What is the Chance of an Electoral College Revolt?

[The Conservative]

Being polite and having manners is a two way street. And don't care who are, being politely asked to move to the back of the bus is worse than whatever goes on "safe spaces."

No worse than being told you can't be someplace (such as a common area) because it is someone's "safe place"... sorry, but to me that is exactly the same as being told to get to the back of the bus.

And people have always been pissed off when they don't win, and they always get pissed off when they don't get their way. People don't generally hear themselves when they're whining because they're doing the whining, but they sure as fuck hear it when other people whine. Hell there were people during the depression that thought it wasn't that bad (the super privileged people).

That is why I don't tolerate those people in my life. Don't come to me whining, if you want to complain, fine, but also have a solution, or ask for help, otherwise leave me alone. I have my own family to take care of, I don't need an adopted bitch-o-matic.

I mean there are people pissed they can't make a rape joke publicly on the internet, like that is something that was perfectly acceptable to say in society prior to the internet. So, while I think the mainstream media view of safe spaces as these soft crybaby playpens with puppies and kittens is hilarious and entertaining, I've no fucking clue what a safe space looks like except a place where you can't say blatantly offensive things.

It was acceptable in public before the internet, because what you said stayed with your circle of friends, today with the internet, what you say around your friends can go viral.

A safe place is a place where you can't theoretically get your "feelings hurt" from the average person walking down the street. That is what they have become. What they were originally were places for people to get together to think about ideas in peace without judgement from the outside world. That, when I was young, we called the library.

And about the safety pin, TMI dude, you used as a rhetorical device and I thought it was disingenuous, but I apologize.

No need to apologize, I'm not a buttercup.

[Cid]

Being polite and having manners is a two way street. And don't care who are, being politely asked to move to the back of the bus is worse than whatever goes on "safe spaces."

No worse than being told you can't be someplace (such as a common area) because it is someone's "safe place"... sorry, but to me that is exactly the same as being told to get to the back of the bus.

That's not happening, so that's not a thing. You're confusing "safe place" with "members only."

That is why I don't tolerate those people in my life. Don't come to me whining, if you want to complain, fine, but also have a solution, or ask for help, otherwise leave me alone. I have my own family to take care of, I don't need an adopted bitch-o-matic.

Take a step back, you're standing too close to the mirror.

It was acceptable in public before the internet, because what you said stayed with your circle of friends, today with the internet, what you say around your friends can go viral.

I don't think you think that posting on twitter or facebook is private. This by comparison is relatively private because its unknown by the vast majority of the English speaking world, but being offensive on twitter and thinking its weird people call you on it is the equivalent of standing with a sign next to a person's home or business. There's no way people aren't going to notice, and there's no way people posting don't realize that. Short of going off the grid insisting people be polite, and mind you that's a higher bar than just "don't be offensive", is about the only recourse available since no one can be forced to be not a jackass.

A safe place is a place where you can't theoretically get your "feelings hurt" from the average person walking down the street. That is what they have become. What they were originally were places for people to get together to think about ideas in peace without judgement from the outside world. That, when I was young, we called the library.

Don't say theoretically can't get your feelings hurt. That's horseshit, that's like liberals calling all Trump supporters racists and bigots. No one is expecting that, you say that shit to someone with a safety pin they'd hand you a diaper and ask you put it on your head. We haven't become that, you might get some shit from people if you wore a "Trump that Bitch" t-shirt, you know the kind of t-shirts that used to be sold exclusively through t-shirt hell but are now worn proudly by people with standards.

And if the library was the only place you could go where you could expect a modicum of civility then that is a shitty place to live.

Here's the thing, anger is fine, but claiming the high ground when I can't tell your extremely disingenuous view from the person who is your polar opposite with an identically disingenuous view, isn't tenable. And to be honest I think SJWs are unreasonably sensitive to things that are meant to be offensive, but then they get trolled with actually offensive shit to the point where they try to deal with it, and everyone else is like, "Oh my Gawd! They want to be able to walk down the street without me offending them?! MAH FREEDOMS!"

Its weird.

[clubgop]

Whatsmore, the EC is really the only reason illegals can affect the election.

