Aren't you glad to know that your votes don't actually count and that Hillary Clinton is one of mere 538 people in the United States whose vote actually does count?
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:01AM
(5 children)
by Anonymous Coward
on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:01AM (#1070235)
Also true. A win by popular vote method will also change how/where/why the candidates campaign.
And had the system changed to "popular vote" for the 2016 election, that does not mean Hillary would have won. It means both Trump and Hillary would have campaigned differently, and the popular vote would have been different. And it is possible Trump would still have won 2016, even with a popular vote, because of the different campaigning.
Millions of them are of voting age. Many are veterans or active military. But they cannot vote to elect their commander in chief.
People born in Guam, the Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and Puerto Rico are all Americans. They vote in US congressional elections and presidential primaries. This year, voting rights advocate and lawyer Neil Weare says they were "even heavily courted by both parties ... they went to the [Democratic and Republican] conventions."
Sounds like taxation without representation to me!
let them fight to become a state like the rest of us did, then their vote will count. but they generally don't want that because they'll then have to pay federal income taxes; which they mostly don't (so the "taxation" part of that argument just fell apart...). that leads to an interesting counter; if some do-nothing dirt-farmer in a flyover state (or south carolina, or mississippi, etc) pays no federal income taxes (a member of romney's famous 48%...), do they, in fact, get representation without taxation?
however, you missed the truly egregious demonstration of taxation without representation; D.C. they have no representation in the senate, and their representation in the house is often not allowed to vote.
D.C would be the 3rd smallest "state". but, it would have a population greater than the SUM of guam, u.s virigin islands, northern mariana islands, and american samoa.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:01AM (5 children)
Also true. A win by popular vote method will also change how/where/why the candidates campaign.
And had the system changed to "popular vote" for the 2016 election, that does not mean Hillary would have won. It means both Trump and Hillary would have campaigned differently, and the popular vote would have been different. And it is possible Trump would still have won 2016, even with a popular vote, because of the different campaigning.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @05:33AM (4 children)
You sound like you've given this some thought. How would you run those campaigns differently given direct voting?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday October 29 2020, @12:22PM (3 children)
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2020, @01:39PM (2 children)
The flyover country would be proper fucked. Might as well kill them quick and painless, then declare the midwest a natural reservation.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 29 2020, @04:21PM (1 child)
You mean the states they already don't visit because they're reliably Red?
And you know what's even MORE egregious? There are millions of people in the US who don't get any Presidential vote AT ALL! [pri.org] They don't even get the bullshit 3/5s of a vote we get here in blue states.
Sounds like taxation without representation to me!
(Score: 2) by rcamera on Friday October 30 2020, @01:03PM
let them fight to become a state like the rest of us did, then their vote will count. but they generally don't want that because they'll then have to pay federal income taxes; which they mostly don't (so the "taxation" part of that argument just fell apart...). that leads to an interesting counter; if some do-nothing dirt-farmer in a flyover state (or south carolina, or mississippi, etc) pays no federal income taxes (a member of romney's famous 48%...), do they, in fact, get representation without taxation?
however, you missed the truly egregious demonstration of taxation without representation; D.C. they have no representation in the senate, and their representation in the house is often not allowed to vote.
D.C would be the 3rd smallest "state". but, it would have a population greater than the SUM of guam, u.s virigin islands, northern mariana islands, and american samoa.
STATEHOOD FOR D.C!
/* no comment */