Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Cooter

Schrillary Rotten

230 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, delcecchi said:

I was just commenting on the issue of the "two party system" and the constitution.   The solution is not to wail about the system, but to get different candidates.  

 

Trump and Bernie showed that it is possible for an outsider to run, and even to win if they have appeal to enough people.    The tea party had an impact within the Republicans.  

 

If your viewpoints aren't getting heard and represented, either they represent only a small group or you're not working to promote them.   

Running and actually doing something are 2 different things though.

 

Trump was going to drain the swamp, go after the big banks, work for the ave Joe etc and then once he was elected he filled the swamp with more Goldman Sachs types, Billionaire bankers and doubled down by gutting many of the things put in place to help the middle class. 

 

he either lied and knew thins from day one or after he was elected those in power got to him and made it clear how things were going to go.

 

You can make your own choice as to how it happened but it's clear he isn't any champion of the average joe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, PurpleFloyd said:

Running and actually doing something are 2 different things though.

 

Trump was going to drain the swamp, go after the big banks, work for the ave Joe etc and then once he was elected he filled the swamp with more Goldman Sachs types, Billionaire bankers and doubled down by gutting many of the things put in place to help the middle class. 

 

he either lied and knew thins from day one or after he was elected those in power got to him and made it clear how things were going to go.

 

You can make your own choice as to how it happened but it's clear he isn't any champion of the average joe.

 

He will throw some bones on occasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, PurpleFloyd said:

Running and actually doing something are 2 different things though.

 

Trump was going to drain the swamp, go after the big banks, work for the ave Joe etc and then once he was elected he filled the swamp with more Goldman Sachs types, Billionaire bankers and doubled down by gutting many of the things put in place to help the middle class. 

 

he either lied and knew thins from day one or after he was elected those in power got to him and made it clear how things were going to go.

 

You can make your own choice as to how it happened but it's clear he isn't any champion of the average joe.

 

 

It's the natural outcome of too much power concentrated at the federal level, and in the executive office, in particular.  The fix is to cut back on federal power, and that is not an easy task.  May not ever happen at this point.

Big Dave2 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, delcecchi said:

Regardless of what they wanted, the system they defined, and the actions of the states almost guaranteed it.  

 

 That's horse hockey.

 

16 hours ago, delcecchi said:

 

Either that or their would have been some bizarre stuff in the congress every election.  So, you can conclude they wanted it, or didn't properly anticipate the implications of their decisions.

 

More Horse Hockey.

 

16 hours ago, delcecchi said:

 

Perhaps you could explain how presidential elections, as defined in the Constitution, would work with three or four (or no) political parties?  

 

Ummmm, just like it works right now? Have you ever taken a good look at your ballot when you vote or do you just go right to the R section? The only difference is the corruption of the 2 major parties that keeps other parties nominees out of debates and off ballots in some states. The system is gamed to favor the 2 major parties so they stay in power and that's about the only thing they work together on these days.

 

16 hours ago, delcecchi said:

 

So, I take it that the Israeli system would be more to your liking, where geographic diversity is traded for political diversity, and the Libertarian Party might have a couple of representatives.?

 

I wouldn't know, I'm not as big of a fan of Israel as you and your party mates are. I don't study Breitbart or The Christian Science Monitor like you probably do so I don't know how Israel's system works and I don't have an opinion even if you do keep bringing it up in every post you make.

 

I don't even blame the system for what's happening as much as I blame simple minded, brainwashed voters for allowing these things to happen. We, as a society, deserve what we get and we have been getting what we deserve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Cooter said:

No, why dont u further examine schrillary first.  Maybe learn something and quit making a clown out of yourself?

 

There's plenty of clown to go around these days.

 

How much examining have you done of Trump? I think that would be more prudent given the fact that he is actually the POTUS and will be relevant for at least the next 4 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cooter said:

 Meanwhile mr trump is under attack the likes of which we've never seen even before day one in office.

 

LOL, your memory must not go back 8 years.

 

2 hours ago, Cooter said:

 

 as a trump voter i have and will call him out when he fails in his duties.

