Cameroni

Prohibition was a time when women still commanded moral authority. In the time of Taylor Swift's 12 exes it would be very hard to get a moral majority for any issue, let alone for changing the Electoral College. After all the small states benefit from the EC, why would they agree to lose it? It just would not happen. There have been many hundreds of attempts to amend and change the EC, only 1 succeeded, and that was a long, long time ago. Let's say you would have some candiate win the popular vote by 33%, it then goes to the House of Reps, they then elect someone else entirely. How would this reflect the will of the people? Most had voted for the candidate with the 33%. Also not really satisfactory. In any event, all this dreaming about a different system, is just that, silly day dreaming. You could never change the EC or abolish it given the hurdles involved.

It is a shame both are not more cordial with each other. I think Trump probably gained more voters by his magnanimous comments about Kamala than from previous 45000 attacks.

I would explain that this way: The two currencies actually were in tandem from Jan 2020 to July 2021. However, the Euro then went on a deep nosedive, the Euro actually also fell against the Baht, just not as much. Against the Baht the Euro recovered much more quickly, which makes sense as Thailand's currency is much weaker than the USD, not as a snapshot but as a whole I mean. However, since July there has been a dichotomy, where the Euro rose against the USD but fell against the Baht. I wonder if that can be explained by the Thai people putting in place a new government, expecting more tourism from visa changes and things like this. But it is interesting. https://in.marketscreener.com/quote/currency/EURO-THAI-BAHT-EUR-THB-88940/graphics-comparison/ Generally though, since the Euro fell harder against the USD, it is presumably normal that it would rebound a bit harder against the USD.

Amending the Constitution requires a double supermajority: an amendment introduced in Congress has to pass both houses by a two-thirds vote, and then must be approved by the legislatures of three-quarters of the states. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/annals-of-inquiry/the-united-states-unamendable-constitution If you read the above article you will see that there have literally been hundreds and hundreds of attempts to amend or abolish the electoral college, all but 1 failed. To abolish the EC and introduce a different system you'd need a majority of states to agree, who would never do that, because they benefit from EC. Good luck trying. And yes, ranked voting complicates matter greatly, it would be a nightmare.

Not really. Both are easily compatible.

Actually that looks pretty good. But you'd still need four fifths of the states to peform constitutional surgery, and since many states benefit from EC, this never going to happen.

Sorry, I thought you meant the ranking JD Vance proposed related to child bearing. If you mean Ranked Choice Voting, again you would need four fifths of the states to support a constitutional surgery to abolish the electoral college, it's impossible that this could happen, since many states benefit from EC and would not agree to change it. Besides, Ranked Voting has its own problems, it makes it harder to vote, harder to count the votes, and much harder to ensure a transparent and accountable democratic process.

You mean like +4 for parents with children, -2 for couples without children -4 for LGTBQ, something like this? Like JD Vance proposed?

He even said it was very nice AND we appreciate it. Such a magnanimous man, clearly the wood that great statesmen are made of. To defend Harris against all the boos of his supporters, you could not help but think "Here is an American". Beautiful.

Well, think about it, if you didn't have the electoral college you could have someone winning the presidency with 30% of the vote. So highly extremist candidates would be the norm then. That would be the true end result of "one person one vote" without system refinement. It's all moot anyway, you would need fourth fifths of states to perform constitutional surgery and those states that benefit from the EC would not support that.

It brought tears to my eyes to see such a fair and gentle man defending that lady.

Indeed! Loonie by name, Loonie by nature!

Well, he is a consumate and experienced politician, putting Kamala in might be his revenge against Pelosi. If he made that a condition of him stepping down, obviously they had to accept that.

Incredibly well put and 100% accurate.

Well, if you can read obviously you're at an advantage, the mention of Iowa and Delaware, which btw was made by the American Paula Ryan, does not claim these are the lowest population states, rather she, correctly, states they have a lower population than Florida or Texas. https://www.familyfoundation.org/blog/why-the-electoral-college-is-so-important Either way, her arguments are correct. The electoral college provides fairness and should be retained.

Well, we shall see on election day how influential she really is.

One of the biggest advantages to using this method is that it provides a more equal voice for both small and large states in the election of the president – since every state has two Senators no matter the size of its population. If the Electoral College were abolished, presidential candidates would be incentivized to focus most of their efforts in states like Florida or Texas, leaving smaller states like Iowa and Delaware left out in the cold. Aside from the fact that there are valid and practical reasons for the Electoral College system, there are other pragmatic reasons for maintaining the status quo. First of all, if we had a pure popular vote system, as many on the Left are now proposing, it would become quite difficult—because of third-party (and more) candidates—to ensure that any candidate would win a popular majority. For example, in the election of President Clinton in 1992, Clinton received a majority of electoral votes and was elected president. However, he only received a plurality – 43 percent – of the popular vote, and Ross Perot, a third-party candidate, received almost 19 percent. President Clinton did not win a majority of the popular vote in the 1996 election either, but because he won an Electoral College majority, he was elected President of the United States both times. This raises the question: What would happen if we did away with the Electoral College and instead implemented a system whereby a person could win the presidency with a plurality of the popular vote? If this were to occur, every special interest group would have their own candidate, and the field of candidates would be enormous. Thus, EVERY election year would be utter chaos. https://www.familyfoundation.org/blog/why-the-electoral-college-is-so-important

Vice President Kamala Harris came under fire Wednesday as an old tweet in which she thanked now-disgraced rapper Sean “Diddy” Combs for hosting a fundraiser for her first presidential campaign resurfaced after the hip-hop mogul’s arrest on sex crime charges. Harris’ message of gratitude was sent during her previous run for the White House after Diddy hosted a town hall on racial inequality for her campaign. “Thank you,@Diddy, for hosting this town hall last night. There’s a lot at stake for our communities right now and it’s critical we bring to the forefront how coronavirus is perpetuating racial inequality and health disparities,” Harris tweeted on April 10, 2020. https://nypost.com/2024/09/18/us-news/kamala-harris-tweet-thanking-sean-diddy-combs-resurfaces/

No, he endorsed Joe Biden and is a strong supporter of the Democrats, see the article linked above.

I raised the point that the RAF had bombed Wilhelmshaven on 4. September 1939 to show that between German and Britain it was Britain who started bombing the other. And indeed 435 civilians did die due to the the RAF bombing Wilhelmshaven, thanks for confirming it. In terms of carpet bombing too, the British started it between these two nations.

Has Sean Coombs endorsed Harris already? They're all such moral people in the music business, we really should pay attention how they want us to vote. Rapper Sean 'Diddy' Combs has been a prolific supporter of Democrats Combs also said "white men like [Donald] Trump need to be banished" during a 2020 interview https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rapper-sean-diddy-combs-prolific-supporter-democrats

You're not wrong, but the working men love Trump. Not Harris. Strange isn't it?

Because Joe Biden insisted on Kamala as his condition to accept the defenestration. Both Pelosi and Obama wanted an open election, but Biden, out of revenge and spite made Kamala Harris his condition of departure. I suspect anyway.

I think you are leaving out the key fact, that this was AFTER the British had initiated area bombing of Germany.

No, I saw it, but I was aware of the history of the bombing of civilians and of course Guernica. Very regrettable.