Jump to content


Former Washington Post Editor Claims Bezos Made Deal with Trump to Block Harris Endorsement


Social Media

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, CanadaSam said:

Somebody please explain why, in the US, the people can vote with a majority for a Presidential candidate, but that candidate can lose, through something called "electoral congress" or some such thing.

 

Not much different from Thailand, innit, where a majority win by the popular people's vote is summarily dismissed and someone else gets to lead the country!

It's called the electoral college and it was enshrined in the constitution by wise men.

Basically it stops the populous coastal states dominating the elections over the less populated central states. The US is not a homogeneous nation, in case you had not noticed.

 

I'm sure google can help you understand it better.

  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It's called the electoral college and it was enshrined in the constitution by wise men.

Basically it stops the populous coastal states dominating the elections over the less populated central states. The US is not a homogeneous nation, in case you had not noticed.

 

I'm sure google can help you understand it better.

That wasn't the reason but you have parroted commonly held misinformation even most Americans believe. Also, what were the "central states" at the time of the founding?!?

 

The Electoral College’s Racist Origins | Brennan Center for Justice

 

Quote

 

Commentators today tend to downplay the extent to which race and slavery contributed to the Framers’ creation of the Electoral College, in effect whitewashing history: Of the considerations that factored into the Framers’ calculus, race and slavery were perhaps the foremost.

Of course, the Framers had a number of other reasons to engineer the Electoral College. Fearful that the president might fall victim to a host of civic vices—that he could become susceptible to corruption or cronyism, sow disunity, or exercise overreach—the men sought to constrain executive power consistent with constitutional principles such as federalism and checks and balances. The delegates to the Philadelphia convention had scant conception of the American presidency—the duties, powers, and limits of the office. But they did have a handful of ideas about the method for selecting the chief executive. When the idea of a popular vote was raised, they griped openly that it could result in too much democracy. With few objections, they quickly dispensed with the notion that the people might choose their leader.

 

 

Edited by Jingthing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Yes he was, in the primaries. How can you not know that?

Voters voted to send delegates. He wasn't nominated by voters. He was nominated by republican party DELEGATES.

There is nothing about parties or primary rules or processes in the constitution.

There is nothing about a two party system in the constitution.

Rules and processes for parties are determined by the parties themselves.

There used to be party called the Know Nothing Party which has been compared to today's maga fascists (who aren't really republicans anymore).

I could start a new party today called the Let's Boogie Party and our new party could make up whatever party rules we liked to choose a presidential candidate.

Edited by Jingthing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Elkski said:

It is a big deal to stop endorsements after 36 years and then blue origin big wigs get to meet behind closed doors with Trump.   Editors quiting says it all.    How often does the right complain about Sorros?  Bozos didn't buy it for no reason.   Sadly I'm addicted to the convenience of getting things on my porch in 1-2 days.   Easily eliminates many hours driving each week for me. 

Bezos has not interfered in the editorial policy of the Post in any way before now.
It's atrocious that he has done it now, but if he continues to allow editorial freedom for everything else, I can't see blaming it on great people that produce the Post which is to me the most important news source for American politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It's called the electoral college and it was enshrined in the constitution by wise men.

Basically it stops the populous coastal states dominating the elections over the less populated central states. The US is not a homogeneous nation, in case you had not noticed.

 

I'm sure google can help you understand it better.

 

Correct.

 

The Electoral Vote is calculated by the number of senators and representatives in the House of each state. Population size is included because House members are designated by population size.

 

Example: A state with 2 senators and 7 House reps would have 9 Electoral Votes. As populations shift, the number of representatives also changes. Eventually, if the migration OUT of California continues, they will lose electoral votes because they will lose House members.

 

Candidates who win the popular vote in each state is "winner take all" in the electoral votes. A couple of states have some exceptions to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now