Jump to content


Photo

It is a sad day for America

Steel Penn

  • Please log in to reply
257 replies to this topic

#21 Timqwe

Timqwe

    Black Belt

  • Manager
  • 1,903 posts

Posted 21 January 2017 - 01:36 PM

No, its a great system.  It gives every person in every state a say in who is elected president.  Large population states are given more weight, but there is still representation of small population states.  The US was never intended to be an immense super state where a popular vote would decide the presidency.  It is a coalition of smaller states, its even in the name of the country.  The electoral college is an essential check that retains some power in small states in a Republic, it was a great idea when initially installed and remains one to this day.
 
If you want to change it to a popular vote then thats your opinion.  But to institute that their would have to be strict voter laws that were actually enforced.  Clinton won the popular vote by around 3.5 million (iirc, its irrelevant so i wont bother to look it up) and all that was gained in CA where you dont have to show ID to vote.  Voter fraud is rampant there and in quite a few other states.  That would all need to be cleaned up.

Not showing ID is ridiculous to begin with. The electoral system might have been good to begin with, but in a time age of globalism you can't have just a few swing states decide the course of action for an entire country. It's both unfair to pure blue and red states, who's votes are basically worthless. Also it prevents people in non-swing states from voting, effectively removing the chance that any of them will become one.
  • 1

15017318482-familia.jpg\


#22 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 6,133 posts

Posted 21 January 2017 - 01:38 PM

Starting today we will have a Trump America. I am worried for us all. 

As long as you dont live near one of the anti-trump riots you should be ok. 

 

Honestly, I dont think much will happen over the next four years.  Trump wont be able to get much past congress, even his own party will obstruct him.  He will have to rule by executive order much like obama and it willl all be over turned as soon as he leaves like trump is doing to the obama EO's now.

 

It will probably be fours years of deadlock, lawsuits and whining.  At least what he says his foreign policy will be is far more agreeable to me then the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama neocon kill em all policy we've had for the last 28 years.  I dont like his stance on Israel, but world opinion has come around to my way of thinking in the the last 10 years or so, so I doubt he can really fuck that up more than it is.


  • 0

#23 The1rstSaint

The1rstSaint

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 3,277 posts

Posted 21 January 2017 - 03:50 PM

I welcome these pussy ass rioters to my house so they can be dragged to my torture chamber. Seriously if there is a pack of them punks around my town I'm either gonna run them over or open fire cause I just may be a little more pissed then they think they are.
  • -1

Saints_sig.jpg

tenor.gif
 

 


#24

  • Guests

Posted 21 January 2017 - 04:28 PM

I welcome these pussy ass rioters to my house so they can be dragged to my torture chamber. Seriously if there is a pack of them punks around my town I'm either gonna run them over or open fire cause I just may be a little more pissed then they think they are.

Now thats america right there. No small talk, pure fuck you, guns out isis style :D
  • 3

#25 The1rstSaint

The1rstSaint

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 3,277 posts

Posted 21 January 2017 - 07:29 PM

Now thats america right there. No small talk, pure fuck you, guns out isis style :D


Oh you got me, had a lil rage moment so now I'm as bad as ISIS. I forget how much smarter you euro's are
  • 0

Saints_sig.jpg

tenor.gif
 

 


#26

  • Guests

Posted 21 January 2017 - 07:37 PM

Oh you got me, had a lil rage moment so now I'm as bad as ISIS. I forget how much smarter you euro's are

not as bad. You just have similar mentalities. The only difference is they do it, you just shout loudly then turn the brain on.


  • 2

#27 kenlow73

kenlow73

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 8,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lutz, Fl
  • Interests:Web Design, Video Editing, Music, Pro Wrestling, MMA, Bucs, Bulls, Boltz, Rays, Magic, Noles, Vegas Golden Knights, and The UNLV Running Rebs.
  • Manager Profile

Posted 22 January 2017 - 02:41 AM

you have to remember that they have been changes since the system was founded, like having a lot less states voting than now, winner takes all systems (which only two states don't have), and the fact early on that there wasn't a election for VP, who ever came in second became VP.


  • 0

 
23844f55e258c7d5f0a812c3eb54b9ec.gif1490140446hxf_logo.png55c16b1bd76c7b2b605aa607029bf545.png


#28 The1rstSaint

The1rstSaint

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 3,277 posts

Posted 22 January 2017 - 04:40 PM

Alright i had my snickers im better now.


