Popular vote is just a way to steal every election for theDemocrats.

And how was it that we had the money to send to Europe in their rebuilding efforts? We had some of the highest tax rates in our history during those years.

 

The US had the best medical care in the World, period. Were there areas of the country that lacked doctors or facilities, yes. Blanket claims, like you're making, misrepresent the facts.

I have no idea what your individual medical challenges are, so they aren't relevant to the conversation.

Healthcare has always spread the cost across the entire population. The assumption is the population will provide some degree of compensation for providing it. When 1/10th of the population doesn't pay, that causes a problem everyone else has to suffer from.

 

Nobody said it is "racist". Why do you feel a need to spread hateful falsehoods?

Was we putting learning on our children? Was you seeing a problem here? I were. LOL!!!

Can you post ANYTHING that quotes any "forefather" stating that? Or are you just parroting right wing think tanks? Yup.

"All"? So the EC decides who your senators will be? Representatives? Governor? Or ONLY the president? Yep, only the president.

California is 43.9% democrat. The rest is mostly republican and independent. If the California vote were to split 50-50 or close to it, any fly-over state could decide the election. You are arguing to protect ONLY the presidential election from being decided by the voters, and your supporting argument is not valid. You are advocating for the tyranny of the minority. And in 2011 the republicans wanted to get rid of the EC by a 53% majority. Now they have flip-flopped.

Oh baloney. The congress comprises the legislative branch. The president only signs or vetoes bills. S/He doesn't write legislation, so the president's influence on states is minimal, especially because of states rights.

Counties don't pay taxes, -people do; they don't fight in wars, -people do; they aren't subject to hardly any federal laws, -people are. Government is for people, -not for land areas. My urban boundary doesn't care who is president. Citizens do.

“Rural areas cover 97 percent of the nation’s land area but contain 19.3 percent of the population (about 60 million people),” Census Bureau Director John H. Thompson said. - https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-210.html

But you want rural areas to decide the presidency even though 80.7% of the population doesn't live there. And you want everyone to agree with you??? LOL!!!!!!!

 

That is not true.

Control of medical care would be in the hands of the government. Execution of that medical care would be in the hands of the Doctors and other providers. There is a significant difference.

We know the VA has been a mess. You're suggesting it's a mess because of the Doctors and hospitals, and not the bureaucracy that controls it. I suggest it's the bureaucracy of the VA, and not the Doctors and Hospitals, that is to blame.

 

What is a true socialist?

 

Please warn me when you're going to move the goal posts and throw out strawmans.

 

Govt does not provide medical care. It pays for the medical care provided by doctors and hospitals for those on Medicare. Just as private insurers pay for the medical care provided by doctors and hospitals for those on private insurance.

 

Single payer would put the US Government in charge of defining medical care in the United States, just as similar government healthcare programs are administered in other countries that provide it.

 

And what happens when the Baby Boomers fill hospitals and that rises to 50%? Baby Boomers are going to be relying more and more on Medicare and Medicaid - socialists based systems. That's just a fact of life.

 

This forum leaves me very confused on the subject. it's either Norway or Venezuela. Either a road to paradise or hell.

I always thought it was about who controls the means of production. But that doesnt even seem to be discussed.

 

Yes, in a single payer system the govt would determine, along with doctors and hospitals, what would be covered, same as how it's done today with Medicare and private insurers. That part is true. But that is different than providing actual medical care, which is always done by doctors and hospitals.

 

Is that an admission that R's can't win the popular vote?
Why can't they?

 

Death panels, eh? In case you are not aware, greedy insurance adjusters are the real death panels now.

 

someone who doesn't believe in natural law and individual liberty.

 

Hoover Dam is a public sector means of production.

 

Welcome to the forum.

You'll learn quickly that anyone supporting a Dem must be a raging lunatic communist. Everyone supporting Trump must be a cold-hearted racist. There is no grey inbetween, everything must be black and white.

As to the means of production: I have never talked to ANYONE in the US who supports the government controlling the means of production. Not even Bernie has advocated for that. Therefore, it stands to reason that there are no TRUE socialists in the US.

After a while the ever self-repeating discussions about all isms really get old.

 

Right, the tradition definition is about the workers controlling the means of production vs the owners. You never even see that discussed when people talk about socialism. It's always a talk about redistribution or social programs or 'other people's money' whatever that means.

 

You mean the way it does for people on Medicare? What's wrong with that?

 

How does one steal an election by getting the majority of votes? The notion is counter intuitive. Unless you're that GOP guy in NC.

 

Bottom line on this thread - the OP is afraid that the Republicans will never be able to put together a good enough platform and candidate to attract enough voters. Poor little victims ... of their own making.

 

Why do you think New York, and California should determine the presidential election?

 

The question here is whether the President is elected to represent the states themselves or the American people. Most Americans regard the President as the one politician who is supposed to represent all Americans as individual people. Some conservatives insist the President is elected to represent all the states. The Electoral College works to make our President the leader of all the states. But a growing number of Americans are feeling this should change so he/she is elected as the President of the people of the nation, since the President & V President are the ONLY politicians in America elected by all the nation's voters together. All other politicians actually DO represent either their states or a voting district within their state. The last two Republican Presidents were both elected with a minority of actual votes from voters. If another Republican is elected or re-elected with a minority voter count, that will convince even more Americans that our system is somehow flawed. But they have to choose between having the American President serve for the states or the voters themselves. If they want the latter, then the EC will have to go.

 

NY & CA won't determine the election. Every voter in the nation will. And then, the President will be the duly elected President of the American people--not the states. With the popular vote deciding, the outcome will more accurately reflect the true will of the people themselves, not the prejudices of the voting districts or states.

 

Why can't Republican candidates do a better job of garnering more votes in those two states? Trump got 4.4M and 2.8M in CA and NY respectively. It's on the candidate to convince more people to give their vote to him, is it not? There were a lot of votes that went to Hillary in states like TX, WI, PA, OH, NC, MO, IN, MI and AZ that could have easily gotten Trump the popular vote too. Is it asking too much to expect candidates to do a better job at getting more votes?

 

Ok so you don’t care if smaller states get disenfranchised, which is prevented by the EC.