I think the intention was to prevent the tyranny of the majority. If you think about it, New Hampshire could just switch on a dime tomorrow and possibly decide the election. You’d have both candidates campaigning in the state , needing their votes. It’s an incredibly intelligently crafted system.

 

The whole concept was an alternative to the popular vote so people take issue with it when the popular vote doesn’t match the winner but technically that was partly the whole point of it. Personally I think it’s great because it’s so unique. If it was a popular vote probably both candidates would be appealing more to California and New York and it probably would create huge problems. Whereas if say New York or California felt forgotten or mistreated now they can vote someone else or become a battleground state and suddenly it all changes. The system means you can’t overlook any state which is genius.

The original intention was to prevent candidates concentrating on states such as California. However, that was pre-radio, let alone television and the internet. It was designed for a time when a candidate could address tens of thousands of voters in California, but only hundreds in Delaware.

 

Now, candidates can easily overlook states. Why would candidates bother spending much time in California when we all know that all their electoral college votes will go to the Democrat candidate? The system is designed for an age where campaigning was mostly in rallies or face-to-face. Things have changed since then.

People are voters no matter whether they are in California or Missouri or Vermont or Utah. If New York always outvotes Vermont that's not a problem to fix in Vermont's favour because states aren't people. In actual fact, if you live in any of those states your vote is treated as a foregone conclusion while both presidential candidates woo the 100,000 or so swing voters in Pennsylvania every year and no one else.

 

Your vote also literally counts less if you live in a large state, because each state has 2 senators in addition to their other electoral votes which means that votes per state is biased in favour of small states.

Taylor Swift endorsing Kamala was the perfect timing :clap:

Seems like a better night for Kamala, I wonder if they’ll have another debate

The debate was hilarious - Trump kept going on about illegal immigrants ‘not even speaking English’ and ‘eating cats and dogs’. He also talked about how he’s best mates with Abdul from the Taliban, Putin and Victor Orban 🤣

Seems like a better night for Kamala, I wonder if they’ll have another debate

 

 

SEEMS. BETTER???

 

Jesus Christ!!!!! That's underplaying it just a bit :rofl: "rofl:

 

Time to get rid of the ridiculously antidemocratic electoral college and the ridiuclous antidemocratic voter suppression of poll closures and voter purges. Closing nearly all polls in Democratic areas of places like Texas is majorly anridemocratic too, as who is going to stand in line for 2-3 or more hours? The day isn't even a holiday.

The debate was hilarious - Trump kept going on about illegal immigrants ‘not even speaking English’ and ‘eating cats and dogs’. He also talked about how he’s best mates with Abdul from the Taliban, Putin and Victor Orban 🤣

 

The general view from the neutral press in the US is that there were no killer blows but no really big gaffes either. A draw really but Kamala held her own.

Accusing Kamala of personally performing 'transgender surgeries' on illegal aliens in prison was the cherry on top

The general view from the neutral press in the US is that there were no killer blows but no really big gaffes either. A draw really but Kamala held her own.

 

The fact Trump is refusing to face off again I think says a little different. If Kamala made any mistakes, the media would be absolutely all over it, it's not her quotes that are being ridiculed. Not that I expect it will change the polls much.

The general view from the neutral press in the US is that there were no killer blows but no really big gaffes either. A draw really but Kamala held her own.

 

Pretty every poll, newspaper report and reaction I've seen have it bad for Trump and good for Harris, (think it was 63-37 for 'who won the debate' from CNN, WaPo's swing state voter poll had them swinging for Harris by 23-2). Huge gaffes from Trump too at least from what I've been able to see, 'illegal aliens getting transgender operations in prisons' (?) and 'eating cats and dogs'. It's looking good for the Dem campaign from this. As I suspected.

 

We need another debate closer to the time, the more people see of Trump at this stage the less they like him, conversely, the more they see of Harris, the more she is liked.

The general view from the neutral press in the US is that there were no killer blows but no really big gaffes either. A draw really but Kamala held her own.

 

Lol. No. Even fox need admits he had s real stinker of a night. He's a pos who should be nowhere near president.

The general view from the neutral press in the US is that there were no killer blows but no really big gaffes either. A draw really but Kamala held her own.

 

And what neutral press is this btw? Lol. Doesn't really exist.

Pretty every poll, newspaper report and reaction I've seen have it bad for Trump and good for Harris, (think it was 63-37 for 'who won the debate' from CNN, WaPo's swing state voter poll had them swinging for Harris by 23-2). Huge gaffes from Trump too at least from what I've been able to see, 'illegal aliens getting transgender operations in prisons' (?) and 'eating cats and dogs'. It's looking good for the Dem campaign from this. As I suspected.

 

We need another debate closer to the time, the more people see of Trump at this stage the less they like him, conversely, the more they see of Harris, the more she is liked.

 

Has everyone not seen Trump enough lol!

Has everyone not seen Trump enough lol!

 

 

You'll be seeing a lot more of him when he's No.47. :o

Has everyone not seen Trump enough lol!

 

What I mean by that is voters seeing the Trump of 2024, who is completely different to the man who won in 2016, he's lethargic, out of sorts. He always rambled and had run on sentences but he does this more than ever now, talks about nothing in particular. All very telling signs of age and verging on senility. With Biden now out of the race, the Dems can and should go all in on Trump being too old, and the more voters see what he visibly looks like and acts now, the better the chance that works.

What I mean by that is voters seeing the Trump of 2024, who is completely different to the man who won in 2016, he's lethargic, out of sorts. He always rambled and had run on sentences but he does this more than ever now, talks about nothing in particular. All very telling signs of age and verging on senility. With Biden now out of the race, the Dems can and should go all in on Trump being too old, and the more voters see what he visibly looks like and acts now, the better the chance that works.

 

Agree with this, the Trump of 2024 is noticeably different. He'd have trounced Biden this time around, but none of his quotes or claims are sticking and some of the ones out of the latest debate are laughably memeable. Be interesting if those long standing older Republicans vote Democrat this time around (or don't vote at all) - doubt it will have too much effect on the election.

What I mean by that is voters seeing the Trump of 2024, who is completely different to the man who won in 2016, he's lethargic, out of sorts. He always rambled and had run on sentences but he does this more than ever now, talks about nothing in particular. All very telling signs of age and verging on senility. With Biden now out of the race, the Dems can and should go all in on Trump being too old, and the more voters see what he visibly looks like and acts now, the better the chance that works.

that’s an interesting observation. Trump has always been senile, but he seemed to get away with it because the other side either had prior baggage (Clinton) or were just more senile (Biden). Now 8 years after the cursed as hell 2016 AND against Harris who has none of that, there’s more of a negative spotlight towards him and his mental capability. It may seem ableist and ageist but this is also the type of rhetoric that Trump supporters have used against Biden for the past four years so it seems only fair game that the shoe is on the other foot

The general view from the neutral press in the US is that there were no killer blows but no really big gaffes either. A draw really but Kamala held her own.

 

I know you're basically his number one defender and think the sun shines out of his backside, but are you f*cking serious?? 🤦‍♂️

 

I know you're basically his number one defender and think the sun shines out of his backside, but are you f*cking serious?? 🤦‍♂️

 

 

That's what I read. Not my analysis. Am actually torn as would like to see a female President in my lifetime.

 

I think she'll win but only just.

Edited September 12, 2024Sep 12 by crazy chris

A draw? Lmao. He showed that he's a dementia ridden senile old fool.