt me in any way was just wrong. As for the whole Monica thing. Sure it hurt me. It hurts me to see the Office of President, which I respect, be soiled by the likes of Bill Clinton and his antics.
The modern Democratic Party has been around (at least in name) since around 1828, after the Democratic-Republican party (who had dominated politics for the previous 30 years) split into inconsolable factions with different agendas. The Democratic party emerged from the ruin as the powerful of the factions, mainly due to their appeal to the 'common man' of the time (the same mantra they try to use today).
(Sorry, I have a history test tommorow about the Jacksonian Era; just getting in some practice
)
Edit: My point is that the Dems aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
(Sorry, I have a history test tommorow about the Jacksonian Era; just getting in some practice
)Edit: My point is that the Dems aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
Originally posted by: A5
The modern Democratic Party has been around (at least in name) since around 1828, after the Democratic-Republican party (who had dominated politics for the previous 30 years) split into inconsolable factions with different agendas. The Democratic party emerged from the ruin as the powerful of the factions, mainly due to their appeal to the 'common man' of the time (the same mantra they try to use today).
(Sorry, I have a history test tommorow about the Jacksonian Era; just getting in some practice
Edit: My point is that the Dems aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
Well the democratic party is having major infighting between liberal and the moderates. There is a non zero chance that a major split could occur.
If you look at history just about all the presidents ( and people in congress ) have not lived up to your expectations..
http://www.americaheldhostile.com/cheating.html
As far as the electoral college is concerned i remember on of the reason ( if not the main reason ) it was put into place was way back when ( before the radios ). it was hard
for anyone to get the "poop" on the canidates so they would have groups of people in each state that would keep up with the canidates so in each state there would be
a group of votes that would be informed. nothing worse would be a bunch of uninformed voters.
Actually I believe Eisenhower had a Republican controlled congress for few years. Can't remember how many (2 or 4)?
If my memory serves me correctly, the Republican controlled the Presidency, Senate, and House for about 10 years STRAIGHT.....leading us right into the Great Depression of the 1930's!!
:disgust:
The raw data
Congress Years President Presidential House Senate The
Party Majority Majority Big
Party Party Tri-fecta
=================================================================================================
1st 1789-1791 Washington No Party Federalist Federalist * #1
2nd 1791-1793 Washington No Party Federalist Federalist *
3rd 1793-1795 Washington Federalist Federalist Federalist *
4th 1795-1797 Washington Federalist Dem-Reps Federalist
5th 1797-1799 Adams(2) Federalist Dem-Reps Federalist
6th 1799-1801 Adams(2) Federalist Federalist Federalist *
7th 1801-1803 Jefferson Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps * #2
8th 1803-1805 Jefferson Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
9th 1805-1807 Jefferson Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
10th 1807-1809 Jefferson Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
11th 1809-1811 Madison Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
12th 1811-1813 Madison Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
13th 1814-1815 Madison Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
14th 1815-1817 Madison Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
15th 1817-1819 Monroe Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
16th 1819-1821 Monroe Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
17th 1821-1823 Monroe Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
18th 1823-1825 Monroe Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
19th 1825-1827 Adams(6) Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
20th 1827-1829 Adams(6) Dem-Reps Dem-Reps Dem-Reps *
21st 1829-1831 Jackson Democrat Democrat Democrat *
22nd 1831-1833 Jackson Democrat Democrat Democrat *
23rd 1834-1835 Jackson Democrat Democrat Whig
24th 1835-1837 Jackson Democrat Democrat Democrat *
25th 1837-1839 Van-Buren Democrat Democrat Democrat *
26th 1839-1841 Van-Buren Democrat Whig Democrat
27th 1841-1843 Harrison(9)/Tyler Whig Whig Whig *
28th 1843-1845 Tyler Whig Democrat Whig
29th 1845-1847 Polk Democrat Democrat Democrat *
30th 1847-1849 Polk Democrat Whig Democrat
31st 1849-1851 Taylor/Filmore Whig Democrat Democrat
32nd 1851-1853 Filmore Whig Democrat Democrat
33rd 1853-1855 Pierce Democrat Democrat Democrat *
34th 1855-1857 Pierce Democrat Republican Democrat
35th 1857-1859 Buchanan Democrat Democrat Democrat *
