TRUMP 2020!

[Leo]

But also the US doesn't like states succeeding. Plus the confederacy was dumb anyway. I still don't get why I see people waving the flags. Sure, you might have heritage in the confederacy, but it was racist and unAmerican. Interestingly enough the same people fly 50 American flags and don't even see the irony lol.

[William one eye]

The confederacy was wrongful, not dumb.
Essentially the majority of the united states believed slavery was wrong. Remember the aveage person did not own slaves.
Just the upperclass. So it mainly affected slaves and plantation owners

Plantations needed workers. Instead of hiring labor they purchased them from slave traders who had purchased them from Africans. This was common practice and fairly recently had been considered socially acceptable.
Essentually they were being foreced to change how they farmed. They were being asked to give up what they considered their property.
I suppose it was more acceptable to plantation owners that treated slaves decently, where the transition to employing them , would not be considerable extra cost. It was probably totally unacceptable to those that treated them as disposable property.
Who intended just to work them till they were no longer useful.

Most people fly the battle flag to honor family members that died in the war. Remember most of the soldeirs were just middle and lower class and most did not own slaves.

Some people fly it because they think the war was about states rights. They are not wrong. But they violation of states rights happened to be the right to own slaves. Which was the real issue.

Some fly it to represent their southern heritage.
More so before people became socially aware others might be offended by it.


Some fly the flag to oppress or intimidate

Some fly it because they are ignorant.

As for those that would fly both
Would it seem strange to see and American Flag and a Flag of Zion in a synagogue. Probably not.

Its ok to celebrate both your nation and your culture or heritage.

[DezNutz]

I disagree, in my opinion i dont think the party changed, their message changed, and their voters believe them and support what they preach not what they do.

Im ashamed the republican party accepted the
race mongering bigots that fled the democratic party when the democrats started trying to win minority votes in th e 1960s

I do not in any way support the electoral college system.
No reason we cant just have a popular vote.

Some times it might favor one side, some times the other.

It would mean every vote truly counts.
No matter what voting district you live in.

You can't blame republicans for "accepting" race mongering bigots. There is no application to join a political party. You simply just join. As well, information wasn't passed around like it is today. What people do and say in private or in closed groups isn't broadcast like it is in today's age.

The electoral college was actually ingenious. The founding fathers had incredible foresight. Without the electoral college, all Presidential Elections would be decided by a handful of states. For those that live in small population states, there vote would be meaningless. In turn issues effecting "fly over country" would be ignored as their vote can be ignored when it comes to election time. Focus would be on issues affecting states that mattered for elections. Think about it, why would other state senators and representatives care about the issues in a state that didn't benefit their agenda and the election of the executive who would implement that agenda. If their vote is meaningless to electing the president the issues affecting them would fall on deaf ears.

Additionally, the United States is not a Democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic, a representative government consisting of a House and Senate.

[Leo]

Yes it helps flyover states, but it means that the popular vote winner doesn't always win and that isn't fair to anyone.

[The Lamb]

You know the "big switch" is actually a lie devised before people had the ability to look things up easily. Its not about weather democrats and republicans switched parties, that happens all the time. You have to look at which Democrats that voted against the civil rights act and similar laws switched from Democrat to Republican. The answer is two of them did. Two dems that voted against equal rights turned republican, the rest of the bigots stayed and retired in the democrat party they just created a new narrative.

Not to big of a switch. Although, they have done a great making people think that republicans are racists even though the dems made the KKK, Jim Crow Laws, segregation, were against equal rights, and woman's right to vote, and were the ones who owned the slaves to begin with. Crazy really.

People really need to get up on their history before it completely rewritten. I mean, how many of you knew that Elizabeth Cady Stanton was a wealthy republican who helped start the womans sufferage movement, oh by the way her abolitionist husband was one of the founders of the republican party:) Damn Racists!!! LMAO

Pretty amazing that after 100 years of fighting for the rights of all, the republicans just all decided to be racists after the the vote for equal rights was passed. In 1964 in the senate, the vote 73-27. There were 27 Nays in senate for the civil rights act, 6 Republicans and 21 Democrats. The house vote was 289 - 126, the nays were 91 dems and 35 republicans.

