Author Topic: [tinythread] with hillary and her media by her side how did she lose?  (Read 866 times)

You ruined this thread with your political bias and misleading bullstuff.

oh and race baiting.

You're Jitank 2.0.

I have to unlock this or perry will slanderize me.

tony, smaller states have to be given more electoral power per voter to balance out their voting power against larger states...yeah, it can make for some insane political forgetery like gerrymandering but without it would be even worse.  entire states could just be forgetin' stamped out if a bigger, more populated state wished it.  this way minimises the ability of disparity between individual states to make electoral decision (theoretically) more even.

the system is explicitly designed so that it's harder to win the presidential election with political manipulation like appealing specifically to larger states.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2018, 07:22:04 PM by PowerDag »

Looks like he's still upset that Hillary lost... So sad

This democracy is not about Mobrule, this Democracy is about fair representation.

If the cities ruled and forgeted over the "Fly-over" states, then there is no way that type of democracy would stand long-term.

This democracy is not about Mobrule, this Democracy is about fair representation.

If the cities ruled and forgeted over the "Fly-over" states, then there is no way that type of democracy would stand long-term.
what is ur obsession with the "big cities" lmfao like dude you do realize that a city is big because theres a lot of......population.....in them, right????

what is ur obsession with the "big cities" lmfao like dude you do realize that a city is big because theres a lot of......population.....in them, right????
?!?

This has literally nothing to do with the post you quoted.
Did you even read it?

I said that Population doesn't matter, Representation does.


There's that non-word again.
There is no such thing as a non-word if you make it into a word.

There is no such thing as a non-word if you make it into a word.

It has to become popular to become a word.
Tony doesnt have that reach. And most likely never will.

But hey, go ahead and try.
As of now, it remains a non-word.

i mean considering “slander” means the same thing but is actually a word......
?!?

This has literally nothing to do with the post you quoted.
Did you even read it?

I said that Population doesn't matter, Representation does.
what exactly do u want to represent if it’s not the people retard lmao

i mean considering “slander” means the same thing but is actually a word......

That's true. Google defines it as "a needless variant of "slander," vb. It seems to occur mostly in speech".
In before Tony denotes Google as a "biased source"

what exactly do u want to represent if it’s not the people retard lmao
You are representing the people, not in numbers, but in relative numbers.

If people who only lived in one or two highly condensed locations for the rest of the country, winning always by sheer numbers, it would be chaos.
Imagine if Germany was part of the USA, and they had the largest population. If Germany won every vote, eventually the unrest would be insane.

Having a system in which only California, the East coast, and maybe florida drive the country would be a disaster in delivery.
It would work for a little while, but as more and more people who live in the "Fly-Over" states lose their value because they don't breed like rabbits, the more likely a civil war would be to occur.

You are representing the people, not in numbers, but in relative numbers.

If people who only lived in one or two highly condensed locations for the rest of the country, winning always by sheer numbers, it would be chaos.
Imagine if Germany was part of the USA, and they had the largest population. If Germany won every vote, eventually the unrest would be insane.

Having a system in which only California, the East coast, and maybe florida drive the country would be a disaster in delivery.
It would work for a little while, but as more and more people who live in the "Fly-Over" states lose their value because they don't breed like rabbits, the more likely a civil war would be to occur.
flyover states are literally less valuable than states with higher population, objectively. you just can’t argue otherwise without sounding like a retard on a warpath
that’s not to say they’re not important, especially in situations where it directly affects them ten times more than urban areas—but you’ve got a pretty stuffty system if you give the collective people of wyoming more power than new york
if you want to act upon the will of the people, look to where people live, not dogstuff montana. politicians have to pander to areas with higher populations in order to win office, anyways, so this is a dumb argument

flyover states are literally less valuable than states with higher population, objectively. you just can’t argue otherwise without sounding like a retard on a warpath
that’s not to say they’re not important, especially in situations where it directly affects them ten times more than urban areas—but you’ve got a pretty stuffty system if you give the collective people of wyoming more power than new york
if you want to act upon the will of the people, look to where people live, not dogstuff montana. politicians have to pander to areas with higher populations in order to win office, anyways, so this is a dumb argument
This sense of arrogance is what leads countries into believing communism is the only way out. By putting yourself in the mindset that there is only a binary situation where there is MobRule or few who rule.

This system is in place because the few should have as much of a say as the many. If you truly believe that Flyover states are less valuable than states with a higher population, you have become adjusted to a high-horse mindset, where only the places with a clusteforget-bomb of people matter and everything else "dogstuff montana".

The will of the people isn't the will of "all the people in San Diego, Los Angeles, New York City, Miami and Orlando".

Besides, when this system starts working in the other direction, I'm sure the same people arguing against the representative system now will be arguing for it.