Why is a Constitutional Republic more proper than a democracy?

[Into the Night]

Into the Night is a stalking troll.

LIF. Grow up.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

What is the confusion among those who wish to make America great again (2nd time asking) and how did Athenian democracy cause it?

I don't know anything about anybody who wants to make Amercia great again ("AGAIN" is hilarious). I'm just talking about MAGAs.

 

[Publius]

U R the problem.

You do know what the definition of insanity, is, right?

 

[IBDaMann]

You work, produce something, and you trade it for something you need, where someone else needs what you produced.

Wrong wording.

Value is added by offering goods and services at a price that realizes added value for the buyer and realizes a profit for the seller. Neither the word "work" or "labor" occurs.

Now, if you can't see that, then your credibility is in question.

Fuck you.

Blow me. We can do this all day.

If you were sincere,, sure. But, of course, given the tone, manner and caliber of your comments, you are disingenuous. I'd say you are actually lying. You're a liar.

Great pivot ... which means you are fleeing again. That explains the dust.

Have you noticed that you traffick in questions with an assumed premises, 'loaded questions'?

When you stop cowering in the corner, you might notice that my questions are really just easy questions. Your panicking full retreat is not necessary, although I realize that bolting in abject fear is your natural reaction and that you can't do much about that.

Have you noticed that you fail to query before jumping to conclusions.

Incorrect. I perform all required logic and draw all the correct conclusions, theorems, proofs, lemmas and corolaries. I do it all up front so as to save time later.

Why bother with people like you?

You really shouldn't. You should seek someone further down to your (un)education level who won't discuss anything that your thought-masters haven't approved.

There is especially no obligation to respond to the smug pricks (like you) of the world,

Smug! Too funny. The correct word for me is "complacent." I have somewhat of an aversion to single-syllable adjectives.

No, there is no point in debating those who are smug.

I offer you someone who is irritatingly complacent. You'll have full plausibility whenever you flee in terror at my anti-Marxism that you are actually EVADING because of annoyance. Everyone will believe you.

Only morons believe the election was stolen

Only a moron will try to convince others that they never really observed what they observed.

(I've been reading your pasts comments),

Oh, so now suddenly you expect me to believe that you can read. You're going to have to convince me first.

But,. you won't listen,

Oh, I listen. I'll let you know when you actually say something that isn't pure booooooolsch't.

you think you got it all figured out.

I see that I have it all figured out.

You don't understand what 'proof' actually is.,

Please bring it on. First, check your watch. Five minutes in, you'll be fleeing again.

I don't evade serious discussion.

That is all you do.

I've been on many forums for some 25 years going back to the 90s.

Johnn-come-lately.

So pester someone else who has you confused with someone intelligent.

Are you fleeing already? We haven't reached the five-minute mark yet.

If you actually believe you are sincere, feel free to prove me wrong.

That's tough to do seeing as how you have already fled again. Let me know when you can muster the courage to answer some "too easy" questions.

 

[Publius]

Let the pivot begin. I realize that I wasn't supposed to notice, but I did. My bad.

No, just focusing my narrative on who you are.

So you realize that you can't justify your assertion that labor is somehow the "ULTIMATE value of money" ... so you are trying to find a graceful way to flee from the conversation ... and by "graceful" I mean "throw up a smokescreen of distractionary insults" in an abrupt change of topic, i.e. the only way you know how.

This, folks, is a text book example of posturing an argument. Posturing is the fool's idea he has elevated himself in an argument by using language (in order to gain some percieved advantage) to belittle the opponent, as if that improves an argument.

Not only does it fail to do that, it demonstrates your novice debate skills, either that your you never learned them.

The facgt is, youbethebullshittingman, my comment merely went back to the original point, no distraction at all.

Somewhere along your Marxist reaming,

Oh yes, Anything that you disagree with is 'marxist'. Tsk tsk. that tired trope goes back to the John Bircher morons of the 60s, and has morphed into the bastion of MAGA maniacs, of which you profess to be a member, right?

you were infected with TDS,

TDS is a thought-terminating cliche.

TDS is not a real thing. It's not a condition extant in any medical journal, psychiatric or otherwise. No mental condition that is valid will have meaning only to one side of the two political parties. It it were valid, it would be clear to anyone.

