Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The purpose of the EC is to prevent smaller and less populated rural areas from becoming irrelevant politically. It works wonderfully. In 2012 both Obama and Romney were in fricking South Dakota in the days before the election. Who gives a crap about South Dakota in a nationwide popular vote? No one.
HC showed how things would go under a popular vote. She ignored most of the country in her campaign, including some traditional Democratic strongholds like Michigan. Never bothered to campaign there. Trump did, and guess who won Michigan and then the election?
There is a brilliant reason for the EC. The ones who dont like the EC are generally the ones who want the urban areas to be able to run roughshod over the rural areas politically.
Except that oftentimes during elections, some states gets tons of visits by the candidates. You know the swing states. States like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and now Arizona get the candidates' attention and they go to them, seemingly avoiding other states like South Dakota. I have no flipping idea why Obama or even Romney traveled to South Dakota during their 2012 campaigns.
As for 2016, Hillary's travels were a problem. That said I think many voters thought she was inevitably going to be elected president so many voters chose to stay home. Few expected Trump to actually win. I don't even think Trump himself did. Many people think that Trump ran knewing he would lose to cause problems and say the system was rigged.
Except that oftentimes during elections, some states gets tons of visits by the candidates. You know the swing states. States like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and now Arizona get the candidates' attention and they go to them, seemingly avoiding other states like South Dakota. I have no flipping idea why Obama or even Romney traveled to South Dakota during their 2012 campaigns.
Yeah, I mean it's pretty ironic- one of the reasons people give for why we should keep the EC- that a few states would be focused on, at the expense of all the others- we have that now, because of the EC.
Any candidate should be able to get some points in all states. This whole thread and the concept of 2 Americas, is caused by the EC and the idea of "blue states" and "red states", just because some states are like a mere 55% or 60% liberal or conservative majority, and not much more than that. And many states are very close to 50%.
This is one USA. Our whole identity should not be assumed or determined based on what state we live in, and all of them should have a plethora of different types of people. Enough with the hyper-polarization.
Not sure why you're asking me about getting something passed. I'm not involved in the government.
If you're asking what my preference is for abortion policy, then, 24 weeks/fetal viability. It's definitely not a human being at any time before that.
I believe that's what the WA state policy is, but I can understand if not every state is going to have that particular policy. I'm fine with the deep red conservative moron states having some cutoff sooner than that. But I'm not fine with abortion bans, in any states. As confirmed by the poll data that you yourself shared, the majority of the entire country believes that women should have safe and legal access to abortions. Some of them with restrictions, perhaps. But if we're talking less than a few weeks into fetal development, then it shouldn't matter what state you are in.
You're depriving women of their basic liberty and bodily autonomy. The reason this topic was brought up was to highlight how the extremism of "Red" America is dividing the nation, needlessly. People don't want these ban policies being forced onto them.
Congrats! You officially believe the government should interfere in a woman's own personal and private health choices and should be in charge of when she can do what she wants with her own body.
When you look at the latest congressional races, we see the overwhelming majority of land in America is home to Republicans or Conservatives. A very small percentage of the land mass is Democrat or Liberal. Democrats and Liberals can and often do control things nationally, as the highest population areas are mainly in the BLUE areas.
What this has brought us in this country is basically a bifurcated country. It's very simple to understand.
The needs, wants and requirements for the RED areas are not at all the same as the BLUE areas.
The needs, wants and requirements for the BLUE areas are not at all the same as the RED areas.
There is no workable one sized solution for the country, even though the left continues to try to force it down everyone's throats.
Both sides are so far apart at this point and those on the left in positions of power will not stop demonizing those on the right, there simply is no path forward anymore.
We are two completely different countries located within the same borders. We have almost nothing in common. We think differently and at this point, have no respect for each other.
It's over folks. Stick a fork in America. The dream is dead.
We need to secede and leave the democrats to practice their lunacy alone.
Conservative areas own all the ag, all the water, all the infrastructure, the military, the ports, and production of the nation. The large urban areas own nothing and produce nothing that cannot be easily replicated.
We need to secede and leave the democrats to practice their lunacy alone.
Conservative areas own all the ag, all the water, all the infrastructure, the military, the ports, and production of the nation. The large urban areas own nothing and produce nothing that cannot be easily replicated.
Well I'm not for seceding, just self separation, but it would be funny to see them try to run their urban hell holes without the power supplied by the states doing the hard and dangerous work required to produce that energy they both hate and need so much.
If "red America" tried to secede from "blue America", it would turn into a mess. The red and blue aren’t neatly concentrated.
A large swath of the agricultural sphere might be in conservative areas. However, it gets sticky in the South. Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, North Carolina, all have blue, rural areas in addition to red rural areas. The blue rural areas have one connection: They're predominantly Black rural areas. Parts of the predominantly Hispanic border counties in Texas could go in any direction. Most of New Mexico is blue.
Plenty of military bases in blue areas. Tacoma, WA is home to Joint Base McChord. Savannah,GA has Hunter Army Air Base within its bounds. Hawaii is as blue as they come and has alot of military bases. San Antonio has several military facilities and is a blue city.
Blue America isn't just urban areas. It's also minority-dominated areas. Go look at Georgia. The "blue" vote isn't limited to Atlanta city limits. It's in the rural areas of southern Georgia, where rural, predominantly Black counties are located. It's in the predominantly Black/minority suburbs in the Atlanta area.
Go look at Mississippi. Mississippi was given to Trump at 57% . The county that gave the highest number of votes for Biden was Hinds County, where Jackson is located. Rankin County, next door, gave Trump the most votes of any Mississippi county. Both counties are indicative of the sharp political and racial divides in Mississippi. Rankin County is 71% White and 21% Black (Mississippi is 37% Black). Hinds County is 69% Black and 25% White.
The Mississippi county that voted for Biden in the highest PERCENTAGE: Jefferson County, 85%. It's a rural county in southwest Mississippi. It's 84.5% Black and 12.3% White. George County, in southeast Mississippi, voted for Trump to a tune of 87%. It's 85% White and 7.3% Black.
We need to secede and leave the democrats to practice their lunacy alone.
Conservative areas own all the ag, all the water, all the infrastructure, the military, the ports, and production of the nation. The large urban areas own nothing and produce nothing that cannot be easily replicated.
I thought the ports are all in Democratic cities, are they not?
We'd have the CDC in Atlanta, I mean... and everything of course in Washington DC, New York City, Chicago, we'd have most everything productive, except farmland and some power plants. But we could build a few nuclear plants and import our food, like the UK does. We'd be alright after some adjustment.
I feel pretty good about our odds in Civil War 2, or a divorce. But I hope to god that nothing like that ever happens. This is one country and we've got to come together and figure out our differences like adults.
All the states are various shades of purple. The electoral college drills home this tragic divisiveness.
If they don't agree with abortion up to the moment of birth, they are agreeing the government should limit what a woman can do with her body depending on how far along she is.
One objection to your suggestion that persons of different persuasion self-segregate to be with their creedal brethren, is gradations of belief. To illustrate this, I'll run with your example. My own belief is that abortion should be legal not only fully through the third trimester, but that upon actual birth, the baby - that is, the thing that was just born - can at the discretion of its parents be euthanized, should they choose to do so, no questions asked.
My view, as doubtless you'll be quick to confirm, is rare and fringe even among the American "left". It's such an extreme that most "pro choice" people would quickly mumble something to the effect that no, they're not my fellow-travelers at all.
Indeed, my quiver of views can be dubbed "pro death". Strongly pro-gun, pro capital punishment, pro suicide (assisted or solitary), pro euthanasia, and generally opposed to the great and prodigious efforts to which the medical establishment goes to prolong life or to reverse the ravages of serious disease. I support the full legalization of hard drugs, and the cutting of municipal budgets for paramedics or emergency services. As some of my views are hard-left, and others hard-right, pray tell: where is my tribe? Where could I possibly move, to seek convivial affinity with my fellows?
One objection to your suggestion that persons of different persuasion self-segregate to be with their creedal brethren, is gradations of belief. To illustrate this, I'll run with your example. My own belief is that abortion should be legal not only fully through the third trimester, but that upon actual birth, the baby - that is, the thing that was just born - can at the discretion of its parents be euthanized, should they choose to do so, no questions asked.
My view, as doubtless you'll be quick to confirm, is rare and fringe even among the American "left". It's such an extreme that most "pro choice" people would quickly mumble something to the effect that no, they're not my fellow-travelers at all.
Indeed, my quiver of views can be dubbed "pro death". Strongly pro-gun, pro capital punishment, pro suicide (assisted or solitary), pro euthanasia, and generally opposed to the great and prodigious efforts to which the medical establishment goes to prolong life or to reverse the ravages of serious disease. I support the full legalization of hard drugs, and the cutting of municipal budgets for paramedics or emergency services. As some of my views are hard-left, and others hard-right, pray tell: where is my tribe? Where could I possibly move, to seek convivial affinity with my fellows?
Whatever the majority of your views are, especially the ones you prioritize, that is where you fall on the political spectrum.
As for infanticide, it is unlikely that will ever be legalized. So, that is just a technicality.
Republicans don’t think drag queens are the greatest thing since sliced bread. Democrats don’t think border walls are the greatest thing since sliced bread. So, you pick and choose.
Whatever the majority of your views are, especially the ones you prioritize, that is where you fall on the political spectrum.
As for infanticide, it is unlikely that will ever be legalized. So, that is just a technicality.
Republicans don’t think drag queens are the greatest thing since sliced bread. Democrats don’t think border walls are the greatest thing since sliced bread. So, you pick and choose.
But here is the thing, I do not think that drag queens are in fact liked by the left. I think the issue is that the right tried to say they are pedophiles and padophiles without proof and then the left says, dum-dum drag queens just dress in drag and not all are even homosexual or fully "*****."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
