• Images
  • Text
  • Find a Couple + Registry
GO
Chit Chat

Tomorrow, tomorrow, you're only a day away!

13»

Re: Tomorrow, tomorrow, you're only a day away!

  • All three "layers" of rule are Republican (House, Senate, President).

    Has this happened before? is it normal for it all to be one party or would there normally be a mix?

    What happened to the Democrats? is House and Senate based on ECV as well?
    The three levels are Legislature (House and Senate), Executive, and Judicial (Supreme Court).  The first two will be under GOP control, and there is an open seat on the Court because the GOP refused to hold hearings for President Obama's nominee.
    This was pissing me off all year and now I am truly concerned about the fact that the GOP won everything.  Obama was not the first president to have a vacancy on his last term they just f*cked around long enough to prevent him from appointing someone so that they would have the chance to...and it worked!  So now that they won majority of the house, senate and presidency they will continue to block Obama's nominee until the swearing in and then the supreme court will nomination will be GOP controlled.
    short+sassy

  • There is a lot of debate about ending the EC system and it will likely start up again. This could be the second election in 16 years where the popular vote doesn't match the electoral college vote (2000 Bush election), prior to that it hadn't happened for over 100 years. 


    They needed to get rid of the EC a long, long time ago!!  It is asinine that we still use a system that can allow a candidate to be more popular among the people but still lose an election.

    I know Trump winning isn't necessarily the end of the world, but I also have many friends and family members who are afraid of what will come now that the GOP swept the board. 

    short+sassy
  • Well that all makes more sense, even if it doesn't sound sensible.

    What a bizarre concept.

    So like I said before... Even though it seems the people are voting Clinton, it's irrelevant, because "The People" have voted Trump.
  • firestar-2firestar-2 member
    Knottie Warrior 25 Love Its 10 Comments
    edited November 2016
    And apparently, this is the first time in something like 122 years that House, Senate, and President have all been one party.

    ETF: funky autocorrect
  • Why have the last five States still not declared final count?
  • Why have the last five States still not declared final count?
    It does take a while for all precincts to report, so there are still votes coming in. And in certain states if the margin of victory is narrow there are automatic recounts required before a winner can be named. 
  • kimmiinthemittenkimmiinthemitten Detroit, MI member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary 5 Answers
    And apparently, this is the first time in something like 122 years that House, Senate, and President have all been one party.

    ETF: funky autocorrect
    No President Bush had a super majority in 2005-2006 too.
    image
    charlotte989875
  • kimmiinthemittenkimmiinthemitten Detroit, MI member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary 5 Answers
    Well that all makes more sense, even if it doesn't sound sensible.

    What a bizarre concept.

    So like I said before... Even though it seems the people are voting Clinton, it's irrelevant, because "The People" have voted Trump.
    I would look at it like "The States" have voted Trump.    We began as a series of state-nations, and when our founders created a Federal Government the leaders of the States were concerned they would lose their voice and autonomy to larger states based on population alone.  So they created the two houses, one based on population and one based on equal representatives and the EC to appease both sides.
    image
    charlotte989875short+sassyaurianna
  • Also we're gonna hear a lot more about "ranked choice voting". This will be a great solution to many of the issues we have. I hope it gains steam
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
    kimmiinthemitten
  • Well that all makes more sense, even if it doesn't sound sensible.

    What a bizarre concept.

    So like I said before... Even though it seems the people are voting Clinton, it's irrelevant, because "The People" have voted Trump.
    I would look at it like "The States" have voted Trump.    We began as a series of state-nations, and when our founders created a Federal Government the leaders of the States were concerned they would lose their voice and autonomy to larger states based on population alone.  So they created the two houses, one based on population and one based on equal representatives and the EC to appease both sides.
    But does the EC still please both sides?

    I'm still seeing it as "each individual person" has voted, yet their vote is essentially overruled.

    Again, I may just be lacking the understanding to see it as it actually is.
  • MCmeow said:
    Also we're gonna hear a lot more about "ranked choice voting". This will be a great solution to many of the issues we have. I hope it gains steam
    What is this please?
  • MCmeowMCmeow member
    500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary 100 Comments Name Dropper
    edited November 2016
    Also my fiancé found out one of the people he sent a save the date to voted for trump. Trump supporters don't support our marriage, they hate hispanics like me and my fiance is undocumented. He wants to uninvite him/her, I know it's against etiquette but I'm tempted to turn a blind eye on this one -_- 

    MCmeow said:
    Also we're gonna hear a lot more about "ranked choice voting". This will be a great solution to many of the issues we have. I hope it gains steam
    What is this please?
    It means when voting you can select more than one candidate. You can have a first choice and second choice. Doing this would eliminate the fear of voting third party. People wouldn't be afraid of voting for who they want because all choices would be ranked. With the system we have now, third party candidates are seen as spoilers.
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • MCmeow said:
    Also we're gonna hear a lot more about "ranked choice voting". This will be a great solution to many of the issues we have. I hope it gains steam
    What is this please?
    A rank-choice system is where you rank the candidates in order of preference, and votes and seats are distributed based on how much each candidate gets. So instead of just voting for Clinton one could vote Clinton first, Johnson second, Stein third, Trump fourth. Then there are formulas for how those are tallied. 
  • Well that all makes more sense, even if it doesn't sound sensible.

    What a bizarre concept.

    So like I said before... Even though it seems the people are voting Clinton, it's irrelevant, because "The People" have voted Trump.
    I would look at it like "The States" have voted Trump.    We began as a series of state-nations, and when our founders created a Federal Government the leaders of the States were concerned they would lose their voice and autonomy to larger states based on population alone.  So they created the two houses, one based on population and one based on equal representatives and the EC to appease both sides.
    But does the EC still please both sides?