36th 1859-1861 Buchanan Democrat Republican Democrat
37th 1861-1863 Lincoln Republican Republican Republican *
38th 1863-1865 Lincoln Republican Republican Republican *
39th 1865-1867 Lincoln/Johnson(17) Republican* Republican Republican *
40th 1867-1869 Johnson(17) Republican* Republican Republican *
41st 1869-1871 Grant Republican Republican Republican *
42nd 1871-1873 Grant Republican Republican Republican *
43rd 1873-1875 Grant Republican Republican Republican *
44th 1875-1877 Grant Republican Democrat Republican
45th 1877-1879 Hayes Republican Democrat Republican
46th 1879-1881 Hayes Republican Democrat Republican
47th 1881-1883 Garfield/Arthur Republican Republican Republican *
48th 1883-1885 Arthur Republican Democrat Republican
49th 1885-1887 Cleveland(22) Democrat Democrat Republican
50th 1887-1889 Cleveland(22) Democrat Democrat Republican
51st 1889-1891 Harrison(23) Republican Republican Republican *
52nd 1891-1893 Harrison(23) Republican Democrat Republican
53rd 1893-1895 Cleveland(24) Democrat Democrat Republican
54th 1895-1897 Cleveland(24) Democrat Republican Republican
55th 1897-1899 McKinley Republican Republican Republican *
56th 1899-1901 McKinley Republican Republican Republican *
57th 1901-1903 McKinley/Roosevelt(26) Republican Republican Republican *
58th 1903-1905 Roosevelt(26) Republican Republican Republican *
59th 1905-1907 Roosevelt(26) Republican Republican Republican *
60th 1907-1909 Roosevelt(26) Republican Republican Republican *
61st 1909-1911 Taft Republican Republican Republican *
62nd 1911-1913 Taft Republican Democrat Republican
63rd 1913-1915 Wilson Democrat Democrat Republican
64th 1915-1917 Wilson Democrat Democrat Democrat *
65th 1917-1919 Wilson Democrat Republican Democrat
66th 1919-1921 Wilson Democrat Republican Republican
67th 1921-1923 Harding/Coolidge Republican Republican Republican *
68th 1923-1925 Coolidge Republican Republican Republican *
69th 1925-1927 Coolidge Republican Republican Republican *
70th 1927-1929 Coolidge Republican Republican Republican *
71st 1929-1931 Hoover Republican Republican Republican *
72nd 1931-1933 Hoover Republican Republican Republican *
73rd 1933-1935 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
74th 1935-1937 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
75th 1937-1939 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
76th 1939-1941 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
77th 1941-1943 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
78th 1943-1945 Roosevelt(32) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
79th 1945-1947 Roosevelt(32)/Truman Democrat Democrat Democrat *
80th 1947-1949 Truman Democrat Republican Democrat
81st 1949-1951 Truman Democrat Democrat Democrat *
82nd 1951-1953 Truman Democrat Democrat Democrat *
83rd 1953-1955 Eisenhower Republican Republican Republican *
84th 1955-1957 Eisenhower Republican Democrat Democrat
85th 1957-1959 Eisenhower Republican Democrat Democrat
86th 1959-1961 Eisenhower Republican Democrat Democrat
87th 1961-1963 Kennedy Democrat Democrat Democrat *
88th 1963-1965 Kennedy/Johnson(36) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
89th 1965-1967 Johnson(36) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
90th 1967-1969 Johnson(36) Democrat Democrat Democrat *
91st 1969-1971 Nixon Republican Democrat Democrat
92nd 1971-1973 Nixon Republican Democrat Democrat
93rd 1973-1975 Nixon/Ford Republican Democrat Democrat
94th 1975-1977 Ford Republican Democrat Democrat
95th 1977-1979 Carter Democrat Democrat Democrat *
96th 1979-1981 Carter Democrat Democrat Democrat *
97th 1981-1983 Reagan Republican Democrat Republican
98th 1983-1985 Reagan Republican Democrat Republican
99th 1985-1987 Reagan Republican Democrat Republican
100th 1987-1989 Reagan Republican Democrat Democrat
101st 1989-1991 Bush(41) Republican Democrat Democrat
102nd 1991-1993 Bush(41) Republican Democrat Democrat
103rd 1993-1995 Clinton Democrat Democrat Democrat *
104th 1995-1997 Clinton Democrat Republican Republican
105th 1997-1999 Clinton Democrat Republican Republican
106th 1999-2001 Clinton Democrat Republican Republican
107th 2001-2003 Bush(43) Republican Republican Rep/Dem */no #3
Judging by the 2 folks that are trying to replace Gephardt*sp* it looks like the democrats have chosen to go left.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
Hmmm Maybe a large scale defection to the Republican party by Moderate Democrats might be the result of the Democratic Leadership moving further to the left. The result would be a more Moderate Republican Party lessoning the influence of the Right Wingers. A situation like this would be excellent for America because the extremists on either side of the political spectrum would be rendered harmless and basic common sense would rule the day.
I haven't followed the political career of Nancy Pelosi but if what I have read about her in the last couple of days is true she could be the liberal version of Newt Gingrich.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter