fair enough. for arguments ( or for lack of) sake, i can accept this as well you may have this view, i still hold onto mine. . the green boy peckers vs bears analogy that made me chuckle. if i was still a drinker id cast my vote THEN partake of a good drink and not worry about the results. i feel personally whichever side won, if i did nothing to affect the end result, i couldnt gripe at the winner or loser. i at least had a miniscule percentage of input on it.
Aaron

Quote from: Watcher on December 29, 2016, 07:24:42 PM
I wasn't trying to be specific or anything.
Of course those few cities aren't literally half the population.  Just exaggerating, a lot, but the point remains.

And I don't think being represented "as they are" is necessarily a good thing.
This is going to be ridiculous but it's the only really good way I can think to make my point.
...
I know that's incredibly remedial, I'm FAR from an expert in these things.  You'll let me know if I came close?

I think I get what you're trying to say, although the situation in your example seems better suited as an argument for limitation of federal power and/or representative democracy instead of direct democracy, rather than an argument for the EC. Feel free to correct me if I've misunderstood you, but I took your point as "what's objectively best for a community may not necessarily be the same as what the majority believes is best." And I get that, sure. I just disagree with the way the EC addresses that concern because, as you said, deliberately introducing inequality in voting power is unfair in and of itself. Like I said before, I don't really want to get into a debate about the EC here as the OP asked for no political debates. I'm always up for a healthy discussion though if you want to start another thread or PM me lol.

As for my opinion on the whole "if you did/didn't vote, you have no right to complain" thing, I think everyone has the "right" to complain, but usually I would be more inclined to listen to the complaints of someone who at least participated in the only way to enact any kind of change. This year is a little bit different though since both candidates were so disliked overall. So while I don't necessarily agree with those who didn't vote, I at very least get where they're coming from this time around. In any case, I'm not really one to talk down on people who didn't vote. You have every right to abstain from an election. The constitution is cool like that.

Also I think its important to say: I don't think anyone is arguing that you literally lose your right to complain, as that would be unconstitutional no doubt. I think the mentality is just that if you are unhappy with the results of the election, you should have voted to at least try to make some kind of difference.

Kinda what I meant tbh. As far as ones gripe having a bit more weight if a vote in any direction were cast. I've run into a few of the don't blame me folks, yet several hadn't voted in 8+ years. Imho last few presidential elections were a bit of a circus. The two main contenders this time scared me almost as much as Vladimir putin. I love it when people are quite certain that this candidate will do this or that. Yet barring executive power or whatever its called, lawmaking resides in the house. Anyhow it is what it is, I guess we've got who we've got for at least 4 years, I guess we sit back with a guarded optimism and hope for the best Eh?
Aaron

Truth.

People getting bent up over politics and "their" candidate?! .. When the government machine will continue to run regardless of which stooge is in the hotseat? .. Bloody ridiculous!

Society has been trained to focus on "we won" thru sports, school results, overseas trading & conflicts plus a whole heap of "awards for being there regardless" ... Not winning is now a insult and personal affront to many!

Plus it keeps us focussed on popular "white noise" issues and the power blocs can keep doing as they wish almost unnoticed! Social media does not help this!

Sent from my LG-K500 using Tapatalk

Quote from: Janx101 on January 01, 2017, 12:13:34 AM
... plus a whole heap of "awards for being there regardless" ... Not winning is now a insult and personal affront to many!

This really is a bigger issue than most would perceive.

I hate that I'm lumped in with "millennials." I hate the thought that a bunch of "not my president", entitled, safe-space,  weak, gutless, "pussified" children will be the people "in charge" of this country in just a couple of short decades...
It scares me possibly more than it should, but it's a real problem.

Quote from: Watcher on January 01, 2017, 11:21:06 AM

Quote from: Janx101 on January 01, 2017, 12:13:34 AM
... plus a whole heap of "awards for being there regardless" ... Not winning is now a insult and personal affront to many!

This really is a bigger issue than most would perceive.

I hate that I'm lumped in with "millennials." I hate the thought that a bunch of "not my president", entitled, safe-space,  weak, gutless, "pussified" children will be the people "in charge" of this country in just a couple of short decades...
It scares me possibly more than it should, but it's a real problem.

People said the same thing about the generation that's in power now.

Well, I'd say one of the biggest problems with the system we have in place is the media's involvement. I understand free press and freedom of speech and all of that, but honestly.... It's gotten to the point where the media plays a pivotal role in the elections, and we all know how biased the media can be. I know that media and news is a necessary evil, but they shouldn't be allowed to "spin" things and make one candidate look good versus the others or vice versa.

Quote from: Kijona on January 10, 2017, 05:34:13 AM
Well, I'd say one of the biggest problems with the system we have in place is the media's involvement. I understand free press and freedom of speech and all of that, but honestly.... It's gotten to the point where the media plays a pivotal role in the elections, and we all know how biased the media can be. I know that media and news is a necessary evil, but they shouldn't be allowed to "spin" things and make one candidate look good versus the others or vice versa.

While I agree that the media should strive to be objective, trying to police what the media says is a very slippery slope. Who gets to decide what's spin and what isn't?

Quote from: Kijona on January 10, 2017, 05:34:13 AM
Well, I'd say one of the biggest problems with the system we have in place is the media's involvement. I understand free press and freedom of speech and all of that, but honestly.... It's gotten to the point where the media plays a pivotal role in the elections, and we all know how biased the media can be. I know that media and news is a necessary evil, but they shouldn't be allowed to "spin" things and make one candidate look good versus the others or vice versa.

Ain't this the truth. But, it's our own fault for watching. If we could just stop watching and listening to they garbage they're selling it would end. Same thing with our leaders. It's always been my view that if even a portion of the voting public where to vote for their 1st choice candidate they might loose that election but it would send a message to the "machine" that they don't have control. Imagine what they would do in subsequent elections if they where not sure they had voters it their bag before the election (elections are usually won by narrow margins). Surely they would not be willing to spend 100's of millions of dollars to get elected. It would be an end to the 2 party system in one election cycle.

But sadly no, most will vote for the lesser of 2 evils to avoid being ridiculed and told they are throwing their vote away. I cannot remember an election where we didn't have a single candidate that was my, or anyone I know, 1st choice. It's always 2 jokers we get conned into voting for.

I'm pledging to "waste" my vote in the next election (in 4 years) unless of course Turmp really turns things around. I pledge not to fall victim to the another Hollywood circus politics election. Don't let the bought and paid for media pit us against each other.

Quote from: qcbaker on January 10, 2017, 06:31:08 AM

Quote from: Kijona on January 10, 2017, 05:34:13 AM
Well, I'd say one of the biggest problems with the system we have in place is the media's involvement. I understand free press and freedom of speech and all of that, but honestly.... It's gotten to the point where the media plays a pivotal role in the elections, and we all know how biased the media can be. I know that media and news is a necessary evil, but they shouldn't be allowed to "spin" things and make one candidate look good versus the others or vice versa.

While I agree that the media should strive to be objective, trying to police what the media says is a very slippery slope. Who gets to decide what's spin and what isn't?

while he was alive, Hussein in Iraq knew what was going on by watching CNN. Back during ww2, when we/allies invaded Normandy, we had the Nazis thinking we were hitting further away than what we did. If we alter or censor the media, we are no better than who we despise, back during the Clinton time in wash., abc news was "All Bill Clinton" NBC was nothing but Clinton and CBS was Clinton broadcasting service. And sure fox was biased in the other direction. Most of the time when I had net running id get my news overseas. I.e.. Bbc etc. Less of an apparent bias. Someone made a comment on talk radio once, seems one side gets 8 years, then the other. Etc. In getting older now and my patience is wearing thin. Politicians need to remember, they produce NOTHING. Our taxes pay them. The apparent demise of the AcA HAS ME AT WITS END. Sometimes I think the party system needs to be done away with. Each person runs on their own merits, and votes accordingly. Also think congress should have term limits like executive branch and others do too. Anyhow ill stop before I get wound up.
Aaron

Quote from: yamahonkawazuki on January 10, 2017, 10:33:17 AM
...
Sometimes I think the party system needs to be done away with. Each person runs on their own merits, and votes accordingly. Also think congress should have term limits like executive branch and others do too. Anyhow ill stop before I get wound up.
Aaron

Technically political parties aren't an official part of our political process. But they might as well be with how ingrained into people's minds they are. Like I've said before, I agree that the 2 party system is detrimental to political discourse, but for that to change you have to change the mechanics of the voting systems we use, and that's pretty hard to do. The people in charge of changing the system were put in place by the current system, so they have very little incentive to try to change it. Why would they want to make it harder for themselves to get re-elected?

As for term limits, they present a weird problem. With term limits, you avoid career politicians and (in theory) reduce corruption which is good. But, then you're left with relatively inexperienced politicians who are less familiar with the processes of federal government and are more easily taken advantage of by lobbyists and special interest groups. Politics is the only field where previous experience is sometimes seen as a negative rather than a positive... Its a weird catch-22 that I'm not sure anyone has a great answer for right now.

One of the biggest problems we have in the USA is that the interests of the people are sometimes out of sync with the interests of the people we elect to govern. The public wants the government making decisions that benefit the people of this country as a whole (what they were elected to do), but senators/representatives often just make decisions that benefit themselves, rather than the people. Politicians often seem most concerned with lining their pockets with campaign contributions rather than being concerned with what is actually best for the people.

A quote to think about:

"It's said that "power corrupts," but actually it's more true that power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by other things than power. When they do act, they think of it as service, which has limits. The tyrant, though, seeks mastery, for which he is insatiable, implacable."

-David Brin

Very similar to something Frank Herbert said in Dune, but I think Brin worded it better. Anyway, the point is that the kind of people attracted to powerful positions are often the people worst suited to wield that power.

... And just like that the political storm in a teacup was becalmed!

I'm a Crazy MotherTrucker!!