Therefore, it's a rhetorical device created by the right that functions as a thought-terminating cliche. TTCs are rhetorical devices implanted in the minds of followers, implanted especially by demagogues (such as Trump) designed to curb critical thinking and kill the conversation, and they are propagated by demagogues (such as Trump) who do not want people to think critically, and when exposed to dissent, they use thought terminating cliches to kill the conversation. TDS is one of the more popular TTC's by the right.

So, instead of going through the trouble of actually engaging someone in a thoughtful debate, which takes work, a republican will just say 'that's TDS' and therefore they don't have to bother debating, that it's TDS settles it, or so the pseudo logic goes.

No, TDS is a TTC, nothing more, nothing less, and by virtue of that fact, not a valid argument.

The irony is that, by your use of this thought-terminating cliche, it shows that you are the infected one, not me.

precluding you from being rational on this topic. All you can do is babble in your raving. The good news is that when you flee in panic, you don't kick up nearly as much dust as I had imagined.

Posturing, self-puffery (by belittling others) , is not a merit worthy argument. Pseudo debate trick. We all do it, but that doesn't change the fact.

I'm directly in the center, with the Constitution as my roadmap.

If you were, you couldn't possibly vote for Trump, so, kill that idea.

You are so far to the left that I can't see you from where I'm standing, which explains why you can't see anything that you need to be seeing.

No, I'm left of center, there the truth is.

By the way, you are not a psychologist. Ask me how I know.

Maybe not, but if you vote for Trump, who lacks empathy, who is a sociopath, chances are you are, as well. That's how I know.

Chances are, but feel free to prove me wrong.

Not in the pit.

A pendulum, using it as a metaphor, rests at the center.

At least not until you learn something. That won't happen while you have others doing your thinking for you.

Posturing, invalid argument. And, I'll file that in the wishful thinking file.

 

[Publius]

Wrong wording.

Value is added by offering goods and services at a price that realizes added value for the buyer and realizes a profit for the seller. Neither the word "work" or "labor" occurs.

Now, if you can't see that, then your credibility is in question.


Blow me. We can do this all day.


Great pivot ... which means you are fleeing again. That explains the dust.


When you stop cowering in the corner, you might notice that my questions are really just easy questions. Your panicking full retreat is not necessary, although I realize that bolting in abject fear is your natural reaction and that you can't do much about that.


Incorrect. I perform all required logic and draw all the correct conclusions, theorems, proofs, lemmas and corolaries. I do it all up front so as to save time later.


You really shouldn't. You should seek someone further down to your (un)education level who won't discuss anything that your thought-masters haven't approved.


Smug! Too funny. The correct word for me is "complacent." I have somewhat of an aversion to single-syllable adjectives.

Complacency is the first stage of become a smug prick. A smug prick = arrogant complacency.

I offer you someone who is irritatingly complacent. You'll have full plausibility whenever you flee in terror at my anti-Marxism that you are actually EVADING because of annoyance. Everyone will believe you.


Only a moron will try to convince others that they never really observed what they observed.


Oh, so now suddenly you expect me to believe that you can read. You're going to have to convince me first.


Oh, I listen. I'll let you know when you actually say something that isn't pure booooooolsch't.


I see that I have it all figured out.


Please bring it on. First, check your watch. Five minutes in, you'll be fleeing again.


That is all you do.


Johnn-come-lately.


Are you fleeing already? We haven't reached the five-minute mark yet.


That's tough to do seeing as how you have already fled again. Let me know when you can muster the courage to answer some "too easy" questions.

You equate my avoiding your foolishness as 'fleeing'. All that is is your making shit up to feel good about your smuggery.

I'll be happy to answer questions

1. If you can ask a question that does not have an assumed premise or is a loaded question. (How does it feel to be a pervert? --- an example).
2. If you abstain from your asinine attempts to puff yourself up by belittling, which does not improve your argument. Funny you didn't notice that. What, you didn't think I wouldn't notice? Perhaps it didn't occur to you that you are not as smart as you think you are. A trait of of the smug. Look, we all fall prey to insulting others, but an insult isn't the kind of self-puffery you are engaging in. You really think you are impressing others on the forum. Tsk tsk. To the intelligent, you read pathetic.
3. If you quit making assumptions about someone you do not know.
4. You'll need to Read up on Marxism, what constitutes a Marxist (the evidence you've given on this forum suggests you do not understand this, as you conflate anything to the left of you as being 'Marxist', which is a logical fallacy and a clear indication of ignorance on the subject).
5. If your questions are sincere. Now, sincerity is obvious, and the lack of it is obvious, either you are sincere in your quest, or you are not.

So far, I'm not seeing it. But, feel free to prove to me you can be sincere. My gut feeling is that I doubt it.

 

[IBDaMann]

Complacency is the first stage of become a smug prick.

Nope. I was a mere smug prick long ago. I have since matured into a truly complacent bastard.

You equate my avoiding your foolishness as 'fleeing'.

Nope. It's a cause->effect chain. I ask you a question that causes you panic which causes you to flee. It's all rather straightforward.

I'll be happy to answer questions

1. If you can ask a question that does not have an assumed premise

You just stated that you won't answer any questions that have a correct answer. Smooth.

or is a loaded question.

... meaning that you will not answer any question that you declare to be a "loaded question", which you will do as you are fleeing from any question that causes you to panic. Grand!

2. If you abstain from your asinine attempts to puff yourself up by belittling,

Nope. As long as you keep making stupid assertions that beg for belittling, belittling is absolutely needed.

3. If you quit making assumptions about someone you do not know.

I'm fine with my understanding of everything you have broadcasted, unwittingly and otherwise.

4. You'll need to Read up on Marxism,

I'm well read on the authoritative sources. Don't be afraid to bring me your really tough questions.

 

[EdwinA]

There is nothing wrong with patriotism and love of country. Fascism requires it. You'll notice that regular vanilla Marxist socialism is not based on generating a nationalistic fervor, but rather in lighting a fire under the proletariat, wherever they are, to unite against the burgeoise. Fascism, on the other hand, calls for patriots to rally around the national flag. Fascism is socialism that is marketed under patriotism.

Notice, there weren't large pictures of Hitler shown at Nazi rallies, just mountains of large national flags/banners.

Good answer.

 

[IBDaMann]

I don't know anything about anybody who wants to make Amercia great again ("AGAIN" is hilarious). I'm just talking about MAGAs.

You are confused. You claim that you aren't talking about people who want to make America great again, and that you are only talking about people who want to make America great again.

At least you now understand why everyone ignores you.

 

[EdwinA]

That would be very bad. The DNC would make four key States totally WOKE and would then force WOKE onto all the other States as they never again lose another election. The voices of all the other States would be forever silenced.

Very bad idea.



... tests that are totally WOKE, developed directly by the DNC at the DNC, tests that must be "passed" in order for anyone to be able to vote.

No, thanks.

that excuse makes pretty much any govt. and/or economic reform impossible. Why bother with any elections at all?

 

[Into the Night]

I don't know anything about anybody who wants to make Amercia great again ("AGAIN" is hilarious). I'm just talking about MAGAs.

MAGA isn't a person. Redefinition fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

You do know what the definition of insanity, is, right?

Mantra 1d. Lame.

 

[Into the Night]

No, just focusing my narrative on who you are.

You can't pivot your way out of your problem. Pivot fallacy.

This, folks, is a text book example of posturing an argument. Posturing is the fool's idea he has elevated himself in an argument by using language (in order to gain some percieved advantage) to belittle the opponent, as if that improves an argument.

You are describing yourself. DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEMS ON ANYBODY ELSE!

Not only does it fail to do that, it demonstrates your novice debate skills, either that your you never learned them.

There is no debate here. Just conversations. You aren't even having one of those.

The facgt is, youbethebullshittingman, my comment merely went back to the original point, no distraction at all.

You have no point. You can't insult your way out of your problem.

Oh yes, Anything that you disagree with is 'marxist'. Tsk tsk.

Just the stuff you believe in.

that tired trope goes back to the John Bircher morons of the 60s,

It goes back further than that! Marxism has never succeeded.

and has morphed into the bastion of MAGA maniacs, of which you profess to be a member, right?

DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEMS ON ANYBODY ELSE!

TDS is a thought-terminating cliche.

Fallacy fallacy. It is not a cliche at all.

TDS is not a real thing.

Yes it is, and you have it.

It's not a condition extant in any medical journal, psychiatric or otherwise.

Psychology is not medicine. Medicine is not a journal or magazine.

No mental condition that is valid will have meaning only to one side of the two political parties. It it were valid, it would be clear to anyone.

It is clear to every (except those suffering from it!).

Therefore, it's a rhetorical device created by the right that functions as a thought-terminating cliche.

It's not a cliche. Fallacy fallacy.

