LaGordita 2012-09-11 20:52:20

Its because you're ignorant

KILLY12 2012-09-11 20:54:55

I'm 18 now and legal to vote and in the same boat as you
I try to know at less what the I'm voting for "say" they'll do when they win
Besides that I'm just listening to what the most intelligent person I know say
Who they're voting for is who I'm voting

KILLY12 2012-09-11 20:56:27

Also, love the hell out of that pic

Natick 2012-09-11 21:37:05

No. Be lucky you're ignorant of this. The shit that gets released every month m8.

ohbombuh 2012-09-12 12:38:04

You should vote for Ron Paul if you like stuff.

On an unrelated topic (honestly for once), what's your favorite kind of porn?

Natick 2012-09-12 17:53:03

The real issue is that we have an economy in this shitter, an education system that is falling apart, a military budget that is unnecessarily bloated and what do these people care about more? FAGGOTS AND CYBERBULLIES.

Squidbit 2012-09-12 18:46:02

I'm pretty sure I've posted this on one of your other newsposts, but, I don't see any sense in worrying about shit I can't change.
Politics is one of those things.

Dosensuppen 2012-09-14 05:27:07

I wound answer, but you told me to shut up.

Knights 2012-09-14 19:45:01

The way I look at is we're all going to die one day so we should make this life as least sucky as possible by electing the candidate that won't fuck us up too bad in the long run.

Dosensuppen 2012-09-15 00:18:22

It honestly won't make a difference unless there's an up-rise in numbers who care, as well. The electoral college takes away the meaning of votes due to it overlapping popular votes.

Politics, as a whole, have a fight with political groups. Not the interest of an entire state. Some Republicans hoped Obama would fail due to him being a democrat. Party over country.

Congress sits on their ass because of their party. Then there's government bending over for corporations and activist groups -- attending to small manners than large.

So, unless you want to start a movement, it won't matter if you're not interested. You, by yourself, are powerless.

Dosensuppen 2012-09-15 18:12:59

Electoral votes were created to give out the interest of a particular state, without succumbing to the more uneducated individual. That was years ago. It's an antiquated system. Everyone and their grandmother can read these days. Everyone, at the least, has a right to basic education. There's no point in counting the popular vote, since it has proven, three times, to not truly represent the outcome of the presidential election. Our vote doesn't count, anymore. The only vote that truly counts is if one gets more vote from a particular state than another.

Members of the electoral college truly don't have to vote the way their state swings, though most do. And the entire state's vote is completely taken by which states gets which party. For instance, Kentucky tends to swing red. Even if Kentucky where to be 49% Democrat but 51% Republican -- it'll still take the entire Republican vote, rather than attempting to divide it to represent the interest of the voters more. It's not a fair system, it's antiquated.

The party group argument is something that bothers me because they're arguing JUST because of their group party. Not truly an interest in the United States (probably same in other nations). It's fine to argue matters, but they're just attempting to one up each other. It's more like a popularity contest than actually speaking about ways to run a country. Like I said, Republican Congress rather sit on their ass than attempt to reason (or care about the state) when there's a Democratic president -- vice versa as well. How is that healthy for the state?

---

I think I answered the question. But the votes of the people are just counted to "predict" the outcome. Though that's a bit pointless -- three times it's been proven wrong.

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_%28United_States%29">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College _%28United_States%29</a>

States, depending on population, can take more votes. California being the highest counted.

Honestly, this has probably more to do with slavery in the past. Smaller southern states had an abundance of slaves and wanted more influence. Though the only ones who would really vote would be educated land-owners. So, they could claim more Electoral Votes due to their population (slave) count, but since it's only a handful of whities, they could cooperate with each other.

The federal government reasoned with these states to unionize them. That time, they had little options.

Dosensuppen 2012-09-17 00:08:58

Basically. Member federalists wanted to end slavery there, but the state as a whole was desperate. They feared that taking a strong stand would simply make the strong slave states leave, if not go to war. So that compromised was formed.

However, the compromise was made one one hand, slave states could have a bit of influence, but on the other, the federalists didn't have to completely bend over. They could still show their power over them. It was honestly a bit of a gamble.

tarahloveshentai 2012-09-18 00:51:49

I don't care at all either.