What's everyones opinion on President Trump?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 minute ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

Yes, the Democratic party were the ones catering to a certain demographic at that time. 

 

 

 

 

And that is different today... how, exactly?

[jg121783 3,915]

24 minutes ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

"Ultra liberal sanctuary city strongholds"

 

Ok...

Well if you look at a map of how people voted a vast majority of Hillary voters are concentrated in sanctuary cities.

[Adam&Allison 128]

Just now, jg121783 said:

Well if you look at a map of how people voted a vast majority of Hillary voters are concentrated in sanctuary cities.

And this is why, IMO, the popular vote is redundant. Los Angeles county has a population of 10,000,000 people, but it's not representative of the country as a whole. If we went off the popular vote, Manhattan, Los Angeles, Houston and Chicago would determine the results every time - and most of them, as stated, are very heavily liberal leaning. 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

When was the last time you've been to a northern university? 

 

i gradeated from Harvard

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

Completely true.. 

I like to give it a free pass because at least it tries to admit it's faults. 

 

 

Well the confederacy is no longer around, so tis hard for them to apologize. 

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

10 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

And that is different today... how, exactly?

I'm pretty sure you have a decent grasp of American history. 

Theres no need for me to go deeper into this topic. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

20 minutes ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

I'm pretty sure you have a decent grasp of American history. 

Theres no need for me to go deeper into this topic. 

Yes I think I do.  And I clearly see how the left tries to use government dependency to get people to vote democrat.  But not everyone can see that, or at least are not willing to admit it.

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

49 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

Yes I think I do.  And I clearly see how the left tries to use government dependency to get people to vote democrat.  But not everyone can see that, or at least are not willing to admit it.

Yes because only "liberals" use welfare.

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

1 hour ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Well the confederacy is no longer around, so tis hard for them to apologize. 

I guess an argument can be made that the rebels kind of broke off into different cults/gangs/ organizations. 

Similar to the Black Panthers. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

Just now, Keith & Arileidi said:

I guess an argument can be made that the rebels kind of broke off into different cults/gangs/ organizations. 

Similar to the Black Panthers. 

There are many people here in the South that still regard our ancestors as heroes fighting for what THEY thought was right at the time. So that's why there are groups like Sons of Confederate Veterans(SCV), I do not have to go any further about the KKK because they are repugnant. My ancestor fought in the Civil War for the Confederacy as poor farmer, he did not own any slaves at all but he still fought.

[yuna628 9,676]

2 hours ago, IDWAF said:

I thought that was the democrats?  Or perhaps they are one and the same?

 

It’s ironic how much we focus on slavery in America (perhaps because it is OUR country?) when America came to the slave game very late, and left it very quickly.  Slavery of people (of all races) has been happening for thousands of years, and continues today in some countries (quite active, in fact), yet everyone seems to want to focus on a few years of US history still today.

I don't think there is anything in this statement that is somehow a plus or excuse for our behavior in this country. It's sort of like saying ''but everyone else was doing it...'' type thing. There were plenty of other countries that ended slavery well before us, and some that pretended to take the high ground all the while still funding things behind the scenes (shameful UK). Focus on a few years? It was more than a few years. It was a critical period of history for this country and it's  still felt. If you do not learn from history, if you try to ignore it, or sweep it under the rug or shrug.. it will come back to bite you.

 

There was never any excuse for slaveholding or servitude in this country. We shouldn't have started it if we truly believed our founding principles. It is the greatest of shames that has stained us, and to some degree will never be erased.

[yuna628 9,676]

2 hours ago, IDWAF said:

Yes I think I do.  And I clearly see how the left tries to use government dependency to get people to vote democrat.  But not everyone can see that, or at least are not willing to admit it.

And what does the 'right' try to use to get people to vote their way I wonder...