    I'm still seeing it as "each individual person" has voted, yet their vote is essentially overruled.

    Again, I may just be lacking the understanding to see it as it actually is.

    First bolded:  I don't necessarily think it favors one side or another.  Though states with small populations would definitely not want it changed.

    Second bolded:  That is one of the biggest problems with it.  The vast majority of states are "all or nothing" with their EC votes.  I think there are maybe 2 or 3 who will actually split their electoral votes based on voting.

    With the "all or nothing", there are quite a few states whose EC votes ALWAYS go Dem or ALWAYS go Repub.  Including mine.  So, I know going into the polling booth, that my vote for President doesn't count at all.  Because I'm in a red state.  Our EC votes have only gone blue 3x in the last 50 years.  If I vote Repub., I'm voting with the masses.  If I vote Dem, I'm a little "tink" against the tide.

    Generally speaking, the South and Midwest state EC votes go Repub. and the Western states/Northern East Coast states go Dem.

    It actually makes me a little sad every POTUS election to look at the colored in electoral map, regardless of who wins.  The entire South nothing but a swath of red.  The Civil War ended over 150 years ago.  But right THERE.  In Red and Blue.  The North and South are still divided politically.   

    Wedding Countdown Ticker
    cowgirl8238
  • MCmeow said:
    Also my fiancé found out one of the people he sent a save the date to voted for trump. Trump supporters don't support our marriage, they hate hispanics like me and my fiance is undocumented. He wants to uninvite him/her, I know it's against etiquette but I'm tempted to turn a blind eye on this one -_- 

    MCmeow said:
    Also we're gonna hear a lot more about "ranked choice voting". This will be a great solution to many of the issues we have. I hope it gains steam
    What is this please?
    It means when voting you can select more than one candidate. You can have a first choice and second choice. Doing this would eliminate the fear of voting third party. People wouldn't be afraid of voting for who they want because all choices would be ranked. With the system we have now, third party candidates are seen as spoilers.
    I would carefully consider this before actioning anything.
    Are you close with this person? I'd assume so, as a std was sent. Can you talk to them about it? Do they know your FI is undocumented?

    Voting for Trump doesn't necessarily mean they don't support your marriage. Maybe they have strong feelings about other points in his campaign?

    If they feel all illegals should be kicked out regardless, I'd turn a blind eye to etiquette and "forget" their invite, too, but in that case, I wouldn't care about severing the friendship.


    Also, thank you fir explaining. that sounds a much better way of voting.
    ILoveBeachMusiclyndausvicowgirl8238charlotte989875
  • MCmeowMCmeow member
    500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary 100 Comments Name Dropper
    edited November 2016
    MCmeow said:
    Also my fiancé found out one of the people he sent a save the date to voted for trump. Trump supporters don't support our marriage, they hate hispanics like me and my fiance is undocumented. He wants to uninvite him/her, I know it's against etiquette but I'm tempted to turn a blind eye on this one -_- 

    MCmeow said:
    Also we're gonna hear a lot more about "ranked choice voting". This will be a great solution to many of the issues we have. I hope it gains steam
    What is this please?
    It means when voting you can select more than one candidate. You can have a first choice and second choice. Doing this would eliminate the fear of voting third party. People wouldn't be afraid of voting for who they want because all choices would be ranked. With the system we have now, third party candidates are seen as spoilers.
    I would carefully consider this before actioning anything.
    Are you close with this person? I'd assume so, as a std was sent. Can you talk to them about it? Do they know your FI is undocumented?

    Voting for Trump doesn't necessarily mean they don't support your marriage. Maybe they have strong feelings about other points in his campaign?

    If they feel all illegals should be kicked out regardless, I'd turn a blind eye to etiquette and "forget" their invite, too, but in that case, I wouldn't care about severing the friendship.


    Also, thank you fir explaining. that sounds a much better way of voting.
    I don't know if he was joking due to the frustration or not. He invited some on his side that he felt were obligatory and I let him deal with those so I don't know if they're actually close or not. But yeah I would forget their invite if they truly had those feelings.
    Also his friends don't know he's undocumented. He keeps that private.
    edit: oh and of course one of our mutual best friends is Muslim AND undocumented, she just started her path to change her status. She has been silent all day today. I'm so terrified for her and her kind family...
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • KatWAGKatWAG Chicago member
    2500 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    MCmeow said:
    The electoral college is meant to suppress democracy. We invade countries and force them to become democratic and we can't follow our own example, we have voter suppression, intimidation, voter ID laws meant to suppress poor and minority voters, and we have a system that discounts the largest populations. We need a real damn democracy because we have a broken one right now.
    That is ludicrous. If we dont have a EC, then the entire election would be decided in New York and LA (maybe Miami and Chicago.) There would be no incentive for candidates to campaign anywhere else. They would be able to ignore most of the country. The EC forces candidates to campaign everywhere. Without it, candidates would be forced to ignore all rural and suburban areas and think of all the issues that would not be discussed like agriculture and manufacturing. 

    Ans then you want to talk about special interests getting involved?  Where do you think most special interest group are? They are in major cities. 


    BabyFruit Ticker
    aurianna
  • KatWAGKatWAG Chicago member
    2500 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    And apparently, this is the first time in something like 122 years that House, Senate, and President have all been one party.

    ETF: funky autocorrect
    No President Bush had a super majority in 2005-2006 too.
    Obama had both chambers in 2009-2010. It is very common for the lower offices to ride the presidential coattails. The controlling party almost always loose one chamber in the midterm elections. 
    BabyFruit Ticker
Sign In or Register to comment.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards