|
Post by Lala on Nov 20, 2017 6:14:22 GMT -5
There are a whole bunch of other reasons the Electoral College is awful too, but I really do not think it is accomplishing what you claim it is, and it is needlessly making the majority of the country feel like their votes don't matter and disengaging them from the political system. We also have the whole issue of faithless electors, which is technically allowed but hasn't happened and probably won't, but we'll keep it on the books just in case we feel like subverting the will of the people, lol A little late to the party, lol. I think it's so that each state has an equal vote? I thought about this later. We are a republic of states, not a democracy...so the electoral college is supposed to make it so each state has an even vote? I suppose not. Maybe that's what they should do. Have everyone in each state vote -- then whatever topic/person wins that state gets one vote in the final election? So 51 votes (with DC)? Does that work better. * * * * * I have no real opinion on Shakespeare's works, so: Gandhih's question: The Best Shakespeare play is: A Midsummer Night's Dream
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Nov 20, 2017 13:46:22 GMT -5
There are a whole bunch of other reasons the Electoral College is awful too, but I really do not think it is accomplishing what you claim it is, and it is needlessly making the majority of the country feel like their votes don't matter and disengaging them from the political system. We also have the whole issue of faithless electors, which is technically allowed but hasn't happened and probably won't, but we'll keep it on the books just in case we feel like subverting the will of the people, lol A little late to the party, lol. I think it's so that each state has an equal vote? I thought about this later. We are a republic of states, not a democracy...so the electoral college is supposed to make it so each state has an even vote? I suppose not. Maybe that's what they should do. Have everyone in each state vote -- then whatever topic/person wins that state gets one vote in the final election? So 51 votes (with DC)? Does that work better. * * * * * I have no real opinion on Shakespeare's works, so: Gandhih's question: The Best Shakespeare play is: A Midsummer Night's DreamNo, right now the system is that each states has a number of electors that is determined by adding together the number of Representatives in the House (determined by census) and number of Senators (2 for every state). So it does skew towards the votes of people living in small states counting for more, but it still doesn't matter that much because their states also aren't worth much. I mean, I think the system you are proposing is even worse than the current one because I just fundamentally don't think that California and Wyoming should get an equal say in determining the president. State lines are somewhat arbitrarily drawn and I think completely ignoring population is even worse. The majority of people's votes would count for even less than they currently do in that system since not only would California for example always vote Democratic, but now despite being the largest state it has the same vote as one of the smallest state. California as a state is so large and diverse and to say that a state that's so small in comparison deserves that much more of a proportional say still is wrong. And I think some of the issues that I highlighted earlier still hold.
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Nov 20, 2017 14:01:34 GMT -5
Disagree, Hermes/Mercury is far more better because 1) adorable wings on his feet and 2) he can enter and leave the underworld unharmed and is the only one who can pull that off. The best Shakespreare play is: a Midsummer Night's Dream. I strongly, strongly disagree with this. I'm not sure what I think Shakespeare's best play is (probably Hamlet, but that's just off the top of my head) but I am absolutely sure that it isn't Midsummer Night's Dream. Now I tend to have a preference for tragedies (that's just my taste) but even among the comedies I think Midsummer Night's Dream stands out as one of Shakespeare's least substantive plays, at least among those with the reputation that it has. Now it isn't necessarily trying to be super insightful or to make some comment on human nature, it's just trying to be a fun, accessible crowd-pleaser, but Shakespeare is capable of so much more than that even in his comedies. I think As You Like It and Much Ado About Nothing both are much better comedies who have more to say about humans and are also better written and funnier, frankly. The Tempest has also always had a place in my heart as one of my favorites even though it's pretty simple, but Shakespeare was truly ahead of his time when he wrote it and the soliloquy at the end where Shakespeare basically says farewell to the theater through Prospero always gets to me. And Merchant of Venice and Twelfth Night are both also fabulous. I've also heard great things about both Othello and King Lear but I haven't read them so I can't comment on that. But yeah, Hamlet is probably the best, but all of the plays that I've mentioned are better than Midsummer Night's Dream in my opinion. In a similar vein, No Fear Shakespeare and similar "modern English" translations are disgraceful, completely butcher the original texts, and ought not be used to teach or read Shakespeare. Footnotes explaining references are fine, but if you're going to read Shakespeare you should read it as it was written.
|
|
|
Post by Your Favourite Vulpine on Nov 20, 2017 14:28:02 GMT -5
Great! Skelda now it's your turn to come up with a statement we can (dis)agree on.
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Nov 20, 2017 15:31:18 GMT -5
Oh right I forgot.
Um let's think.
Human beings have no free will (meaning ability to make decisions or have any kind of control over any aspect of our lives).
|
|
|
Post by Lala on Nov 20, 2017 16:42:46 GMT -5
No, right now the system is that each states has a number of electors that is determined by adding together the number of Representatives in the House (determined by census) and number of Senators (2 for every state). So it does skew towards the votes of people living in small states counting for more, but it still doesn't matter that much because their states also aren't worth much. I mean, I think the system you are proposing is even worse than the current one because I just fundamentally don't think that California and Wyoming should get an equal say in determining the president. State lines are somewhat arbitrarily drawn and I think completely ignoring population is even worse. The majority of people's votes would count for even less than they currently do in that system since not only would California for example always vote Democratic, but now despite being the largest state it has the same vote as one of the smallest state. California as a state is so large and diverse and to say that a state that's so small in comparison deserves that much more of a proportional say still is wrong. And I think some of the issues that I highlighted earlier still hold. Why not? All states are equal. Just like each citizen is equal. Are you saying that Joe Smith from San Diego is more important than Mary Cartwright from Casper? Why YES, in essence you ARE saying that. So you are saying some states are more equal than others? Isn't that like racism or sexism -- except for states? Stateism, lol. Well, gee Wyoming, you are such a stupid state out in the middle of nowhere, so you aren't as important to us. Any citizen who lives in Wyoming is worth 1/3 of any citizen who lives in California. Go home, Wyoming. We don't need you here. -- Skelda
|
|
|
Post by Lala on Nov 20, 2017 16:46:23 GMT -5
Oh right I forgot. Um let's think. Human beings have no free will (meaning ability to make decisions or have any kind of control over any aspect of our lives). Disagree. I have free will. I have the free will to "X" out of any comment you make I think "no" is the determining word there. That's so concrete. Sims 4 Pets & Dogs is NOT the best animal/pet addition to the Sims series.
