It was all designed for giving every state a voice. There isn't any intent to give individual voters equal power. If we did, then smaller states would be beholden to more populated states. You may not like that, but good luck in getting the Constitution amended to change it. The smaller states would never go for it.
"We have a political system where some people have more power than others purely due to where they live."
We have a system that was designed to give all of the states a voice. It's not based upon every individual's vote counting equally, and it's exactly why Congress was designed with two houses.
"Yet this could all be fixed."
It's working as designed, and both sides know the rules going in. No matter which way you change it, the system will be gamed, it's just a matter of how.
"DC has been screwed over in lots of ways over the years."
DC reelected a known crack junkie for mayor, among other craziness. The citizens have shown a little more responsibility in recent years, but shit like that doesn't make people be inclined to help them.
And with it your vote only counts if your state is not firmly in the hand of either party. Even if you happen to agree with it, your vote is worthless.
So, maybe the lesson there is that if people want to cluster in areas with others of similar opinions, then their voice will count for less. I, for one, am in favor of this. People shouldn't live in echo chambers. Or is diversity unimportant?
One advantage to that is that you no longer have to put up with the constant phone calls, and knocks on your door. They can't get the damn polls right anyway.
For generations, children did better than their parents, and it wasn't because of institutions. That only changed recently. What percentage of the population starts from zero...it's minuscule.
I'll bet dollars to donuts the GOP will not lose the Senate next term. Take a look at which seats are up for reelection in 2018, and you'll see why any move toward the left is highly unlikely.
Typical response to those who disagree with you...we must punish them. Don't allow free speech, or descent, instead of respecting other people's opinions. You give so much lip service to being inclusive until someone disagrees with you. Then you claim it's hate or bigotry. Newsflash: Other opinions != stupidity. I'm so looking forward to the end of the political correctness bullshit.
As one of the former American forces in Europe, I'll just tell you, you're welcome. We helped bring the wall down (I was there between '80-92). And, we've reduced our presence ever since. Is there a reason for American bases?...well, since the Soviets are no longer a threat, not so much. But, maybe you'd like to ask Ukraine and Poland, and the Baltic nations if they want a U.S. contingent around.
Riiiight. Maybe you'd care to check on how old many of those laws are. Hint: It was before the selfie. And if you actually give a shit, try and google the history of voter intimidation.
You're limited by your imagination. Voter intimidation does have a history, and simple to google.
The free speech argument here is a distraction from the fact that absolutely nothing is preventing you from saying in every forum that you voted for whoever. You're simply not allowed to prove it with a photo. You've lost nothing unless you intended to sell that vote.
Well, about $7B was spent by the candidates in 2012. There were 126M voters that year. You could draw multiple conclusions, but would likely want to get more info on the swing states and only influence voters there.
Some states allow you to vote more than once. They only take your latest vote. In those states taking a photo of a ballot paper doesn't prove who you voted for.
Link? Google only gave me references to it being illegal.
Slashdot Mirror
What would Bruce, er Kate Jenner think?
"they swabbed the mobile phone and right hand..."
So, do the tadpoles interfere with the imagery?
While that may be so, methane was only 11% of the greenhouse gas composition in 2014, while CO2 was 81%.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissio...
"I am an economist."
Not trying to be insulting, but... the odds of you being right are about the same as a coin flip...
https://www.scientificamerican...
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/21...
http://www.governing.com/topic...
Apparently, /. has decided to post every second or third article with a Trump headline to generate more clicks.
Better all head for Canada now. Your safe spaces are about to disappear.
It was all designed for giving every state a voice. There isn't any intent to give individual voters equal power. If we did, then smaller states would be beholden to more populated states. You may not like that, but good luck in getting the Constitution amended to change it. The smaller states would never go for it.
"We have a political system where some people have more power than others purely due to where they live."
We have a system that was designed to give all of the states a voice. It's not based upon every individual's vote counting equally, and it's exactly why Congress was designed with two houses.
"Yet this could all be fixed."
It's working as designed, and both sides know the rules going in. No matter which way you change it, the system will be gamed, it's just a matter of how.
"DC has been screwed over in lots of ways over the years."
DC reelected a known crack junkie for mayor, among other craziness. The citizens have shown a little more responsibility in recent years, but shit like that doesn't make people be inclined to help them.
And with it your vote only counts if your state is not firmly in the hand of either party. Even if you happen to agree with it, your vote is worthless.
So, maybe the lesson there is that if people want to cluster in areas with others of similar opinions, then their voice will count for less. I, for one, am in favor of this. People shouldn't live in echo chambers. Or is diversity unimportant?
One advantage to that is that you no longer have to put up with the constant phone calls, and knocks on your door. They can't get the damn polls right anyway.
For generations, children did better than their parents, and it wasn't because of institutions. That only changed recently. What percentage of the population starts from zero...it's minuscule.
I'll bet dollars to donuts the GOP will not lose the Senate next term. Take a look at which seats are up for reelection in 2018, and you'll see why any move toward the left is highly unlikely.
http://www.politico.com/story/...
http://www.rollcall.com/news/h...
"All those folks out in the sparse spaces haven't figured out that rugged individualism is basically childishness."
Funny, it's been working for all of those sparse space citizens for a couple hundred years now. They don't need your safe space.
"Elong Munk"
Is that some kind of kinky toy?
D.C. isn't a state, and this is probably one of the reasons why it continues to be that way.
Typical response to those who disagree with you...we must punish them. Don't allow free speech, or descent, instead of respecting other people's opinions. You give so much lip service to being inclusive until someone disagrees with you. Then you claim it's hate or bigotry. Newsflash: Other opinions != stupidity. I'm so looking forward to the end of the political correctness bullshit.
As one of the former American forces in Europe, I'll just tell you, you're welcome. We helped bring the wall down (I was there between '80-92). And, we've reduced our presence ever since. Is there a reason for American bases?...well, since the Soviets are no longer a threat, not so much. But, maybe you'd like to ask Ukraine and Poland, and the Baltic nations if they want a U.S. contingent around.
Clinton knows her way around the political system - she would have continued the corruption.
FTFY
Now let's see how the Clinton Foundation does without the political influence.
You make it sound as if the left has never gerrymandered. There's some good reading on the topic here.
http://www.theatlantic.com/mag...
It takes one to know one
No you - wtf is this kindergarten? Grow the hell up.
Riiiight. Maybe you'd care to check on how old many of those laws are. Hint: It was before the selfie. And if you actually give a shit, try and google the history of voter intimidation.
That's your opinion. And it's wrong.
Having lived there for six years, I'll just say that you're full of shit.
You're limited by your imagination. Voter intimidation does have a history, and simple to google.
The free speech argument here is a distraction from the fact that absolutely nothing is preventing you from saying in every forum that you voted for whoever. You're simply not allowed to prove it with a photo. You've lost nothing unless you intended to sell that vote.
It's not only the sale of votes, it's also voter intimidation.
http://www.demos.org/publicati...
Well, about $7B was spent by the candidates in 2012. There were 126M voters that year. You could draw multiple conclusions, but would likely want to get more info on the swing states and only influence voters there.
Some states allow you to vote more than once. They only take your latest vote. In those states taking a photo of a ballot paper doesn't prove who you voted for.
Link? Google only gave me references to it being illegal.