 

The problem is, you won't acknowledge when he does fail in his duties, just like the Democrats didn't acknowledge when Obama failed in his.

 

2 hours ago, Cooter said:

 

 But the attacks right now are from a butthurt media and population group unable or unwilling to accept the outcome of an election that didnt go their way.

 

Not much different than the last 8 years...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Big Dave2 said:

The system is gamed to favor the 2 major parties so they stay in power and that's about the only thing they work together on these days.

 

QFT..

 

Their unified efforts in this area are seamless.

PurpleFloyd likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Dave, and Bear, let's hypothesize that there are three or four or five parties, and they all get chunks of the vote.  Today, in each state the electors would go to the party with the plurality, although that is up to the states and they could divide them.  

 

In any case if there are more than two significant parties, it seems likely that no party would have a majority in the electoral college (or in the popular vote), meaning that the president would be chosen  from the top three by the house with each state getting one vote.   And if no one gets a majority, of the top three by March 4th,  then the vice president, who is chosen by the senate from the top two finishers for vice president becomes president.  And the presidential candidates go home. 

 

Do you think that happening every four years and the attendant chaos would be preferable to the current system?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Big Dave2 said:

LOL, your memory must not go back 8 years.

 

Wrong. Draw even one parallel to level where it sits at today.

 

3 hours ago, Big Dave2 said:

Not much different than the last 8 years - signed the resident forum bully brat.

 

Shockingly wrong.

 

With a twist of irony, your responses are only missing a White House podium and a lime green tie like Spicer.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hysteria on the left is nearly a mirror image of the hysteria on the right when Obama was elected. 

 

The difference is largely tied to the distribution of the message that is inciting them.

 

During the Obama administration the media that was influencing the neocons was mostly underground and done through chain emails, talk radio, through organizations like ALEC and a bit of Fox. That is why the print and TV media always underestimated the size and scope of the network.

 

OTOH the current liberal campaign is being played out by the national media,print media and social media that are all largely liberal owned and run. The fact that nearly every media entity is going after Trump 24/7 gives the appearance that the movement is bigger than it is and by default it brings people into the tent that wouldn't if not for the excessive coverage they give it.

 

And of course paying people to protest always increases participation. 

Big Dave2 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, delcecchi said:

OK Dave, and Bear, let's hypothesize that there are three or four or five parties, and they all get chunks of the vote. 

 

That doesn't happen already? 

9 minutes ago, PurpleFloyd said:

The hysteria on the left is nearly a mirror image of the hysteria on the right when Obama was elected. 

 

The difference is largely tied to the distribution of the message that is inciting them.

 

During the Obama administration the media that was influencing the neocons was mostly underground and done through chain emails, talk radio, through organizations like ALEC and a bit of Fox. That is why the print and TV media always underestimated the size and scope of the network.

 

OTOH the current liberal campaign is being played out by the national media,print media and social media that are all largely liberal owned and run. The fact that nearly every media entity is going after Trump 24/7 gives the appearance that the movement is bigger than it is and by default it brings people into the tent that wouldn't if not for the excessive coverage they give it.

 

And of course paying people to protest always increases participation. 

 

He's_right_you_know.jpg

42 minutes ago, JigSawJimmy said:

 

Wrong. Draw even one parallel to level where it sits at today.

 

 

Shockingly wrong.

 

 

What's not shocking is that YOU don't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, delcecchi said:

OK Dave, and Bear, let's hypothesize that there are three or four or five parties, and they all get chunks of the vote.  Today, in each state the electors would go to the party with the plurality, although that is up to the states and they could divide them.  

 

In any case if there are more than two significant parties, it seems likely that no party would have a majority in the electoral college (or in the popular vote), meaning that the president would be chosen  from the top three by the house with each state getting one vote.   And if no one gets a majority, of the top three by March 4th,  then the vice president, who is chosen by the senate from the top two finishers for vice president becomes president.  And the presidential candidates go home. 

 

Do you think that happening every four years and the attendant chaos would be preferable to the current system?   