What? That makes little sense. EC isolates fraud and any other shenanigans. As for the Census, states use differing data sets for apportionment. Some use all people, others only citizens, other citizens of voting age, and some other delineations. They just have to use the same data set throughout.

That's patently false.

Are undocumented residents (aliens) in the 50 states included in the apportionment population counts? back to top
Yes, all people (citizens and noncitizens) with a usual residence in the 50 states are to be included in the census and thus in the apportionment counts.

No it isn't. The Supreme court has never ruled on the matter and apportionment plans usingother data sets have been approved.

EC doesn't isolate fraud. If you didn't have the EC the effect on fraud would be 0. If you can explain how a group of people chosen by the party that won the state, who then can go vote however they want, isolates fraud then I would say you need to be writing for a major publication.

I'll put together my resume then. Let's say we have a Tammany hall or Chicago Daley machine type operation and they commit fraud regularly. With EC that fraud is isolated to that state, whereas with NPV that fraud taints the whole country and the whole process. With NPV you need only upscale your normal vote rigging process in one geographical location. Whereas with EC to be effective one would need to rig the various systems and traditions of several geographic locations.

[Cid]

Its not isolated to the state, if you assume fraud is a real thing you just magnified it by letting it claim a winner take all situation where as it would be severely diluted in an at large national election. Its way easier to rig 538 votes than 150+ million.

Edit: Also, I linked to the census page regarding apportionment. Link to the different datasets that California and/or Texas use to not game the system and I'll concede.

[The Conservative]

Being polite and having manners is a two way street. And don't care who are, being politely asked to move to the back of the bus is worse than whatever goes on "safe spaces."

No worse than being told you can't be someplace (such as a common area) because it is someone's "safe place"... sorry, but to me that is exactly the same as being told to get to the back of the bus.

That's not happening, so that's not a thing. You're confusing "safe place" with "members only."

That is why I don't tolerate those people in my life. Don't come to me whining, if you want to complain, fine, but also have a solution, or ask for help, otherwise leave me alone. I have my own family to take care of, I don't need an adopted bitch-o-matic.

Take a step back, you're standing too close to the mirror.

It was acceptable in public before the internet, because what you said stayed with your circle of friends, today with the internet, what you say around your friends can go viral.

I don't think you think that posting on twitter or facebook is private. This by comparison is relatively private because its unknown by the vast majority of the English speaking world, but being offensive on twitter and thinking its weird people call you on it is the equivalent of standing with a sign next to a person's home or business. There's no way people aren't going to notice, and there's no way people posting don't realize that. Short of going off the grid insisting people be polite, and mind you that's a higher bar than just "don't be offensive", is about the only recourse available since no one can be forced to be not a jackass.

A safe place is a place where you can't theoretically get your "feelings hurt" from the average person walking down the street. That is what they have become. What they were originally were places for people to get together to think about ideas in peace without judgement from the outside world. That, when I was young, we called the library.

Don't say theoretically can't get your feelings hurt. That's horseshit, that's like liberals calling all Trump supporters racists and bigots. No one is expecting that, you say that shit to someone with a safety pin they'd hand you a diaper and ask you put it on your head. We haven't become that, you might get some shit from people if you wore a "Trump that Bitch" t-shirt, you know the kind of t-shirts that used to be sold exclusively through t-shirt hell but are now worn proudly by people with standards.

And if the library was the only place you could go where you could expect a modicum of civility then that is a shitty place to live.

Here's the thing, anger is fine, but claiming the high ground when I can't tell your extremely disingenuous view from the person who is your polar opposite with an identically disingenuous view, isn't tenable. And to be honest I think SJWs are unreasonably sensitive to things that are meant to be offensive, but then they get trolled with actually offensive shit to the point where they try to deal with it, and everyone else is like, "Oh my Gawd! They want to be able to walk down the street without me offending them?! MAH FREEDOMS!"

Its weird.

Really?

http://college.usatoday.com/2016/11/15/ ... -election/

Or

https://academeblog.org/2016/11/13/the- ... ent=safari


And you are right, me growing up was shitty. My father mentally abused me and physically abused me when I was "stupid".

I turned out a lot more normal than I should have.

In any case, the point is that most kids today couldn't handle the shit we went through growing up.

