Presidential election, 2016

[David Horn]

(12-04-2016, 11:26 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(12-04-2016, 10:14 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(12-03-2016, 11:36 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(12-03-2016, 05:06 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

The Electoral College isn’t just undemocratic, as watching the second-place candidate in the popular vote become president-elect has reminded us. It’s also racially biased. Not just in the historical sense that it was founded on slavery, but concretely in the present day, as the graph above shows. Lara Merling and Dean Baker lay it out: The Electoral College, like the Senate, is biased toward small states. And guess what?

The states that are overrepresented in the Electoral College also happen to be less diverse than the country as a whole. Wyoming is 84 percent white, North Dakota is 86 percent white, and Rhode Island is 74 percent white, while in California only 38 percent of the population is white, in Florida 55 percent, and in Texas 43 percent. [...]

African American votes on average have a weight that is 95 percent as much as white votes, Hispanic votes are on average 91 percent, and Asian American votes, 93 percent as much of a white vote. In the Electoral College, white votes matter more.

And that’s one more reason for Republicans to defend the Electoral College.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/11/25...hite-power

We understand that the American system that's in place does not favor the blues politically. We understand that blues want to remove the American system that is in place. We understand it and understand why blues want do it and have a fairly good grasp of what types of systems they'd be replacing it with and so on. Why not, you ask... What's wrong, you ask...The answers are pretty simple once you understand that we understand and are aware of your sides political motives and intents relevant to the future of America.

The problem is that they don't understand it themselves.  Most of them believe their own side's propaganda, rather than understanding it's about dictatorship of the urban majority over the hinterlands, all in the cause of the blue urban elites.

I know. What's up with that? Are they clueless or do they actually believe that we can't read and have no comprehension what so ever? BTW, most of them here are heavy into the propaganda. Lots of money in delivering propaganda.

So you both deny the data that clearly shows that the less urban and consequently more white get more power than they deserve ... and you believe this is fair?  It's getting harder to convince the urban many that granting excessive political power to their poorer rural cousins is acceptable.