Presidential Elections

[peppy]

No, it is certainly a major part of it...

The Framers of our Constitution invented a system that would establish a democracy while protecting minority rights. They created the Electoral College to protect the residents of the smaller states, and they rejected government by simple majority because plebiscites historically have been the tool of dictatorships, not democracy.
To win the presidency, the candidate must receive a majority of the electoral votes. To determine how many electoral votes a state has, just take the number of each state?s U.S. Representatives and add two (which represents the number of Senators for each state). Even the residents of the smallest states (or the District of Columbia) have a minimum of three electoral votes.

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/how-electoral-college-works-why-it-works-well

That's certainly one of the more naive opinions on the Electoral College that I have come across. Not too surprised as the context is Bush v. Gore.

In its inception the US had a rather elitist government and electors were needed since the will of the people could not always be trusted. It was intended to result in no winner by majority so that it would befall on congress (the elitists that knew better than the masses) to pick the next president. Winner-take-all assignments actually were done in part to generate an outcome were one candidate would get the majority of votes, thus avoid this particular scenario.

In our current split, swing states matter because there is some division in the larger states. You can certainly come up with a possible scenario were small states become inconsequential if enough larger states swing only one way.

The electoral college only benefits smaller states slightly by effectively weighing their votes over those in more populated states. If enough  large states swing one way, this becomes moot.

Now don't even get started on third party candidates as they have zero changes under this system.

The guy who wrote that "naive" opinion has some heavy duty credentials...I'll take his word for it.

Ronald D. Rotunda is the Doy & Dee Henley Chair and Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence, at Chapman University, the Dale E. Fowler School of Law. He joined the faculty in 2008. Before that, he was University Professor and Professor of Law at George Mason University School of Law.  From 2002 to 2006, he was the George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law. Before that, he was the Albert E. Jenner, Jr. Professor of Law, at the University of Illinois.  He is a magna cum laude graduate of both Harvard College and  Harvard Law School, where he was a member of Harvard Law Review. He joined the University of Illinois faculty in 1974 after clerking for Judge Walter R. Mansfield of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, practicing law in Washington, D.C., and serving as assistant majority counsel for the Senate Watergate Committee. He has co-authored the most widely used course book on legal ethics, Problems and Materials on Professional Responsibility (F

LOL. The guy wrote a paid opinion piece for a right-wing think tank to defend the reasoning behind the victory of the right-wing candidate by a razor thin margin in electoral votes and a loss in the popular vote. I'm disappointed at your blind trust in an opinion based solely on the authors credentials. I thought you'd at least have an opinion of your own.

Madison and Hamilton would be rolling around in their grave. The reason for the Electoral College was nothing more than the distrust of a direct democracy - the so-called "tyranny of the majority". It was intended as a layer of checks so that congress has a last say on who becomes president regardless of the will of the people. Totally elitist in its inception (just read Hamilton's take on congress and its role in government).

In practice and in this day and age, the Electoral College is nothing more than a formality and doesn't go beyond assigning the allotted votes to the winning candidate in each state.

 

[morekaos]

If i have a headache and the neurosurgeon from the mayo clinic with years of experience and education tells me I have a brain tumor, I'm inclined to go with him rather than enroll in medical school and diagnose myself in seven years.  His opinion supported by many others makes sense. I 'm inclined to agree.

 

[peppy]

If i have a headache and the neurosurgeon from the mayo clinic with years of experience and education tells me I have a brain tumor, I'm inclined to go with him rather than enroll in medical school and diagnose myself in seven years.  His opinion supported by many others makes sense. I 'm inclined to agree.

LOL. That's an interesting comparison. It's more like the neurosurgeon telling you that your foot is your head and you believing him because of his credentials. 

 

[morekaos]

Just need to use a little common sense and not over complicate things.

 

[morekaos]

What's your thoughts on Trump's statement during the debate: "We have become a third world country."

Do you think LAX airport is a third world country airport?

LAX representing..Proven right again...

The 10 worst airports in the US

President Trump wants to upgrade the nation's infrastructure, and much of that desire comes from his hatred of the nation's airports.

Trump in a presidential debate compared the nation's airports to what he would expect to find in a "third-world country." As a frequent flyer on his own personal jet, the subject of airports is something very close to the president's heart.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-10-worst-airports-in-the-us/article/2618338

 

[irvinehomeowner]

Trump is the smartest man in the world!!!

 

[eyephone]

The airport in Hawaii is not one of the biggest airport in the US. But I think that airport needs an upgrade.

What's your thoughts on Trump's statement during the debate: "We have become a third world country."

Do you think LAX airport is a third world country airport?

LAX representing..Proven right again...

The 10 worst airports in the US

President Trump wants to upgrade the nation's infrastructure, and much of that desire comes from his hatred of the nation's airports.

Trump in a presidential debate compared the nation's airports to what he would expect to find in a "third-world country." As a frequent flyer on his own personal jet, the subject of airports is something very close to the president's heart.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-10-worst-airports-in-the-us/article/2618338

 

[morekaos]

Trump is the smartest man in the world!!!

Or he simply states the politically incorrect obvious, or both.

 

[Perspective]

Not objecting to a massive US airport infrastructure plan, but this predominately benefits a certain demographic. Folks who frequently use airports, and therefore are most affected and benefit, are not working class whites in the Rust Belt and South.

