You might want to rethink what you just typed.
You might want to rethink what you just typed.
"Question the world man... I know the meaning of everything right now... it's like I can touch god." - bbobb the ggreatt
No that is absolutely wrong. There is a large group of officials that DOES NOT EVEN WANT TO GOVERN AND IS PROVING IT ON A DAILY BASIS.
That has nothing to do with "adversaries". If you want to be some slackjawed dicksmoke working at a 7/11 doing fuck all, then have at it. If you want to be a leader, then start actually LEADING. Case in point:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sc...oss-2018-07-20
Last edited by Joust Williams; 25 Jul 2018 at 10:54 PM.
From what I understand not all states get an equal number by design — states with more population tend to get more delegates in general but it doesn't just outright scale with population. States with less % of the national population still get a guarantee of 3 or whatever. So this means states is a less population density still have their way of life and ideas represented on the larger national stage because their choice of delegate (should they win) has a modifier on it (Vermonts 3 delegates are worth 3x more per individual than New York's but New York still has more than 9). If I have the concept right that's still normalization from state to state because it caps densely packed population centres and curves up lesser packed populations. Else no one from Nebraska or Montana would ever have a say in their own affairs otherwise (and "who gives a fuck about those hicks" probably isn't a legitimate idea in spite of the outrage atm).
It's a bit strange it's winner-takes-all-delegates. If delegates were split up by local populate vote that MIGHT be a good compromise if local popular split differs from national popular split. If local regions have the same Dem/Rep split as the national split then that would just be a popular vote system. I suspect that it probably true—so it has to kind of be the way it is.
Originally Posted by rezo
Well hold up a second. Would they complain about the electoral college itself? No. They need that. It's essential for Republican victory. But they would find a nice loophole so they could complain about it. Something along the lines of it being illegitimate or corrupt or something else. Look to Jim Jordan's language when describing his reasoning for the Rosenstein articles as an example. Real quaint, Technically Correct™ loopholes.
There, I fixed it for you.
I think a lot of people forget we are 50 self governed states in a union similar to the EU.
The popular vote of the State* determines who the state votes for.
The state has X amount of votes 50% depending on population 50% equally.
*Kansas and Maine are exceptions which split their vote.
Last edited by Doc Holliday; 26 Jul 2018 at 08:00 AM.
"Question the world man... I know the meaning of everything right now... it's like I can touch god." - bbobb the ggreatt
"Question the world man... I know the meaning of everything right now... it's like I can touch god." - bbobb the ggreatt
Bookmarks