“Both Sides”

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Anotherblackman, Dec 30, 2019.

  1. newsbuff

    newsbuff Forum Royalty

    Good luck convincing smaller or agricultural states to join your Federal Union where you inherently have overwhelming power over them without an electoral college. Without EC, candidates would only need to campaign in L.A., N.Y.C., Chicago, and Houston and ignore the rest of the country even more than they already do.

    And @Anotherblackman I'm still waiting to hear your plan for black people to pay reparations to Jews for their enslavement to build ya'lls Kangz'z pyramids.
  2. Anotherblackman

    Anotherblackman I need me some PIE!

    The Egyptian culture already paid heavily. If you believe in biblical word, they were said to have paid with their first born child which was the final of the plagues. If you don’t believe in that however, then it’s factual that a huge exodus of people left from under the empire. They were the people got their freedom. If you don’t believe that, then look at the fact that the culture is dead.

    I believe if your culture is destroyed your debt for evil to the world is paid. Same reasoning why I enjoy the fact that a Roman Empire is destroyed.

    Since you called me out I might as well give you some knowledge: the EC as you put is wasn’t put into play until AFTER the civil war. As a way to control areas that if they had majority of the negro vote(which at the time there was a ton of black people and whites people in the south were advocating that it would give these “inferior beings” power. Now the EC just works as a rigged up system to cheat for those who’s interest are bonded to who ever is elected. From George Bush Sr. And Jr, there have been no Republican President that has won the majority of votes. From when Al Gore lost cause Bush cheated in Florida to the attempt to use it to remove Obama vs Mitt Romney( this the overwhelming defeat of him because we the people, didn’t let that EC into play) if you are defending the stupid electorate college which was designed to give a small amount of people, all the power in America, then you are supporting the fact that it is being used against the true majority of Americans have no been heard.

    If people like you actually wanted “voices heard” then you would do away with this ancient election Bane Shift, and just have an app that allows you to vote. Or something a long those lines of nation wide anonymous “Talley voting” Voting in America needs to be updated for the new millennium. So that way, as you say, a Majority of Americans can vote and be heard.
  3. newsbuff

    newsbuff Forum Royalty


  4. newsbuff

    newsbuff Forum Royalty

    I'm absolutely NOT interested in a direct democracy, and neither were the founders. Read the Federalist Papers. I do NOT want "voices heard," I want a Federalist, Representative Republic.
    profhulk likes this.
  5. Extinctshun

    Extinctshun I need me some PIE!

    @Anotherblackman there is a reason we dont go by majority rule. Some of the states responsible for the largest amount of agriculture are significantly less populated than urban areas such as Los Angeles and NYC, etc. Even if majority vote was one way, it doesnt make sense for a majority that covers a small area to be making decisions for a spacial majority that they know nothing about.

    @newsbuff I'm with you. Get the majority rules bull Bane Shift out of here. The system isn't built to KEEP THE NEGROS DOWN like you are insinuating... and a vast majority of people would agree that racism is a terrible thing and that no one should be persecuted for the color of their skin. That being said.. that is not the intent of the electoral college as you portray it to be AND with your made up dates getting debunked so effortlessly, I'm starting to think you have no credibility at all.
    newsbuff likes this.
  6. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    but not one that is proportionally representative of the voters it would seem.
  7. darklord48

    darklord48 Forum Royalty

    I actually think the US is too big and would be better served as smaller countries with direct representation. What I need in Minnesota is different than what someone in California, New York, Texas, or Wyoming needs. Some things we all need, like to be able to go to a doctor and be taken care of in a timely and cost efficient manner.
    chickenpox2 likes this.
  8. newsbuff

    newsbuff Forum Royalty

    I agree. Roosevelt's New Deal was the final nail in the State-level autonomy coffin that started with the civil war. Since then, we've become too centralized.
  9. profhulk

    profhulk Forum Royalty

    Balkanization of a land mass as large as the United States doesen't seem like a good decision. You just mentioned the Civil War. One of the reasons the "War of Northern Aggression" happenned was so the bankers could divide up the United States. Centralization is a mess, but dividing this country would be worse.
  10. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    so why not have the electoral college votes divided proportionally to the votes of the state rather than have states that are red or blue and where being a supporter of the ''other team' means you actually have no influence in your national governance?
  11. newsbuff

    newsbuff Forum Royalty

    I'm in favor of electoral reform like this. winner-takes-all is probably not the best system.
  12. chickenpox2

    chickenpox2 I need me some PIE!

    I was thinking that have US split one run by democrats in urban areas and republican for rural area (because conversatives are better at it)
    Have 2 prime minister and one president that unite both parties

Share This Page