TTCs are rhetorical devices implanted in the minds of followers, implanted especially by demagogues (such as Trump) designed to curb critical thinking and kill the conversation, and they are propagated by demagogues (such as Trump) who do not want people to think critically, and when exposed to dissent, they use thought terminating cliches to kill the conversation. TDS is one of the more popular TTC's by the right.

What do you care? You don't think.

So, instead of going through the trouble of actually engaging someone in a thoughtful debate, which takes work, a republican will just say 'that's TDS' and therefore they don't have to bother debating, that it's TDS settles it, or so the pseudo logic goes.

You are not debating. You are preaching.

No, TDS is a TTC, nothing more, nothing less, and by virtue of that fact, not a valid argument.

It is not a cliche, and not an argument. It's an adjective.

The irony is that, by your use of this thought-terminating cliche, it shows that you are the infected one, not me.

It is not a cliche.

Posturing, self-puffery (by belittling others) , is not a merit worthy argument. Pseudo debate trick. We all do it, but that doesn't change the fact.

You are describing yourself again. DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEMS ON ANYBODY ELSE!

If you were, you couldn't possibly vote for Trump, so, kill that idea.

DON'T TRY TO HIDE BEHIND THE CONSTITUTION YOU DESPISE!

No, I'm left of center, there the truth is.

No, you are a Marxist. You are a socialist. There is no truth there. Only lies.

Maybe not, but if you vote for Trump, who lacks empathy, who is a sociopath, chances are you are, as well. That's how I know.

Buzzword fallacy. Mantra 1d.

Chances are, but feel free to prove me wrong.

He already did.

A pendulum, using it as a metaphor, rests at the center.

Not one that is moving.

Posturing, invalid argument. And, I'll file that in the wishful thinking file.

Inversion fallacies. DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEMS ON ANYBODY ELSE!

 

[IBDaMann]

that excuse makes pretty much any govt. and/or economic reform impossible. Why bother with any elections at all?

It's not an excuse and no reforms are made impossible.

You have to look at it from the States' perspective. The States own the Constitution and the States pick the President. You could simply give each State one vote. The framers decided, however, that they wanted a State-based system that incorporates We the People. Hence the Electoral College. You say you want to go back to the idea of "one State, one vote"?

 

[IBDaMann]

No, just focusing my narrative on who you are.

Yet not once have you correctly used the word "complacent."

This, folks, is a text book example of posturing an argument.

To whom are you speaking? Are you pulling a Biden?

The facgt is, youbethebullshittingman,

Forgive me for laughing, but you think you're the first person who was so terribly clever as to come up with this "name" to call me.

my comment merely went back to the original point, no distraction at all.

You haven't gone anywhere near the zip code of your original idea. You are clearly hoping that I just forget what you blurted and drop it.

OK. I'll pretend you never said any of the stupid things you posted so you can too.

Oh yes, Anything that you disagree with is 'marxist'.

Nope. Everything Marxist is Marxist. If you are unfamiliar with your own positions, I can bring you up to speed.

Tsk tsk. that tired trope

If you consider it such a tired trope, why did you adopt it as a position?

has morphed into the bastion of MAGA maniacs,

Apparently, all of your stupidity rests on your inability to explain what is wrong with someone wishing to make America great again. Such people are maniacs now. Would you care to explain why this is, or shall we just agree that your raving is stupid?

TDS is a thought-terminating cliche.

Nope. It's a debilitating disease. Some diseases prevent people from competing in sports. Some diseases prevent people from traveling or going on hikes. Yours prevents you from making any sense.

What is wrong with wanting to make America great again? One has to assume that you simply HATE America, as any good Marxist would.

TDS is not a real thing.

You are in denial, like a quadrapalegic who is certain he will win the 100-meter dash in the Pan American games.

Therefore, it's a rhetorical device created by the right

Nope. It's a denial-producing disease that has rabies-like symptoms. If left untreated, infected individuals begin frothing at the mouth and raving incoherently on internet political fora.

So, instead of going through the trouble of actually engaging someone in a thoughtful debate, which takes work, a republican will just ...

Why are you bringing Republicans into this, other than to tell me that you aren't pursuing any sort of ideals but rather to remain OBEDIENTLY partisan? My guess is that your TDS is moderately advanced and has weakened your mind's ability to apply any sort of critical reasoning, forcing you into total dependence on your political party to do your thinking for you.