The electoral college needs to go anyway so we can start there, I'm sure you would be right there with me had Hillary won, now who knows where republicans are. A strait up popular vote would work with any number of candidates, I'm sure people would cry for various reasons but how could that be any worse that what we are seeing now. Instant runoff voting looks promising, just rank your top 3 choices for president, leave off those who you absolutely do not want, it is simple and it works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear,

 

Ok, let''s say we go to a straight popular vote with four parties.  Votes are counted.  Two people each get 30%and two get 20%..

 

What happens then?

Edited by delcecchi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

Bear,

 

Ok, let''s say we go to a straight popular vote with four parties.  Votes are counted.  Two people each get 30%and two get 20%..

 

What happens then?

Riff off?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

Bear,

 

Ok, let''s say we go to a straight popular vote with four parties.  Votes are counted.  Two people each get 30%and two get 20%..

 

What happens then?

 

If two are at 30% one will likely have more votes that the other, they win. If there is a perfect statistical tie I'd even be happy with a coin flip. Anything but send it back to the politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So no more majority required?    I don't believe that would be a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

So no more majority required?    I don't believe that would be a good idea.

We don't have that now. Trump didn't get a majority of the votes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a majority of the electoral votes as defined in the Constitution.  Typical liberal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly PF, been a few presidents elected without the "majority". Don't give me the electoral college, that is a joke and I have been saying that long before Trump was elected. Like we have any kind of majority anyway, there are a handful of independent voters in swing states that decide our president. The rest of us just pretend to vote because we all know where it will end up anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Big Dave2 said:

 

LOL, your memory must not go back 8 years.

 

 

The problem is, you won't acknowledge when he does fail in his duties, just like the Democrats didn't acknowledge when Obama failed in his.

 

 

Not much different than the last 8 years...

Center ring at the circus we have a nitwit from belle plaine with apparent mental challenges.  Still struggling to pull his head out of his skirt and comprehend any form of reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, my name is Dave and i believe the msm has been just as tough on obama as they have trump.  And a pretty pink flying elephant told me so.  Cripes dude, you ever get sick of making an arse outta yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, delcecchi said:

Got a majority of the electoral votes as defined in the Constitution.  Typical liberal.

You didn't say electoral college. Nice backpedal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It would take a constitutional amendment at the national level to get rid of the electoral college, but the part of the system that really favors the two major parties is the winner-take-all feature at the state level, which could be changed by the states themselves.

 

In 2016, for example, Hillary lost the Democratic nomination to Bernie Sanders by 20 to 30 percent.  She won the popular vote over Trump by a slim margin, but she ended up getting all 10 electors in the electoral college.  If there was no electoral college, and the voting was done by a simple majority vote, she probably would not have reached more than 20 to 25 percent of the total vote in Minnesota.

 

 

 

Edited by swamptiger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, PurpleFloyd said:

The hysteria on the left is nearly a mirror image of the hysteria on the right when Obama was elected. 

 

The difference is largely tied to the distribution of the message that is inciting them.

 

During the Obama administration the media that was influencing the neocons was mostly underground and done through chain emails, talk radio, through organizations like ALEC and a bit of Fox. That is why the print and TV media always underestimated the size and scope of the network.

 

OTOH the current liberal campaign is being played out by the national media,print media and social media that are all largely liberal owned and run. The fact that nearly every media entity is going after Trump 24/7 gives the appearance that the movement is bigger than it is and by default it brings people into the tent that wouldn't if not for the excessive coverage they give it.

 

And of course paying people to protest always increases participation. 

 

 

So what youre saying is the MSM refused to cover the conservatives when they rioted, protested, cried non stop, packed up and moved out of the country, made mean spirited skits, and beat democrats up in the street when Obama was in office?

 

I dont think you can even make a comparison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cooter said:

Center ring at the circus we have a nitwit from belle plaine with apparent mental challenges.  Still struggling to pull his head out of his skirt and comprehend any form of reality.

 

1 hour ago, Cooter said:

Hi, my name is Dave and i believe the msm has been just as tough on obama as they have trump.  And a pretty pink flying elephant told me so.  Cripes dude, you ever get sick of making an arse outta yourself?

 

And you're one who accuses liberals of name calling. Best invest in a mirror.

Big Dave2 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now