Trump 2024

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Charles Fout, Nov 27, 2022.

Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Charles Fout

    Charles Fout Active Member

    I'm all in! Now that he's announced, I decided to fully support our once and future President.<3
     
  2. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

  3. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Assuming we still have fair and free elections, he can't win the presidency. But he can win the nomination. And even if he loses that, I would not be surprised to see him launch a 3rd-party bid.
     
    Rachel83az and Maniac Craniac like this.
  4. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    [​IMG]
     
  5. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Given the success Democrats had supporting lunatic fringe candidates in Republican primaries, I'm not sure which outcome would be better for them.
     
  6. LevelUP

    LevelUP Active Member

  7. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    As a life long Democrat, I don't usually try to give advice to Republicans that would help them win the presidency. This is a weird situation though. I'd rather see a Republican in the presidency than to take a chance at Trump getting a second term. I'm not sure that our democracy would survive another four years of Trump. So here's the advice.

    While it's true that Trump activates the Republican base, he is even better at activating the Democrats and independents to get out and vote against him. This makes Trump a loser. He lost the popular vote in 2016 by over 3 million votes. He lost the House and Senate in 2018. He lost the presidency in 2020. He contributed to the Republicans not picking up the Senate and only barely picking up the House in 2022. Trump is a loser in the general election. He would most likely lose the presidency if he gets the Republican nomination for 2024. The Republican's best chance of winning in 2024 would be to nominate someone else besides Trump.
     
    Charles Fout likes this.
  8. Charles Fout

    Charles Fout Active Member

    I'm delighted to read my DI Colleagues remark about my musings in an analytical manner. We will be living in "Interesting Times" for a sustained period. Let's continue to be civil towards each other. <3
     
    Bill Huffman likes this.
  9. LevelUP

    LevelUP Active Member

    We have a constitutional republic, NOT a democracy.

    The electoral college system determines the presidential race as specified in the constitution.

    The states get as many votes as they have representatives (435 total), senators (100 total), and 3 votes for the District of Columbia.

    The electoral college system help to protect states' rights and ensures that presidential candidates would have to campaign in all 57 50 states.
     
    MasterChief and Charles Fout like this.
  10. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    State rights is not really a valid argument. Also, the founding fathers didn't even like the idea of campaigning for the presidency. That change came later with Andrew Jackson.

    Quote(source linked below):
    "felt that gentlemen should not campaign for public office (The saying was "The office should seek the man, the man should not seek the office.")."

    The argument closest to yours is that it protected smaller states from larger states always getting the presidency, especially assuming that there would be no runoff election to get to 50% + 1.

    This looks like a pretty good paper on it. https://elections.delaware.gov/mockelection/pdfs/eleccoll.pdf
     
    Maniac Craniac and Rachel83az like this.
  11. SweetSecret

    SweetSecret Well-Known Member

    Ha! If Trump was going to get in a second time he already would have. We have a place-holder right now that not even most of the Democrats are thrilled about. Biden was the compromise.
     
  12. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Perhaps not that one.
     
  13. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    A republic is representative democracy. Besides, many states have ballot initiative, and some have town meetings, both of which are direct democracy.

    It ensures that they don't have to do this because only swing states are realistically in play. If you're a Republican in California, you may as well not even bother vote for president.
     
  14. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    However, the process involves millions of individual decisions, not one big one. And a huge bunch of those decisions will be in Trump's favor.

    Trump prevailed in 2016 by winning pluralities against numerous opponents. Had he faced one serious challenger, he might not have won. The 2024 situation seems to be shaping up in a similar form. He can win the nomination with a similar set of pluralities.
     
    Maniac Craniac and Bill Huffman like this.
  15. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Absolutely right. The Electoral College effectively narrows the contest to a handful of "battleground" states. As you point out, a direct vote would require candidates to strive for votes all over the country instead, and voters in the minority in a state would be equally franchised as those in states where their party holds a majority. (This goes for those in states where the majority is unquestioned. Democrats in California and Republicans in Wyoming aren't having much of a say, either, since their candidates can take their states for granted. (Or do so incorrectly, right Secretary Clinton?)
     
    Maniac Craniac and Rachel83az like this.
  16. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    There are many reasons why I think electoral college is valuable and needed system.
    One of them that I value is that some states have kept traditions upon which the country was founded that otherwise would have been wiped out by large states.
    My observation is that some states still offering some conservative views of Judaeo Christian values that once US was following or built on.
    From the symbols of Moses and 10 commandments the Law and Judicial in DC, to the once view of this land as New Israel.

    The whole Republic way of governance, the initial 13 tribes/colonies.
    Obviously things changed, and distanced from what I mentioned, demographics change and its further gravitates away.
    We can be reminded for example Yale University beginning.
    Notice the Hebrew letters -Of Urim and Tumim that are mentioned in the Bible, Exd breastplate stones of High Priest Aaron.
    Yale Chartered by the Connecticut Colony, the Collegiate School was established in 1701 by clergy to educate Congregational ministers before moving to New Haven in 1716. Originally restricted to theology and sacred languages,

    [​IMG]
    Some pictures and images from DC - Moses and the tablets etc
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    Charles Fout likes this.
  17. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    You say that like it's a good thing.

    Anyway, if that's your argument then it's a stronger one for federalism, Congressional supremacy, and scaling back the administrative state than it is for an electoral college.
     
    Rachel83az and Charles Fout like this.
  18. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    I don't think that's the case. I was looking at very specific side of it in my previous post.

    Our federal government has three parts. They are the Executive, Legislative and Judicial.
    1, We hold 51 popular elections every presidential election year: one in each state and one in D.C.
    Part 2 of the election is held later among the states' 538 electors, not the November election, which officially determines the identity of the next President.
    At least 270 votes are needed to win. So yes the rase for the 270.
    No political party can ignore any state for too long without suffering the consequences. For example didn't California voted Republican in 1988. Texas used to vote Democrat.
    EC protects against the possible tyranny of the majority, encourages coalition building and discourages voter fraud.
    At the time and today the small populous states were fearful that if representation was set up in a certain way that favored big states, they would be unimportant, and the big states thought the same thing about the small states. The electoral college became/becomes the solution, regarding how to solve this problem/s so let the states pick the President of the United States.
    Obviously this became more complex.
    Does it protect small states? Not necessarily. Or did it overcame regionalism or sectionalism?.
    So, a lot of those premises only partly worked out over time. Some push to maybe try to get more states to allocate their electors on a proportional basis?
    In state were Democrat wins 65% of the popular vote and a Republican wins 35%. Maybe allocate the electoral votes 65/35. Or, in a state where Republicans gets 60%, and a Democrat 40%, allocate it that way (60/40). In our days there are many proposals for trying to reform EC, but none of them seem to be getting the consensus.
    Also in close elections can you imagine national popular vote recount ? Today we recount a few states.
     
    Charles Fout likes this.
  19. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    The composition of the House and the Senate already addresses the concern that states with wildly different populations may have different interests.

    The only reform for the Electoral College that has traction is to abolish it, and understandably so.

    No one said that abolishing the Electoral College would remove presidential elections from state oversight. Either way, I'm not sure why you're trying to paint recounts as bad.
     
    Rachel83az likes this.
  20. LevelUP

    LevelUP Active Member

    The Constitution, much like the Bible, the left only likes the parts they agree with.

    The parts they don't agree with, they ignore.
     
    Charles Fout likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page