BF2S Forums Presidential Election 2016

And then to top it all off the result is decided by a fucking coin toss.

Man... people are really jerking themselves about this coin toss. Get ready to take off your foil hat!
First of all, it's a primary NOT THE ACTUAL ELECTION. Secondly, in SOME precincts there's an odd number of delegates, lets say 7, if the vote is tied, they each get 3 and the coin flip decides the last delegate. Read more about it (or likely don't, just keep bitching) here: http://www.npr.org/2016/02/02/465268206 … ry-clinton

Please keep defending a factually flawed system, show that stupidity and blind nationalism. It's the same reason your the only developed country without universal health care, the only developed country with bizarre out of control gun laws/crime, the only developed (and 99% of underdeveloped) countries to not use the metric system.

DrunkFace wrote:

pirana6 wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

That's bullshit. Your demographics requires small city votes to count, If you just campaigned in major cities you would be ignoring 90% of the country. You can't win with only 10% of the votes, except.... when you have a system set up how it currently is.

You can't win with only 10% of the votes. Not sure where you got the facts there.

If we completely remove the 'states' we'd have one big country - fine. Then candidates only campaign in the biggest cities and ignore any place in the country that doesn't have a large population. Is that better?

Of course you can. Just need a more extreme example of the republican primary. As long as you have FTP voting winner takes all, you can theoretically win the presidency with 2 votes in California. In fact you could do it with 1 vote.

What the hell do you classify as "biggest cities". Because to get anywhere near 50% of the population you could need to visit over 250 cities, over half with less then 200k people. And even then you would need everyone to vote for you.

If you had demographics like Australia where 4 cities make near on 60% of the total population then you would have a point, not so much in the US.

pirana6 wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

pirana6 wrote:

You ARE angry. You complain more than the entire us population of this site. How many times have you even been to this country you can't stop bitching about?

I've been to the great Satan 4-5 times.
In that period America has 'intervened' militarily in 11 different countries, each time for no reason other than its money-making/power agenda.

Which 11 countries?

SuperJail Warden wrote:

You guys are acting personally offended when Dilbert and DickFace pointed out the problems with our constitution and political system. The way our government is designed is inherently stupid and it goes beyond our current political culture.

The house of representatives which most of the stupid crap from congress comes from shouldn't be elected based off first past the post. And congressional districts shouldn't be allowed to be redrawn by state governments. The house should be elected like a parliament and it would fix many of the issues there and probably rein in the political parties to a point.

And it doesn't make sense that in the Senate a state with 400,000 people has the same amount of senators as a state with 40,000,000. The Midwest's senators should probably be condensed down and the states should be allowed only a handful of senators due to their small population. And I don't care if small states lose their representation because currently a small irrelevant handful of senators representing 10,000,000 people can stop disaster aid from reaching 100,000,000 people and ruin lives.

And people do treat our constitution like a holy document. I blame evangelical Protestantism but that's for another time. The last time our constitution was amended was 25 years ago and it was an amendment that had been pending since 1789. Before that it was an amendment in the 1960's.

DesertFox- wrote:

I still can't really fathom how her supporters are calling Hillary a pragmatic one who will actually accomplish the things she says. If there's one thing the Republicans like more than calling Obama a Muslim, it's chasing Hillary over Benghazi. I only foresee the current intractable gridlock getting worse if she's back in the White House.

Dilbert_X wrote:

No, he gave her confidential documents to read at home.

Jay wrote:

With a republican house she will accomplish zilch.

GG America

Honestly, blocking stuff just so they can say 'oh look, Democrats can't do anything because we're retarded' is what is making Americans angry, see my previous link.

In the meantime China has 5 year, 10 year, 50 year and 100 year plans.

Jay wrote:

They ran away from some podunk part of the country where they were undoubtedly one of the brightest and most ambitious among their small pool of contacts, and thus they have an overly large sense of self-importance.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2016-02-10 01:50:44)