Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	So now Colorado's electoral college votes go to...
Date:	3/18/2019 1:15:42 PM

Whoever NY and CA pick.  Not sure it will stand up to court challenge but either way, there is no longer any reason to vote for POTUS in Colorado because it will no longer matter.  Only the left can come up with this kind of stupidity.

Name:	johndoe -	Reply
Subject:	So now Colorado's electoral college votes go to...
Date:	3/18/2019 5:07:01 PM

Only an ignorant person could make such a claim. In the present system, more than half the votes nationwide don't count. That's how a candidate who loses by 3 million votes can become POTUS. Only a handful of slave-owning oligarchs could come up with such a system, and only anti-democratic types will defend it. Unless your guy loses, then it's evil.

Under the popular-vote based system passed by Colorado and a number of other states - assuming enough additional states pass it - every vote will count equally. One man, one vote.

FYI, there are other ways to address the issue. One is to eliminate winner-take-all and allocate electors proportionately to the number of votes each candidate gets. Another is to implement popular vote nationwide, which is what the National Popular Vote bill guarantees.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	DOE-KRAP
Date:	3/18/2019 6:58:18 PM

Tell us.....should illegal alien votes be counted in any election  in USA?  If so, on what legal grounds?

Name:	lucky67 -	Reply
Subject:	So now Colorado's electoral college votes go to...
Date:	3/18/2019 7:01:41 PM

evidently we have another raging , angry, Trump hateing  demo on the Forum--John Doe--OR GF or ARCH have changed their monniker or created an new one

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	No MM, stop with the fake news, tell the truth
Date:	3/18/2019 7:57:27 PM (updated 3/18/2019 7:58:34 PM)

CO along with several other states have passed a law which simply says their state's members of the electoral college will cast their votes for whichever candidate won the largest number of actual votes cast!  CO will support the choice of the people...simple as that.  Obviously you oppose the ''will of the people'' unless the people happen to agree with you!

Name:	johndoe -	Reply
Subject:	DOE-KRAP
Date:	3/18/2019 8:27:31 PM

Dang, there are some serious delusions being spread around here.

FYI, It is not legal for non-citizens to vote in US elections, under any circumstances, in any state, nor is there the slightest evidence that this has ever happened in significant numbers. OTOH, there are actual cases of election fraud by Republican candidates for office, including the states of North Carolina and Georgia.

Tell me, are you in favor of denying the right to vote to US citizens simply because you believe it is likely they will vote against you? That is the present Repugnican/MAGAt position.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	So now Colorado's electoral college votes go to...
Date:	3/19/2019 8:24:10 AM

Yep....and he is on ignore along with Archibald.  Life is too short to read that drivel although I do sometimes look before I log in and they disappear.  Never much worth reading but I do occasionally respond when they post something that makes sense.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	No MM, stop with the fake news, tell the truth
Date:	3/19/2019 8:50:14 AM

Simple question - would you be backing the same if Trump won the "popular vote"  for some reason I think you would not and would be harping on something else(well everything else)

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	No MM, stop with the fake news, tell the truth
Date:	3/19/2019 8:52:59 AM

So that is the reason you guys want to give illegals and 16 year olds the right to vote.  A pure numbers game for you people, if you can't win by playing by the rules, change the rules.  You associate with a now pathetic party led by individuals like Bernie and AOC, who feel that their vision for America is equivalent to that espoused by Jefferson, Madison et al and should be recognized as such.    What pure gall.  

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	I logged out so I could see the stupidity
Date:	3/19/2019 8:57:47 AM

Yep, I am right to keep them on ignore.  Answer me this left wing nuts.  If a majority of the voters in one of these states voted for candidate A and Candidate B won the popular vote nationwide does it seem right to you that the voters in the state no longer count and the candidate they preferred doesn't get their electoral college votes?  And this cuts both ways.  I can assure you the howls will be many if Trump wins the popular vote in 2020 and captures the Colorado electoral college votes.  What will be interesting is how it impacts campaigns and voting trends, if at all. 

On tha national popular vote front, there is a process to do that.  Amend the Constitution.  We are not a democracy, we are a representative Republic and there is a reason for the electoral college.  Every state has a say in who is President, not just the high population areas on the coasts.  You can reasonably argue that this isn't the best way to go about this and if there is enough support just amend the Constitution.  But as you know, I am a Federalist and if a state wants to disenfranchise their voters then have at it. Believe me, for most of them that is their standard operating procedure.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	YES!
Date:	3/19/2019 9:19:07 AM (updated 3/19/2019 9:46:07 AM)

The electoral college may be part of the constitution but it is as archaic and wrong as was the part of the constitution that oroginally counted slaves as 3/5ths a person for purposes of enumeration.  Think about this, in the entire spectrum of thousands of federal and state elective offices, the President and vice president are the only 2 whose election is not directly determined by a vote of the people!  Maybe, you are one of those who wants to go back to the ''intent''.  Perhaps you would prefer to go back to the first election where George Washington was ''elected'' by the electoral college without benefit of a national popular election at all?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Humm, did anybody notice
Date:	3/19/2019 9:21:50 AM

that in MM's blathering he does not contridict my correction of his post?