  • 0

Saints_sig.jpg

tenor.gif
 

 


#29 Face Kicker

Face Kicker

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 10,488 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 04:09 AM

Trump > Clinton

 

 

Is President Donald J. Trump the savior?  No.  Is President Donald J.Trump a great candidate?  No.  Is President Donald J. Trump better than either Clinton? Yes. Is America's and world stability more secure with American President Donald J. Trump than her?  Potentially, yes.  Not a guarantee, but at least it's a gamble the majority believe is worth taking.

 

 

LMAO, you're joking right?  PLEASE tell me that was mostly sarcasm.  Have you even seen some of his cabinet appointments??  It's like he thought to himself "ok, who would be the WORST person I could put in charge of this?".  Yeah, lets put a climate-change denier in charge of the EPA, even though he's actively in litigation against the EPA (poor guy just wants to pollute more) and is in the pocket of the oil lobby, cuz that's a great idea right?  Let's put a crazy dipshit with ZERO relevant experience in charge of HUD, cuz that makes perfect sense, right?  And yeah, surely an anti-union CEO of a fast food chain will make decisions to the benefit of the working class, huh?  Sure, let's put Vince McMahan's wife in charge of the SBA lol.  While we're at it, lets put a billionaire with financial interests in privatizing education, IN CHARGE OF EDUCATION, cuz why the fuck not lol?

 

Also, how did you not just burst out laughing when trying to use the word "stability" to describe anything related Trump?  He's like a 5 year old.


  • 3

I've got a gun for a mouth, and a bullet with your name on it.


#30 Face Kicker

Face Kicker

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 10,488 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 04:25 AM

No, its a great system.  It gives every person in every state a say in who is elected president.  Large population states are given more weight, but there is still representation of small population states.  The US was never intended to be an immense super state where a popular vote would decide the presidency.  It is a coalition of smaller states, its even in the name of the country.  The electoral college is an essential check that retains some power in small states in a Republic, it was a great idea when initially installed and remains one to this day.

 

If you want to change it to a popular vote then thats your opinion.  But to institute that their would have to be strict voter laws that were actually enforced.  Clinton won the popular vote by around 3.5 million (iirc, its irrelevant so i wont bother to look it up) and all that was gained in CA where you dont have to show ID to vote.  Voter fraud is rampant there and in quite a few other states.  That would all need to be cleaned up.

 

there's essentially zero evidence of any meaningful voter fraud.  these claims of "millions" of illegal votes are completely unsubstantiated.  imo the MUCH bigger problems are voter suppression and gerrymandering.


  • 6

I've got a gun for a mouth, and a bullet with your name on it.


#31 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 6,133 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 02:07 PM

there's essentially zero evidence of any meaningful voter fraud.  these claims of "millions" of illegal votes are completely unsubstantiated.  imo the MUCH bigger problems are voter suppression and gerrymandering.

http://www.washingto...s-from-nonciti/
Article projects up to 2.8 million noncitizens voting(not all for Clinton.). That # is based on 20 million illegals which is a low estimate. Also has this fun quote from Obama, where he encourages voter fraud;

"President Obama was asked during the campaign last year if illegal immigrants had anything to fear from federal authorities if they voted in the presidential race.
Many of the millennials, Dreamers, undocumented citizens and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country are fearful of voting, he was asked on a Latino YouTube channel. So if I vote, will Immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?
Not true, and the reason is, first of all, when you vote, you are a citizen yourself, Mr. Obama said. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, etc. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential."

More voter fraud;
https://www.washingt...m=.98082712e4b7

http://www.baltimore...0308-story.html

http://dailycaller.c...of-voter-fraud/

http://www.miamihera...cle1956542.html
  • -3

#32 Timqwe

Timqwe

    Black Belt

  • Manager
  • 1,903 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 02:24 PM

http://www.washingto...s-from-nonciti/
Article projects up to 2.8 million noncitizens voting(not all for Clinton.). That # is based on 20 million illegals which is a low estimate. Also has this fun quote from Obama, where he encourages voter fraud;

"President Obama was asked during the campaign last year if illegal immigrants had anything to fear from federal authorities if they voted in the presidential race.
Many of the millennials, Dreamers, undocumented citizens and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country are fearful of voting, he was asked on a Latino YouTube channel. So if I vote, will Immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?
Not true, and the reason is, first of all, when you vote, you are a citizen yourself, Mr. Obama said. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, etc. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential."