|
|
|
Post by Your Favourite Vulpine on Nov 20, 2017 17:18:47 GMT -5
Agreed. Might even be the worst.
Rosey should have a conversation with Cleverbot and post the whole script here for us to read.
|
|
|
Post by Lala on Nov 20, 2017 17:41:02 GMT -5
Agreed. Might even be the worst. Rosey should have a conversation with Cleverbot and post the whole script here for us to read. Agree. If it is possible, lol. Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday of the year!! (if you come from a different country, you may substitute your holiday feast if you have one)!
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Nov 20, 2017 18:41:51 GMT -5
Disagree. Thanksgiving is no Christmas, I'm sorry. Christmas is the annual holiday.
Turkey is not that delicious.
|
|
|
Post by Lala on Nov 20, 2017 18:48:55 GMT -5
Disagree. Thanksgiving is no Iistmas, I'm sorry. Christmas is the annual holiday. Turkey is not that delicious. It's not about the Turkey! It's about the Lala!! Disagree. Turkey, although not the tastiest is still pretty good. I'd eat it over tuna fish any day. Tulips are among the world's greatest flowers.
|
|
|
Post by ApplelovePear on Nov 20, 2017 19:33:49 GMT -5
Welp. As a Dutch person. Sorry to disagree Lala, I prefer getting roses! I got some beautiful pink 'get well soon' roses from friends English is one of the more beautiful languages (say top 5) in this world (nothing beats Frysk, but I won't state that as no one here would probably agree, eventhough it's pretty close to English, and Scandinavian languages, which I also like, I'm drifting, sorry)
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Nov 20, 2017 20:06:06 GMT -5
No, right now the system is that each states has a number of electors that is determined by adding together the number of Representatives in the House (determined by census) and number of Senators (2 for every state). So it does skew towards the votes of people living in small states counting for more, but it still doesn't matter that much because their states also aren't worth much. I mean, I think the system you are proposing is even worse than the current one because I just fundamentally don't think that California and Wyoming should get an equal say in determining the president. State lines are somewhat arbitrarily drawn and I think completely ignoring population is even worse. The majority of people's votes would count for even less than they currently do in that system since not only would California for example always vote Democratic, but now despite being the largest state it has the same vote as one of the smallest state. California as a state is so large and diverse and to say that a state that's so small in comparison deserves that much more of a proportional say still is wrong. And I think some of the issues that I highlighted earlier still hold. Why not? All states are equal. Just like each citizen is equal. Are you saying that Joe Smith from San Diego is more important than Mary Cartwright from Casper? Why YES, in essence you ARE saying that. So you are saying some states are more equal than others? Isn't that like racism or sexism -- except for states? Stateism, lol. Well, gee Wyoming, you are such a stupid state out in the middle of nowhere, so you aren't as important to us. Any citizen who lives in Wyoming is worth 1/3 of any citizen who lives in California. Go home, Wyoming. We don't need you here. -- Skelda
No Lala. F. You get an F. First, your system of the electoral college doesn't solve the problem of there being swing states that determine every single election. The majority of the votes cast each election do not matter because they are in red or blue states, and your system even amplifies the problem since fewer states are needed to swing a vote potentially. You are basically saying that neither Mary Cartwright nor Joe Smith matter because Wyoming always votes Republican and California always votes Democratic, so they might as well not vote. But secondly, your standard of states is totally arbitrary. I can about people, about making as many people as possible feel like their vote is mattered and their voice is heard. You are the one saying that Joe Smith matters many times less than Mary Cartwright because California, despite being many times larger than Wyoming and being much more diverse, gets a single vote because it was arbitrarily decided that most of the West Coast would be a single state. States that are smaller should not get equal representation because they represent fewer people, and most people think of them as Americans first and Wyomingians (sp?) second. If you give Wyoming and California each a single vote, each Wyoming vote is worth 1/585,501 of an electoral vote while each California vote is worth 1/39.25 million of an electoral vote. That is blatantly unfair and is privileging certain citizens over others because of where they arbitrarily happen to live. It's voter suppression, it's accomplishing nothing good, and it has to go.
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Nov 20, 2017 20:09:48 GMT -5
Welp. As a Dutch person. Sorry to disagree Lala, I prefer getting roses! I got some beautiful pink 'get well soon' roses from friends English is one of the more beautiful languages (say top 5) in this world (nothing beats Frysk, but I won't state that as no one here would probably agree, eventhough it's pretty close to English, and Scandinavian languages, which I also like, I'm drifting, sorry) Hmm, disagree? I love English a lot as a language, but because it's the only language I speak I have a hard time thinking of it as beautiful, it's just the default. I do love the English language though, I just think other languages are more beautiful since they are different from what I'm used to. The death penalty is immoral; no government should have the right to execute its own citizens no matter what they did or how much evidence they have against them.
|
|
|
Post by Lala on Nov 20, 2017 21:10:31 GMT -5
Disagree!!! There are some on the earth that should be gone completely. I prefer light-hearted agree/disagree statements
|
|