[Cid]

Anecdotal evidence from college campuses does not damn a generation. If a handful of rooms at universities determined the character of a generation then there's probably enough evidence of the doom of our nation from college rags going back half a century.

Whatsmore, if we want to continue anecdotal evidence piling on, then herpa derp

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/10/us/post-e ... ears-trnd/

So feel free to judge them as lesser, but that shit above was not common when I grew up either, yet I don't assume this generation is destined to be a bunch of barely intelligible Nazis.

It might just be that the irrationally uncivil nature of the discourse got to them, and given that we are constantly blaring it at them, I'm not sure we'd have done much better. When the adults tell the children that their country is dying, that there is a white genocide, that they're going to deport everyone with brown skin, etc etc, is it really going to be that shock when some of them lose their shit?

[clubgop]

Its not isolated to the state, if you assume fraud is a real thing you just magnified it by letting it claim a winner take all situation where as it would be severely diluted in an at large national election. Its way easier to rig 538 votes than 150+ million.

What? There isnt 538 electors there are different sets of electors appionted by the candidate that won the popular vote of that state. Throughtout history the electors have voted as they were supposed to 95% of the time. The "faithless elector" is very rare and it isnt even fraud or rigging to begin with. There is nothing to rig anyway because they cast their vote publicly. Rigging is not about the voting its about the counting. As I said before in NPV a broken totally owned liberal state with a huge population can sit back wait for the votes to come in see how much they need and "count" the votes until they the number they need. What 2-3 million votes in California? Nothing, as was demonstrated this year. I know when you guys lose you need a cheap cudgel to weasel out of any responsibility but do you have to be so myopic, obtuse, and dishonest about it?

Link to the different datasets that California and/or Texas use to not game the system and I'll concede.

What the fuck does that even mean and why just those 2 states? Best argument for EC, liberals give 0 fucks about the rest of the country.

[Fife]

Pop quiz kids (open book, open notes):

Suppose that American individual voters vote for electors in the primary election, not for the actual candidates for POTUS.

How are the electors chosen, and by whom?

[Cid]

What? There isnt 538 electors there are different sets of electors appionted by the candidate that won the popular vote of that state. Throughtout history the electors have voted as they were supposed to 95% of the time. The "faithless elector" is very rare and it isnt even fraud or rigging to begin with. There is nothing to rig anyway because they cast their vote publicly. Rigging is not about the voting its about the counting. As I said before in NPV a broken totally owned liberal state with a huge population can sit back wait for the votes to come in see how much they need and "count" the votes until they the number they need. What 2-3 million votes in California? Nothing, as was demonstrated this year. I know when you guys lose you need a cheap cudgel to weasel out of any responsibility but do you have to be so myopic, obtuse, and dishonest about it?

Hey, I'll be at the inauguration son, don't whip the "you guys lose" bullshit. I've posted about the EC for years, and I might as well start early so the next time a Dem wins in 8 years I can say this bullshit needs to stop. So fuck you, any system where its even possible to bribe people to be faithless, and it is possible to do that, is fucked. You can have all the voter ID laws you want, whatever it takes, but this is stupid. No one would set up a system like this today unless you were confident there was no other way you could win. Its sketchy as hell.

Link to the different datasets that California and/or Texas use to not game the system and I'll concede.

What the fuck does that even mean and why just those 2 states? Best argument for EC, liberals give 0 fucks about the rest of the country.

I figured you probably knew that California and Texas have the most illegals that are counted in the census data, and therefor benefit the most from those numbers being higher when it comes to apportionment. Again, you can look that up.

[Cid]

However, I'll just ask you directly rather than beat around the bush, do you think Republicans could win an election without the EC? I think they could, north of 80 million people didn't vote in this election. Are the majority of those 80 million Democrats that just could be bothered? I doubt it.

Edit: Also, any answer you give that isn't, "Yes" with some elaboration means this conversation stops. Not going to entertain the notion that taxpayers in one state are worth more than taxpayers in another state because of geography. Not going to pretend that your vote matters more or less if live in a shitty trailer or a shitty apartment or a mcmansion or a penthouse. This urban blue rural red horseshit is my main gripe with the media. Its as bad as the media telling people they need safe spaces or that the president is a racist.