More voter fraud;
https://www.washingt...m=.98082712e4b7

http://www.baltimore...0308-story.html

http://dailycaller.c...of-voter-fraud/

http://www.miamihera...cle1956542.html

Did you even read the Washington Post article? It projects 800k non citizen votes, while Clinton beat Trump in the popular vote by 2.8 milion. The number you quote does appear later in the article, but it's an absolute guess:

Using other measuring tools, they said, the actual number of noncitizen voters could be as low as 38,000 and as high as 2.8 million

Or what about the republican able to vote in multiple states?
http://nymag.com/dai...two-states.html
 


  • 3

15017318482-familia.jpg\


#33 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 6,133 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 02:59 PM

Did you even read the Washington Post article? It projects 800k non citizen votes, while Clinton beat Trump in the popular vote by 2.8 milion. The number you quote does appear later in the article, but it's an absolute guess:
Or what about the republican able to vote in multiple states?[/size]
http://nymag.com/dai...two-states.html

Of course I read it, and the 2.8 million is clearly in the article as the high end range based on the 2012 census estimate of 21 million voting age illegals. When I wrote "up to 2.8 million" I was noting the high end referenced in the article. If you need my to explain how the study worked, I can do it.

I think that high end # is actually pretty low. For one it is based on 2012, before Obama opened up the borders. The illegal immigrant of voting age #s are unarguably much higher then 21 million at this point. Probably closer to 50-60 million. So you could easily double that illegal vote number, although not all went for clinton over trump.

In my state, no id is required to vote. The same rules are in place in the few states where Clinton received the majority of her votes. In my brief time in the polling station this election I am sure I witnessed some voter fraud, but it wasnt by illegal immigrants, just local scumbags trying to cheat the system.

The article you posted just says he was registered in two states, not that he voted in two separate states. If he voted in two states he should be charged. I honestly dont know if being registered in two states is a crime, i would think it isnt. One of the articles I posted previously was of a women voting in two states who was caught and asked to resign her candidacy. It made no mention if she was actually charged with a crime.
  • 0

#34 Timqwe

Timqwe

    Black Belt

  • Manager
  • 1,903 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 03:13 PM

Of course I read it, and the 2.8 million is clearly in the article as the high end range based on the 2012 census estimate of 21 million voting age illegals. When I wrote "up to 2.8 million" I was noting the high end referenced in the article. If you need my to explain how the study worked, I can do it.

I think that high end # is actually pretty low. For one it is based on 2012, before Obama opened up the borders. The illegal immigrant of voting age #s are unarguably much higher then 21 million at this point. Probably closer to 50-60 million. So you could easily double that illegal vote number, although not all went for clinton over trump.

In my state, no id is required to vote. The same rules are in place in the few states where Clinton received the majority of her votes. In my brief time in the polling station this election I am sure I witnessed some voter fraud, but it wasnt by illegal immigrants, just local scumbags trying to cheat the system.

The article you posted just says he was registered in two states, not that he voted in two separate states. If he voted in two states he should be charged. I honestly dont know if being registered in two states is a crime, i would think it isnt. One of the articles I posted previously was of a women voting in two states who was caught and asked to resign her candidacy. It made no mention if she was actually charged with a crime.

A range with a margin of error of 2.5 million is ridiculous, and has no meaning to a discussion. The only relevant number in the article is the 800k, still not nearly enough for Trump to have won the popular vote.


  • 0

15017318482-familia.jpg\


#35 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 6,133 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 04:24 PM

A range with a margin of error of 2.5 million is ridiculous, and has no meaning to a discussion. The only relevant number in the article is the 800k, still not nearly enough for Trump to have won the popular vote.

I take this to mean you need me to explain how they got the numbers. This is fairly simple extrapolation of the first survey on yougov. Of those who say they voted in a past election, a percentage said they were non-citizens (illegal voters). That percentage was then used to come up with a larger number of voters who were voting illegally based on 2012 noncitizen population estimates. Note that the # of illegal voters they came up with was based on 2012 census which estimated 21 million illegal aliens of voting age, a number which is comically low. Thats how they came up with 800k(which i readily concede is not proof of voter fraud).

