I posted the numbers and provided the cites.
If it was up to me, I switch over the basic democracy. Enact a constitutional amendment and abolish the Electoral College. Whoever gets the most votes, wins the election.
I know, what a crazy idea.
You could make white votes worth only 3/5ths of other votes.
+1
QFT
This
Disregarding whites, the last thing a post-industrial urbanized hyperpower needs is a government run by rubes and farmers.
The media is never going to give the Republican a fair break. That’s not new with Romney, although the first Romney-Obama debate was a wake-up call to the press of what can happen when they do. But yes, there is an element of crying wolf - every Republican gets the same “racist/sexist/homophobe/stupid/out of touch/corrupt/evil!!!” rant, and people have learned to tune it out to some degree.
Regards,
Shodan
Well, when the Republican President lays bare the equivalency of the Nazis and Confederates, and comes down on the side of the Nazis with little outcry from other Republicans, well, Republican actions speak louder than Democratic words.
I don’t know, 60% of POTUS elections this century have aligned with the popular vote- that’s almost double Babe Ruth. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
Yes I am being sarcastic.
Agree. How about also making it harder for political parties to become so entrenched and divisive - whoever gets the 2nd most votes gets to be VP? Maybe we can also break the 2-party grip on politics.
So, in the election forum we have liberals generally defending the tactics and reputation of Democrats; those on the Right largely blaming Democrats. Other than confirming my belief in much of what Scott Adams says the vast majority of replies in this thread has increased my understanding of the of the op’s arguments(pros and cons) by about 0%. The thread has had about 50 replies; I can guarantee around 40 of them are partisan junk.
It’s funny how some people act like the 3/5th clause was the most outrageous thing that was ever in the Constitution, while being okay with our current Constitution which gives some people less than 1/3 of the vote that other people get.
I know I’ve mentioned it before, but Romney’s problem was that he looked like a typical asshole CEO who announces layoffs and no bonuses for the remaining workers and then collects record bonuses and stock options for himself and his upper executive buddies. That wasn’t the right message for 2012, recovery from financial crisis recessions has always been stubbornly slow.
We have it on high authority that the Stupidist 1984-style Movement in America started with the vicious treatment of Nixon and his lackey, Judge Robert Bork, by Democrats 
The old metaphoric pendulum that I understood had great inertia. A left-of-center voter might vote for the rightist if the country was too far left, or vice versa, knowing that any change would be gradual.
But that is not the “pendulum” in today’s America. The sudden brutal lurch from the left-of-center Obama to right-wing insanity is unbecoming. Regardless of what follows from here, expect American governance to be a laughingstock for the foreseeable future.
International opinion of America rebounded pretty quickly under Obama. Trump is more of a laughingstock than Bush, but the right person could turn things around.
America’s decline produced Trump, something which Romney wouldn’t have stopped. Liberal respectability politics is dumb, though.
What do you think declined between 2012 and 2016 besides the unemployment rate?
Designed? I would say it is ‘designed’ such that everyone over 18 can vote. It just so happens that there are more white people in the country than non-white people.
[/QUOTE]
No.
Mr. Nemo may be referring to the electoral college, but that is not the only way in which elections have been rigged to suppress the voting power of blacks and other likely Democratic voters.
The party of personal responsibility gave us Trump. Put on your big boy pants and own this shit.
I think it may have even started when Seth Meyers got him at the Correspondents Dinner in 2011.’
It is amazing how the Framers in 1787 could not only predict that blacks could vote in 2017, but also predicted that they would consolidate in precisely the manner to make their votes “count less” under the system they designed.
Seriously, though, this new talking point of the EC being racist is absurd. The founders designed this exact system when no state even allowed blacks to vote. To say that they set up a system so that black votes would count less is ridiculous. They believed black votes would not count at all. Why design a deviously evil system to supposedly underhandedly suppress black votes when they openly disallowed all black votes?