I'm sorry; I didn't know.

Posturing, self-puffery (by belittling others) ,

I'm glad that you were cognizant enough to recognize the belittling, but your perceptions of self-puffery border on delusional. I never self-puff. The last time I tried, I inadvertently injured someone in the same thread, so I just avoid it.

If you were, you couldn't possibly vote for Trump, so, kill that idea.

We the People are very real and all of Us who don't have TDS will be voting for Trump.

The avalanche is coming, posing a real problem for the DNC. If they plan on stealing the election, they're going to have to spend weeks generating enough counterfeit ballots for Kamiola to win.

No, I'm left of center, there the truth is.

You're far enough left of center that you can plant one foot in Utopia.

 

[EdwinA]

It's not an excuse and no reforms are made impossible.

You have to look at it from the States' perspective. The States own the Constitution and the States pick the President. You could simply give each State one vote. The framers decided, however, that they wanted a State-based system that incorporates We the People. Hence the Electoral College. You say you want to go back to the idea of "one State, one vote"?

No, I said we should outlaw 'winner take all' and get rid of the electoral college or reform it, something that was done in the past; it is not the same 'electoral college' of the Founders, and it isn't representative of voters. We didn't even elect Senators until the 17th Amendment, in 1913.

 

[Publius]

Yet not once have you correctly used the word "complacent."

I thought we were discussing that you are a sociopath, or at least you are voting for one.

To whom are you speaking? Are you pulling a Biden?

What, you can't read?

Forgive me for laughing, but you think you're the first person who was so terribly clever as to come up with this "name" to call me.

Yeah, maybe so, you didn't really deserve more careful prose, but you're still a bullshitter.

You haven't gone anywhere near the zip code of your original idea. You are clearly hoping that I just forget what you blurted and drop it.

Whatever

OK. I'll pretend you never said any of the stupid things you posted so you can too.

Posturing, a novice's idea of how to debate. I'll pretend you're not a moron (see, posturing).

Nope. Everything Marxist is Marxist. If you are unfamiliar with your own positions, I can bring you up to speed.

I'll file that in the ignorant file.

If you consider it such a tired trope, why did you adopt it as a position?

Question has an assumed premise, Clearly, you are unskilled in the art of debate.

Apparently, all of your stupidity rests on your inability to explain what is wrong with someone wishing to make America great again.

Let's start with the fact that question has a false premise. It's a loaded question, it assumes the MAGA movement, actually is going to make America great, again, it's founded on on the rather myopic notion that AMerica isn't great, and needs to be restored, these are all debatable and assumed premises, and, as such, the question ahs a highly debatable and assumed premise. It's the kind of question that either:
1. you are stupid
2. You never learned out to properly frame a question
3. You are unskilled in the art of debate, overall.
4. All of the above.

Such people are maniacs now. Would you care to explain why this is, or shall we just agree that your raving is stupid?

"MAGA maniacs' is just a rhetorical quip. don't take it personally, It's like saying 'joetato' or ''sleepy joe'. However, what is dumb is your failure to grasp that that's all it was, and you took the bait.

Nope. It's a debilitating disease. Some diseases prevent people from competing in sports. Some diseases prevent people from traveling or going on hikes. Yours prevents you from making any sense.

No, it's a thought terminating cliche implanted by a demagogue designed to curb critical thinking and kill the conversation. You see, Trump doesn't like it when he is criticized, and what better way to get his followers to shut people up than for his followers to claim his detractors have a mental condition, and that way they don't need to continue the conversation beyond that point? Clever, right?. And you are perfect evidence of that fact.
You won't find 'TDS' in any clinical treatise by anyone with any real credibility in the field of mental health. However, 70,000 mental health professionals have signed a petition that Trump is sick in the head. https://www.change.org/p/trump-is-mentally-ill-and-must-be-removed?

What is wrong with wanting to make America great again?

Question has an assumed/false, premise. See above.

One has to assume that you simply HATE America, as any good Marxist would.

An ignorant person would assume that, no doubt.

You are in denial, like a quadrapalegic who is certain he will win the 100-meter dash in the Pan American games.

You are projecting.

Nope. It's a denial-producing disease that has rabies-like symptoms. If left untreated, infected individuals begin frothing at the mouth and raving incoherently on internet political fora.

See above.