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	CRD, eschew obfuscation
Date:	3/19/2019 9:23:17 AM (updated 3/19/2019 9:26:27 AM)

and stick to the topic...should the man or woman who gets the most votes nationwide be constitunally declared the winner of the election?

We can discuss voter supression in another string.

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	CRD, eschew obfuscation
Date:	3/19/2019 9:51:18 AM

nope, plurality statewide is enough.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	YES!
Date:	3/19/2019 11:12:06 AM

So had Hillary won the electoral vote and Trump the popular vote you would still be beating that drum?

Bull schiff.  You are a liar and a bad one at that.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	CRD, eschew obfuscation
Date:	3/19/2019 11:13:57 AM

Nope, founders of this country were much smarter then you.  It keeps large population centers from having too much control.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	CRD, eschew obfuscation
Date:	3/19/2019 11:15:59 AM

Just think "middle of the road" Archie is watching his party march further and further left and embraces it, Archie wants the US to become just another socialist failed schiff hole.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	CRD, is not "whoever gets the most votes"
Date:	3/19/2019 11:36:15 AM (updated 3/19/2019 11:38:57 AM)

just a common man way of saying "plurality"? Whoever gets a "plurality" nationwide should win...as in Hillary 2016!

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Yep
Date:	3/19/2019 11:42:13 AM (updated 3/19/2019 11:53:03 AM)

They were a lot smarter than me and they were a lot smarter than you Phil.  That doesn't mean they were 100% right.  The 3/5ths count of slaves as an example.

The 3/5ths rule was a compromise to keep the population centers of the north from having too much representatation in Congress.  Eventually it was changed.  Today the electoral college gives too much power to the very small states.  WY with 650,000 people gets 3 votes while CA with 62 times the population gets only 19 times as many votes.  Texas with 46 times the population gets only 14 times the vote.  Even AL gets screwed!

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	I think you are confused as usual
Date:	3/19/2019 11:49:27 AM

What they decided was to allow non Colorado voters to decide where their electoral college votes go.  We are a Republic, not a Democracy.  Your govt school failed you Archie. This is all about being short sighted which is the hallmark of the left (i.e., see the use of the nuclear option on judges as the most recent example that has come back to haunt them).

I personally believe that the electoral college votes of a state should go to the candidate that the state chose, not by how other states vote, including states that always go to the Democrats.  But if Trump wins Colorado's electoral college votes I can assure you they will change that law ASAP and there will be lawsuits to prevent them from happening and all the other chaos.  Besides, it will only matter for purple states that go back and forth.  But it will definitely motivate the GOP candidate to drive for winning the national vote as they will get electoral college votes from states which they never could before and it would drive the left batsh!t crazy.  All the states that have signed onto disenfranchising their voters ( (CA, CO, CT, DC, HI, IL, MA, MD, NJ, NY, RI, VT, WA) are not exactly bastions of GOP success.  So until purple states sign onto this it will be for naught.  

I will really enjoy the howling when Trump (or some future GOP candidate) changes  strategy to win the popular vote and he/she wins the electoral college with the votes from these 11 states.  Unintended consequences.......

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	Yep, eschew obfuscation
Date:	3/19/2019 11:49:42 AM

Wow - run to the racist card.  The last ditch effort of a demoncrat.

Please stay on topic.

Name:	au67 -	Reply
Subject:	So now Colorado's electoral college votes go to...
Date:	3/19/2019 11:52:17 AM

Since I can stay logged in on only one of my three devices,  I try to only pull up the "Off-Topic Forum" on the logged in device.  Not seeing the posts of those I choose to ignore adheres to one of my aims in life...avoiding stupid people.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	I think you are confused as usual
Date:	3/19/2019 11:54:58 AM

Not to mention we would be able to hear Archibald wails over here in Alabama when it backfired and support someone other then Hillary or a demonrat.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Explain yourself
Date:	3/19/2019 11:59:00 AM

how has "race" been brought into it?  The old 3/5 rule is a fact that was once constitutional but is no more.  Pointing that out is not a racial remark but a statement of historical fact .  You are one of the folks that loves to play the race card!

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	Explain yourself
Date:	3/19/2019 12:28:10 PM (updated 3/19/2019 1:10:01 PM)

My statement is self explanatory.

"The 3/5ths rule was a compromise to keep the population centers of the north from having too much representatation in Congress."

so by counting southern slaves as less then a person the south got MORE representation?

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	CRD, is not "whoever gets the most votes"
Date:	3/19/2019 1:15:42 PM

"Also, a successful candidate for the office of president would have to have the distinguished qualities to appeal to electors from many states, not just one or a few states:

Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States."

 

Archie, argue with Alexander Hamilton.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	So now Colorado's electoral college votes go to...
Date:	3/19/2019 1:56:44 PM

I have to look every once in a while to confirm my decision.  They literally have so little of value to say that slogging through the idiocy is just not worth the random acts of lucidity......and they are not only random but rare. 

