Message from @Grenade123

Discord ID: 531923135759646720


2019-01-07 19:47:25 UTC  

but the president affects everyone.

2019-01-07 19:47:29 UTC  

Your vote determines your state's choice for POTUS.

2019-01-07 19:47:37 UTC  

no it doesn't

2019-01-07 19:47:42 UTC  

Yes, it does.

2019-01-07 19:47:52 UTC  

it really does not if you are not living in a swing state

2019-01-07 19:48:02 UTC  

not as anyone not voting dem in most of the north east

2019-01-07 19:48:06 UTC  

not in my lifetime

2019-01-07 19:48:56 UTC  

Your vote determines whether you live in a swing state.

2019-01-07 19:48:59 UTC  

why should 60% get to say who the 40% voted for?

2019-01-07 19:49:10 UTC  

there is a reason why presidential candidates are going from one swing state to another while ignoring almost all the other ones.

2019-01-07 19:49:17 UTC  

^

2019-01-07 19:50:30 UTC  

The choice of the 60% majority prevails, because democracy.

2019-01-07 19:50:39 UTC  

mob rule

2019-01-07 19:50:45 UTC  

Democracy.

2019-01-07 19:50:45 UTC  

except not mob rule

2019-01-07 19:50:57 UTC  

because it allows someone with 41 votes out of 93 to win

2019-01-07 19:51:22 UTC  

you know the story about the two wolves and the sheep, right?

2019-01-07 19:51:49 UTC  

that's what your understanding of democracy comes off as

2019-01-07 19:51:57 UTC  

It does not allow someone with fewer total electoral votes to win.

2019-01-07 19:52:37 UTC  

well... that would be by definition impossible to happen...

2019-01-07 19:52:38 UTC  

no, it allows someone to win 55 votes with one state when they should have won only 33 in that state

2019-01-07 19:52:57 UTC  

this is how we get the swing states.

2019-01-07 19:53:09 UTC  

They should have won whatever that state's election law says they should have won.

2019-01-07 19:53:30 UTC  

yeah... and the state election laws are stupid 😄

2019-01-07 19:53:31 UTC  

what a dumb argument for why we should change the rules

2019-01-07 19:53:45 UTC  

"this is why the rules are broken"
"yeah but that is the rules"

2019-01-07 19:54:16 UTC  

Calling everything stupid isn't an argument.

2019-01-07 19:54:42 UTC  

okay, cool. ignore what i posted way before then claim i have no argument

2019-01-07 19:54:55 UTC  

I was referring to I AM STUPID.

2019-01-07 19:55:44 UTC  

i mean... i told you why i think it's stupid but hey... the rules are the rules, right.

2019-01-07 19:56:37 UTC  

Each state makes its own election rules. What's stupid for you isn't necessarily stupid for them.

2019-01-07 19:57:29 UTC  

Cali: 55 electors
Texas: 38 electors

win 60% in cali, you win 55 electors
60% of 55 is about 33.

win only 20% in Texas, you win 0 electors
20% of 38 is about 8.

IF you win 60% in cali, but only 20% in texas, you get 55 electors and win 55 vs 38. That is how it currently works. We are saying it shouldn't. instead winning 60% in cali should get you 33 electors, and winning 20% in texas wins you 8. That leaves you with 41 electors. 41 to 54.

2019-01-07 19:57:41 UTC  

so the argument is not "it's stupid", that is the conclusion. the argument is that the current system makes votes in non-swing states worthless because they do not have any impact on the outcome of the election.

2019-01-07 19:59:01 UTC  

the change means the percent you win in each state matters more than just winning the state itself.

2019-01-07 19:59:03 UTC  

No vote is worthless so long as each state's election counts every vote.

2019-01-07 19:59:33 UTC  

except if you voted in call, you might as well not have voted

2019-01-07 19:59:44 UTC  

same in texas even in that example

2019-01-07 19:59:46 UTC  

what impact on the outcome of the election did the votes for trump in california have then?

2019-01-07 20:00:12 UTC  

what would have changed if every single republican voter had stayed home?

2019-01-07 20:00:17 UTC  

They were counted directly in California's election.

2019-01-07 20:00:25 UTC  

tell me, in the example above, that the change didn't make each vote in each state more valuable than before?