1 hour ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

There are many people here in the South that still regard our ancestors as heroes fighting for what THEY thought was right at the time. So that's why there are groups like Sons of Confederate Veterans(SCV), I do not have to go any further about the KKK because they are repugnant. My ancestor fought in the Civil War for the Confederacy as poor farmer, he did not own any slaves at all but he still fought.

Sorry but, there is nothing heroic in fighting for the confederacy. It was just plain wrong, like it or lump it. No one wants to believe that they were wrong in fighting for something I know... but I just respectfully disagree. The majority of my ancestors were abolitionists and believed in the founding principles of this country, but there was also a clear divide on my father's mother's side that were slaveholders and confederates. It was what provided them $s. There was nothing noble or heroic in that. I don't look upon them as honorable figures, I look at them with shame and sorrow for how far they fell. I've wrestled deeply at understanding their original origins and wondering how on earth they got themselves where a once-persecuted people could then be the persecutors themselves. And even though the confederacy is over, slavery is gone, there are civil rights... nothing changed too much in their more modern mindset either. When my grandparents from that side were alive they were still pretty horrible racists (I guess it would have freaked pop the hell out to know that his 2x grandfather was actually mixed-race likely illegit child/slave at some point..).

 

I guess my point is, people can try to coat the issue to feel better, or convince themselves that they ''were just doing what they thought was right''... but the right way was staring them in the face.

[jg121783 3,915]

2 hours ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

There are many people here in the South that still regard our ancestors as heroes fighting for what THEY thought was right at the time. So that's why there are groups like Sons of Confederate Veterans(SCV), I do not have to go any further about the KKK because they are repugnant. My ancestor fought in the Civil War for the Confederacy as poor farmer, he did not own any slaves at all but he still fought.

That's not surprising considering only 2% of people actually owned slaves and there were other major issues that the war was fought over other than slavery despite what the virtue signaling left wants people to believe. I'm not saying I endorse confederate soldiers or their beliefs but most of them were fighting for things besides slavery and it is a fairly narrow minded view of history to say otherwise.

[bcking 3,157]

4 hours ago, Adam&Allison said:

And this is why, IMO, the popular vote is redundant. Los Angeles county has a population of 10,000,000 people, but it's not representative of the country as a whole. If we went off the popular vote, Manhattan, Los Angeles, Houston and Chicago would determine the results every time - and most of them, as stated, are very heavily liberal leaning. 

Why does a "distribution" of the country, but one that does not reflect an actual majority, "represent the country as a whole" in your opinion? We want to represent the PEOPLE of the country, not the geography of the country. It doesn't matter where the majority of the people are, they are still the majority. 

 

Both ways of surveying the country as a whole has its flaws. By "weighing" each state somewhat equally you are giving more power to some people (those who live in rural areas) compared to those who live in urban centers. Why does the vote of someone in LA matter less than someone else just because they live in a large city?

[Adam&Allison 128]

6 minutes ago, bcking said:

Why does a "distribution" of the country, but one that does not reflect an actual majority, "represent the country as a whole" in your opinion? We want to represent the PEOPLE of the country, not the geography of the country. It doesn't matter where the majority of the people are, they are still the majority. 

 

Both ways of surveying the country as a whole has its flaws. By "weighing" each state somewhat equally you are giving more power to some people (those who live in rural areas) compared to those who live in urban centers. Why does the vote of someone in LA matter less than someone else just because they live in a large city?

 

Because if you went simply by the popular vote, in federal elections the candidates would simply campaign in major metropolitan areas, and tailor their policies around winning the vote in those cities. 

 

People in Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Idaho etc wouldn’t get a second thought. At least with the electoral college, even if the state only has a few electoral points - it’s still enough for candidates to try and claim those points. 

 

I think you’re right, there are definite issues with both ways of doing it - but in my opinion the electoral college gives a fairer view of the country as a whole over the popular vote. In the 2016 election, for instance, Hillary won the popular vote but you wouldn’t find many people who voted for her in middle America or the South. Even in PA, the state I live in, outside of Philadelphia - it’s mainly Trump county.