Funny how when liberals lose they want to change the rules of the game.  It's already bad enough the control a few states have over the election process but if we went to a popular vote candidates would only visit probably 15 to 20 states max and would ignore all the rest.  The divide between the rural and urban population would be even greater today.  Besides, we already have one bracj devoted to that and it's called the House of Representatives.  I can assure you there would not be this whining if Hillary had won the electoral college and lost the popular vote.  We are a Republic and not a Democracy, thank goodness.  As Ben Franklin said, "A republic, if you can keep it."  He knew all too well the inclination of the mob and human nature.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	PHIL some people talk in circles
Date:	3/20/2019 12:40:20 PM

You talk in a spiral!

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	YES again Phil
Date:	3/20/2019 12:45:03 PM

Just because I don't like the outcome does not make what is right any less right.  There is always 2020!

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	CRD do you honestly
Date:	3/20/2019 12:54:28 PM

Think that Jefferson, or Madison, or Adams, or Hamilton, or Lincoln would support Trump?  How about Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower or Ronald Reagan?  Hell, do you even think Richard Nixon would vote for Trump?. It's become very clear the Bush family  don't!  I agree with Lindsey Graham from the time before he sold his soul for a mess of pottage..."my party has gone bat s**t crazy!"

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	YES again Phil
Date:	3/20/2019 1:19:27 PM

So if DJT won the popular vote and Hillary the EC you would say Hillary was not really President and DJT should be president?

You Lie

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	PHIL some people talk in circles
Date:	3/20/2019 1:20:23 PM

The only spiral is your facts as it spiraled in to crash and burn.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	CRD do you honestly
Date:	3/20/2019 1:23:24 PM

I think many would vote for DJT over Hillary - The fact that you now want to hold Bush's opinion up on high after blaming him for the worlds problems during Oblamer shows how weak your argument is.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	OK Phil
Date:	3/21/2019 11:35:07 AM

put up or shut up....point off any erroneous "facts" I have posted!

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	YEP!
Date:	3/21/2019 11:37:39 AM (updated 3/21/2019 11:44:51 AM)

Not saying I would like it, but the choice of the people should have the position.  If it is right for every other Federal and state elective office why, other than for a constitutional paragraph, should it not be the same for the top 2 offices.  The constitution has been changed by amendment many times.  It is time to do it again or to accept the CO law in each state which does not even require a constitutional amendment!

BTW:  I understand Dear Leader has advocated for making Daylight Savings Time apply for all the years...finally the idiot has come up with something that makes sense!

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Who asked you Phil
Date:	3/21/2019 1:01:10 PM (updated 3/21/2019 1:04:15 PM)

But since you decided to butt in, I think anybody that thinks any of the past presidents and leaders specifically mentioned would be a Trump supporter is smokin some bad stuff (highly likely in your case)!

Hey Phil, I voted for W in 2004 and now consider it a mistake.  The further he got into his 2nd term the more he was directed down the primrose path to disaster by the likes of John Bolton, Dick Cheney and other neocons.  Now since W preceded Obama how does it not make sense to give him at least some of the blame for the problems Obama faced...the financial melt down for example?

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	YEP!
Date:	3/21/2019 1:44:07 PM

Because of said constitutional paragraph to keep from having mob rule by one party.  Sadly, I think the way you post from the minority position on the site makes the point.  Just imagine if this site as a replacement for the "national popular vote" and if by popular opinion we could just have you evicted from the site.  It keeps the majority in check.

I would think you would be for checks and balances - but apparently you are just a majority/mob rule kind of guy - anytime you can get more the 50% then so be it.  

Personally I think you are full of schiff that you would be complaining about the EC if  Hillary won the EC and DJT won the popular vote.  You are proving to all that you are not as honest as you claim.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	Who asked you Phil
Date:	3/21/2019 1:55:50 PM (updated 3/21/2019 1:58:53 PM)

Well since you posted on an open forum anyone can post, or are you trying to silence me?    If you only want one persons opinion ther eis a way to email just that person and not have it posted for the everyone to see and respond.  So in the future if we see you respond to something that is directed to any one person, we should ask you "Who asked you"  I have a feeling that your response will not be woops I should not have posted as it did not concern me.

But since you directed this one back at me - Yes W deserves some blame, as does Fanny and Freddie, many republicans and demonrats who helped to create the situation. As does Clinton for helping to create the situation for the housing bubble crisis with mortages to low income people who could not pay them.

And your God Oblamer rode that "blame W" for 8 years and took no resposibility for anything.  It was all inherited, he contributed nothing - which I guess makes sense with his famous quote "You did not build that"

Keep posting, I love a good laugh.

Name:	MAJ USA RET -	Reply
Subject:	Democracy - Mob Rule
Date:	3/22/2019 4:10:10 PM

“Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.”

                                                            - attributed to Benjamin Franklin

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	Democracy - Mob Rule
Date:	3/22/2019 5:29:57 PM

Have heard that one many times before - It is a good thing if you are one of the wolves... not so much for the sheep.