These nays are the southern democrats that we are told did the big switch and became republicans. Look it up for yourself and find out how many of these southern dems actually switched parties

Lastly, nutz is correct again . The electoral college is designed to give a say to all states who have different needs. We are a constitutional republic. A joining of individual states to make a single nation. You dont want the major population zones making all the rules for the whole nation as NYC has different needs than say, New Mexico. If not for the electoral college, NY and CA would dictate every election and the rest of the states wouldn't get proper representation. Would be like England and Italy making the rules for all the EU, may not work very well for very long. You would have EU countries wanting to leave the EU ...hmnmmmmm Dont they teach civics in schools anymore? Holy crap!

[Rnnrman]

I hate him!
Thought about resigning from Army and moving to Canada but I figured we could last trough any administration...did not care for Mrs. Clinton either. First time since I was 18 I did not vote in a presidential election.

[The Lamb]

I think a bunch of you are on to something... maybe we could start a petition for Cali to secede from the union . Option B, Feniks, you know of any special lube we can use to frack the San Andreas fault? Not looking for violent shaking, just a large movement to make a new island

[William one eye]

You know the "big switch" is actually a lie devised before people had the ability to look things up easily. Its not about weather democrats and republicans switched parties, that happens all the time. You have to look at which Democrats that voted against the civil rights act and similar laws switched from Democrat to Republican. The answer is two of them did. Two dems that voted against equal rights turned republican, the rest of the bigots stayed and retired in the democrat party they just created a new narrative.

Not to big of a switch. Although, they have done a great making people think that republicans are racists even though the dems made the KKK, Jim Crow Laws, segregation, were against equal rights, and woman's right to vote, and were the ones who owned the slaves to begin with. Crazy really.

People really need to get up on their history before it completely rewritten. I mean, how many of you knew that Elizabeth Cady Stanton was a wealthy republican who helped start the womans sufferage movement, oh by the way her abolitionist husband was one of the founders of the republican party:) Damn Racists!!! LMAO

I stand correcrted, got suckered by historical fake news.
I tell people learn instead of beliving. Read enough matching opinion without fact checking and it starts to seem true.

I have done some more reading,

In reference to shifts in the later 60s and early 70s

It would seem more than two leaders left the democratic party because they started courting minorities, but not nearly as many as i thought. Voted dont tell all, if a leader was not in office that term or voted against their beliefs for a favor.

I was surpised to learn a few moved republican because they were dissapointed that the pro civil rights message being preached did not match thd actions of the leaders.


A few just shifted over concerns about the democratic fiscsl policys. No real surprise there.

Most seem to have just remained in the democratic party.

[William one eye]

I still do not undrrstand how electoral college resolves anything
California has 55 elevtoral votes.
New york has 20

Kansas has 6

How does that mean the states are getting equal representation.

Additionally
A candidate is probably only going to care about your state if it potentially is a swing state


As far as individual representation

In the 2016 election

In new york
20 eoectoral votes

4.5 million voted hillary
2.8 million voted trump

Despite the fact that trump won electoral


Thats 2.8 million votes that did not count for him in that state.

In ohio
18 electoral votes
2.8 million voted trump
2.4 million voted hillary

Thats 2.4 million votes that did not count for hillary


@meliva if you divided states electoral votes by percentage it becomes barely any different than popular vote.

[William one eye]

Yes it helps flyover states, but it means that the popular vote winner doesn't always win and that isn't fair to anyone.

To be honest, i doubt you would be complaining if trump had lost electoral and won popular.


Candidates are specifically trying to win electoral votes.
They approch those votes strategically and focus efforts to get a winning count nation wide. Trump did better at this.

Its the system used. if you win it, you win it.