Why are you bringing Republicans into this, other than to tell me that you aren't pursuing any sort of ideals but rather to remain OBEDIENTLY partisan? My guess is that your TDS is moderately advanced and has weakened your mind's ability to apply any sort of critical reasoning, forcing you into total dependence on your political party to do your thinking for you.

I'll file that in the ignoramus and assorted idiocy file.

I'm sorry; I didn't know.


I'm glad that you were cognizant enough to recognize the belittling, but your perceptions of self-puffery border on delusional. I never self-puff. The last time I tried, I inadvertently injured someone in the same thread, so I just avoid it.

You are ignorant, arrogant, and engage in self puffery a lot, which is what smug pricks, ignoramuses do, a lot.

We the People are very real and all of Us who don't have TDS will be voting for Trump.

The avalanche is coming, posing a real problem for the DNC. If they plan on stealing the election, they're going to have to spend weeks generating enough counterfeit ballots for Kamiola to win.


You're far enough left of center that you can plant one foot in Utopia.

Sorry, I can't take you seriously.

 

[Publius]

You can't pivot your way out of your problem. Pivot fallacy.

You are describing yourself. DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEMS ON ANYBODY ELSE!

There is no debate here. Just conversations. You aren't even having one of those.

You have no point. You can't insult your way out of your problem.

Just the stuff you believe in.

It goes back further than that! Marxism has never succeeded.

DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEMS ON ANYBODY ELSE!

Fallacy fallacy. It is not a cliche at all.

Yes it is, and you have it.

Psychology is not medicine. Medicine is not a journal or magazine.

It is clear to every (except those suffering from it!).

It's not a cliche. Fallacy fallacy.

What do you care? You don't think.

You are not debating. You are preaching.

It is not a cliche, and not an argument. It's an adjective.

It is not a cliche.

You are describing yourself again. DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEMS ON ANYBODY ELSE!

DON'T TRY TO HIDE BEHIND THE CONSTITUTION YOU DESPISE!

No, you are a Marxist. You are a socialist. There is no truth there. Only lies.

Buzzword fallacy. Mantra 1d.

He already did.

Not one that is moving.

Inversion fallacies. DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEMS ON ANYBODY ELSE!

Incessant projectionism, Fallacious fallacy syndrome. Failure to debate points on point.

Sorry, I can't take you seriously.

Dismissed.

 

[Publius]

Nope. I was a mere smug prick long ago. I have since matured into a truly complacent bastard.


Nope. It's a cause->effect chain. I ask you a question that causes you panic which causes you to flee. It's all rather straightforward.


You just stated that you won't answer any questions that have a correct answer. Smooth.


... meaning that you will not answer any question that you declare to be a "loaded question", which you will do as you are fleeing from any question that causes you to panic. Grand!


Nope. As long as you keep making stupid assertions that beg for belittling, belittling is absolutely needed.


I'm fine with my understanding of everything you have broadcasted, unwittingly and otherwise.


I'm well read on the authoritative sources. Don't be afraid to bring me your really tough questions.

Clearly, you are not well read, or you don't understand what you've read.

If you had, you'd know the difference between a democrat and a communist.

You'd know that historically speaking, in all the corridors of power, academia, and educated people, they clearly don't make such a distinction between a 'constitutional republic' and a 'representative democracy', as the OP makes, that these terms are not mutually exclusive. Only since Republicans have been failing to win the popular vote, and their desire to establish voter suppression legislation, have they been making this claim. This, apparently, is a byproduct of Trumpism. Back in the day,. they never used to. But,. with morons like Mark Levin, now it's a thing.

Since you don't know the difference, either you are lying, or you are ignorant, or you are a troll.

Given your incessant ignorance, posturing/self-puffery, smug certainty, arrogance, inability to debate on point, I can't take you seriously.

There is no greater stench than that of a smug ignoramus, and an educated one, even worse.

That would be you.

I repeat; I really can't take you seriously.

I think you are phony, a small, petty man.

Just like Trump. No wonder you'd vote for him.

 

[IBDaMann]

No, I said we should outlaw 'winner take all' and get rid of the electoral college or reform it,

The problem I have with your position is that it does not allow States to decide their votes. The States are supposed to be voting on the President, but you want to tell each State how it must decide its vote. If a State wishes to implement a "winner-take-all" approach then that is the right of that State's legislature, just as you individually have every right to vote straight party ticket if you wish.

Would you prefer every State get one vote each and dispense with the pretense of people voting?