Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
*Fingers crossed* Not a tumorI can't wait to see the growth our country has for the next four years for everyone.
I am for 1/2 of trumps idea here, Repeal.The Republican have to do some work now. I want to see their plan to replace Obamacare
R House, R Senate, R WH come Jan. 21. There's no excuse not to repeal.The Republican have to do some work now. I want to see their plan to replace Obamacare
Yeah...you gheys should be able to marry and be miserable like the rest of us.PLEASE do not get rid of ALL of his executive orders or my life is literally going to be screwed.
PLEASE do not get rid of ALL of his executive orders or my life is literally going to be screwed.
True, and why I'm surprised so many liberals rail at him for social issues. As for undoing the executive orders, this might just be personal.The supreme court decided on gay marriage, that's not going to change. Trump is very liberal on social issues.
History is not on your side.I can't wait to see the growth our country has for the next four years for everyone.
Pubs won't have the 60 Senate seats necessary to block a filibuster, though.R House, R Senate, R WH come Jan. 21. There's no excuse not to repeal.
The only excuse is that they have to come up with something to replace it. I want to see how different it is (they have been working on it for 6+ years)R House, R Senate, R WH come Jan. 21. There's no excuse not to repeal.
Well obamacare was always designed to screw the people in 2017, after he left office. The people will be screaming to trash it by this time next year if they are not already.The only excuse is that they have to come up with something to replace it. I want to see how different it is (they have been working on it for 6+ years)
depends on what is proposed. A full retraction probably gets a filibuster. Reformation probably earns some cooperation.Pubs won't have the 60 Senate seats necessary to block a filibuster, though.
as in price controls on hospitals and drugs and preventing insurance companies from leaving?A systematic reformation is what's needed
The supreme court decided on gay marriage, that's not going to change. Trump is very liberal on social issues.
Overall turnout was lower than 2012 or 2008, but % was average since the 1950's. Not as low as the 1980's either.Byproduct of the electoral college maybe? Am I really going to take time out of my day and sit in traffic in California to vote for Trump?
How do these compare historically?
That's a good point. I understand that electoral college system is designed to balance democracy with a republic representation, but it does seem heavily slanted towards a republic. Maybe that's the way it should be, as we were founded as a republic and always resisted the pressure to adopt this new idea called democracy at the time of our founding.Byproduct of the electoral college maybe? Am I really going to take time out of my day and sit in traffic in California to vote for Trump?
How do these compare historically?
I've always wondered if more states (especially the bigger population states) adopted the Maine distribution of electoral votes how the electoral college would vote. Maine tallies votes by Congressional district with a candidate each getting an elector for winning a House district, then the bonus two electors if they win the majority of the districts. But those rules are up to each state to decide.That's a good point. I understand that electoral college system is designed to balance democracy with a republic representation, but it does seem heavily slanted towards a republic. Maybe that's the way it should be, as we were founded as a republic and always resisted the pressure to adopt this new idea called democracy at the time of our founding.
The Legislative branch's power is divided equally between the Senate (republic) and Congress (democracy). I'm curious what the results would look like if that division of power was extended to the presidential election. 100 delegates, 2 per state, winner take all per state. 100 delegates divided proportionately by popular vote.
Last night the distribution would have been:
Hillary (20 states = 40 + 48% popular) = 88 delegates
Trump (30 states = 60 + 48% popular) = 108 delegates
Johnson (0 states = 0 + 3% popular) = 3 delegates
Doesn't change the results, but it also doesn't take into account a potential higher voter turnout which might have affected the distribution of popular delegates.
I wonder if it would have changed any past elections. Probably Bush v Gore.
That would result it something pretty close to what I pondered, but I doubt you'd ever get buy-in from the big states like FL, TX, CA. In Texas (the majority republicans) would never vote to switch to giving some delegates to democrats. The same result but opposite reasoning in CA.I've always wondered if more states (especially the bigger population states) adopted the Maine distribution of electoral votes how the electoral college would vote. Maine tallies votes by Congressional district with a candidate each getting an elector for winning a House district, then the bonus two electors if they win the majority of the districts. But those rules are up to each state to decide.