 

[Liar Loan]

Not objecting to a massive US airport infrastructure plan, but this predominately benefits a certain demographic. Folks who frequently use airports, and therefore are most affected and benefit, are not working class whites in the Rust Belt and South.

Really?  Who will be doing the construction then?  Who predominantly works at airports?  Who predominantly works for airlines?

 

[Perspective]

Not objecting to a massive US airport infrastructure plan, but this predominately benefits a certain demographic. Folks who frequently use airports, and therefore are most affected and benefit, are not working class whites in the Rust Belt and South.

Really?  Who will be doing the construction then?  Who predominantly works at airports?  Who predominantly works for airlines?

Let's see a full cost-benefit analysis. Certain folks in the construction industry would benefit, temporarily. I'm not sure employment at airports/airlines would necessarily increase, but assuming a nominal increase is reasonable.

Folks who travel regularly would seem to benefit most. No biggie, but I think that it's important to identify these issues with these types of proposals.

 

[eyephone]

"President Trump's oldest son released emails Tuesday showing he knew the damaging information he was seeking about Hillary Clinton was being peddled by the highest levels of the Russian government.

"Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee said Monday his panel "absolutely'' wants to speak with the president's son about the Veselnitskaya meeting.

"This was the first time the public has seen direct evidence that Trump campaign officials reached out... to agents of a foreign government to try to get damaging information on Hillary Clinton,'' said Warner, whose panel is investigating possible collusion between Trump associates and Russia. "
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...omise-sensitive-information-russia/467894001/

 

[morekaos]

Another big fat nothingburger. The markets tanked 100 points then digested the BS and rallied..tooo funny.  Heard CNN called Jr. for a comment before they released the chain, he told them hold on a minute and he'll give them a comment, then released them himself, undercutting their scoop.... they got played again!!!

 

[peppy]

Another big fat nothingburger. The markets tanked 100 points then digested the BS and rallied..tooo funny.  Heard CNN called Jr. for a comment before they released the chain, he told them hold on a minute and he'll give them a comment, then released them himself, undercutting their scoop.... they got played again!!!

NYT, not CNN.

 

[morekaos]

Whats the difference?

 

[peppy]

Whats the difference?

It was actually a story by an independent journalist that was going to published by the NYT. There's a lot of animosity from the alt-right against him and most likely the release was done to spite him personally, rather than the news outlet he published in.

 

[morekaos]

Too funny

The New York Times had already reviewed copies of the emails and asked Trump Jr. to comment when he decided to tweet out pictures of the email exchange.
Trump Jr.'s tweets came out, seemingly out of nowhere, at 11 a.m. ET on Tuesday.
By then, the Times was already on the verge of publishing. The newsroom already had a full story ready to go, so it hit publish a few minutes later. A news alert sent by the paper came out at 11:10 a.m.
Staffers at the Times confirmed that they believe Trump Jr.'s release was triggered by their reporting.
"@DonaldJTrumpJr posted these emails after being informed that The New York Times was doing a story on them," deputy managing editor Clifford Levy tweeted.
A newsroom source declined to say when exactly the story came together.
But "we were preparing to publish" when Trump Jr. tweeted, the source said. "Don Jr. asked for more time when we contacted him" for comment, "and then pre-empted us."

http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/11/media/new-york-times-donald-trump-jr-emails/index.html

 

[peppy]

Too funny

The New York Times had already reviewed copies of the emails and asked Trump Jr. to comment when he decided to tweet out pictures of the email exchange.
Trump Jr.'s tweets came out, seemingly out of nowhere, at 11 a.m. ET on Tuesday.
By then, the Times was already on the verge of publishing. The newsroom already had a full story ready to go, so it hit publish a few minutes later. A news alert sent by the paper came out at 11:10 a.m.
Staffers at the Times confirmed that they believe Trump Jr.'s release was triggered by their reporting.
"@DonaldJTrumpJr posted these emails after being informed that The New York Times was doing a story on them," deputy managing editor Clifford Levy tweeted.
A newsroom source declined to say when exactly the story came together.
But "we were preparing to publish" when Trump Jr. tweeted, the source said. "Don Jr. asked for more time when we contacted him" for comment, "and then pre-empted us."

http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/11/media/new-york-times-donald-trump-jr-emails/index.html

LOL. And he incriminated Jared and Manaford as being complicit (while they were both denying their participation in the past as well as in federal disclosures). I hear the faint sound of their lawyers crying.

 

[jmoney74]

Too funny

The New York Times had already reviewed copies of the emails and asked Trump Jr. to comment when he decided to tweet out pictures of the email exchange.
Trump Jr.'s tweets came out, seemingly out of nowhere, at 11 a.m. ET on Tuesday.
By then, the Times was already on the verge of publishing. The newsroom already had a full story ready to go, so it hit publish a few minutes later. A news alert sent by the paper came out at 11:10 a.m.
Staffers at the Times confirmed that they believe Trump Jr.'s release was triggered by their reporting.
"@DonaldJTrumpJr posted these emails after being informed that The New York Times was doing a story on them," deputy managing editor Clifford Levy tweeted.
A newsroom source declined to say when exactly the story came together.
But "we were preparing to publish" when Trump Jr. tweeted, the source said. "Don Jr. asked for more time when we contacted him" for comment, "and then pre-empted us."

http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/11/media/new-york-times-donald-trump-jr-emails/index.html

This is hilarious

 

[morekaos]

No crime here to incriminate anyone ...mark my words, this will go the way of Pee-Gate.