My reasonings that the 800k number is very low are as follows:
1. much larger population of illegals, probably 2.5 to 3 times as many (800k x 2.5= 2 million, 800k x3= 2.4 million)
2. even on an anonymous survey, people are still less likely to confess to a crime (illegal voting) so 800k bumps up exponentially there
3. Obama and others outright encouraging illegal voters to vote. This was pretty widespread in this election cycle, so you have to bump up the % again.
4. The states Clinton won the largest margins were no ID states.

Now you have to add in the voter fraud from citizens and that number of illegal votes creeps up again. Having states were no ID is necessary to vote is a national embarrassment. As I said before, none of that study is proof of illegals voting. I think you have to be drinking a lot of the koolaid to sit and think that illegals arent voting in pretty large numbers. Because there is no requirement to show an ID in some states and an intense opposition to even using an ID there, I doubt any definitive proof can even be found. The best chance would be a very expensive comparison of vote results from CA, IL, MA, NY and other states were ID's are unnecessary vs the actual registered voters. None of those states would allow that to happen before huge legal battles were to take place, so I doubt we'll ever see it.
  • -1

#36 RozzaD

RozzaD

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 5,485 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 05:28 PM

So pathetic seeing all the retards rioting and protesting and a lot of them can't even tell you why they are protesting. People still crying about Trump being president is pathetic as well... Give the man a chance and get on with your useless lives.


  • 0

CAGECARTEL18_1.png

 

Tournaments hosted: World Dominance 2013GONY 1GONY 2GONY 3, UFC Camp league 2016 + 2017.

 

 


#37 Face Kicker

Face Kicker

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 10,488 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 09:49 PM

the meaningful numbers are speculation, not solid evidence.  i'm not arguing that voter fraud is a total fabrication, i'm mainly saying to the extent it occurs is inconsequential.  the effects of voter suppression and gerrymandering on elections are FAR greater than any voter fraud, and without question tip many elections in favor of republicans.


  • 2

I've got a gun for a mouth, and a bullet with your name on it.


#38 JLP

JLP

    Red Belt

  • Developer
  • 6,133 posts

Posted 28 January 2017 - 11:01 PM

There can be no evidence because the really liberal states allowing votes with no ID. Its easy to deny something that is institutionally encouraged, even if it's a criminal act, if you keep absolutely no evidence and demand no proof of citizenship to vote. It's impossible to grasp the magnitude of vote fraud when the state government in question is also complicit and outright encourages it.
If by "voter suppression " you mean forcing a person to prove they have a legal right to vote, the I'm all for voter suppression. Fuck, we need a lot more of it. I agree that gerrymandering is bullshit. But it goes both ways and can't be accomplis without out the tacit support of the other party.
  • 0

#39

  • Guests

Posted 28 January 2017 - 11:19 PM

Jesus you still talk about that?
  • 0

#40 Face Kicker

Face Kicker

    Red Belt

  • Manager
  • 10,488 posts

Posted 29 January 2017 - 08:07 PM

There can be no evidence because the really liberal states allowing votes with no ID. Its easy to deny something that is institutionally encouraged, even if it's a criminal act, if you keep absolutely no evidence and demand no proof of citizenship to vote. It's impossible to grasp the magnitude of vote fraud when the state government in question is also complicit and outright encourages it.
If by "voter suppression " you mean forcing a person to prove they have a legal right to vote, the I'm all for voter suppression. Fuck, we need a lot more of it. I agree that gerrymandering is bullshit. But it goes both ways and can't be accomplis without out the tacit support of the other party.

 

no, by "voter suppression" i mean things like reducing the number of available voting stations, limiting early voting, shortening voting hours, etc.  i support requiring at least some form of photo identification to vote.

 

did you see how long the voting lines were in many democratic-leaning areas?  and they do things like having polls only open during regular work hours, and in inconvenient places, where republicans know it will have a greater effect on low income (and democratic-leaning) voters.

 

the voter turnout in this country, comparative to the rest of the world, is a joke, and a large part of that can easily be attributed to voter suppression tactics used (almost exclusively) by the republican party. 


  • 1

I've got a gun for a mouth, and a bullet with your name on it.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Steel Penn

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users