Ruth Bader Ginsberg died

dinglefritz

College Football Hall of Fame
Jan 14, 2011
24,454
18,508
113
The electoral college is a vestige of slavery, I assume you know that, right? People in rural states cling to the notion that it prevents states like California, NY and Texas from deciding the outcome of presidential elections, but they ignore the fact that it gives undue weight to some rural states over more populated states. In other words, one vote from a Nebraskan is the equivalent of several dozen votes of a Texan. If that still seems like a reasonable system, then consider that it wasn't always the Democrats winning the popular vote. There was a time not so long ago that the situation was reversed. The point is, you can't argue out of one side of your mouth that we live in a democracy, while celebrating the manipulation of that system to benefit a minority of voters. Why, because it won't always be as it is now. Roles reverse. Furthermore, your point that family and friends of yours have stopped voting because they're convinced that California is blue and will remain that way. For what its worth, the same is true in Texas for Democrats. I would argue this is yet another failing of the electoral college. People who live in states that reliably vote red or blue rightly understand that if they are in the minority their vote is for naught. How can you argue that this is a functioning system? And lastly, Roberts has been consistently conservative in his opinions with very few exceptions. Why are you focusing on just the handful of opinions you don't like? A court that leans too far one direction or the other will eventually lose credibility with the public. I realize you are a very conservative person, but not everyone in this country shares your views. Compromise is the genius of the American system. The one time compromise failed we had a civil war. You can scream at the top of your lungs all day long that this country has veered hard left, but the fact of the matter is power has shifted between the two parties for decades. Social issues have shifted to the left, then again what is your basis for comparison? What period of time in American history was better socially, according to you? Of course politically, conservatives have dominated the state and local landscape and largely redrawn the maps to ensure their dominance. You engage in nonstop whataboutisms. What about the dems? What about Hillary? You condone extremism on the right because you've made up your mind that liberals either have or would do the same given the chance. You claim to be a religious person, and yet in life you argue in favor of doing as much damage as possible to others just in case they might do it to you first. That's a paranoid way to live your life, man.
Texas is not a full on red state anymore. They're more and more in play as immigration has changed their profile.

The electoral college is not a vestige of slavery. It's a conscious effort to give states with fewer voters a fair voice in choosing a President. Nothing more and nothing less. It had nothing to do with slavery. Anything that indicates otherwise is revisionist history.
 

oldjar07

All-American
Oct 25, 2009
4,069
2,516
113
The electoral college is a vestige of slavery, I assume you know that, right? People in rural states cling to the notion that it prevents states like California, NY and Texas from deciding the outcome of presidential elections, but they ignore the fact that it gives undue weight to some rural states over more populated states. In other words, one vote from a Nebraskan is the equivalent of several dozen votes of a Texan. If that still seems like a reasonable system, then consider that it wasn't always the Democrats winning the popular vote. There was a time not so long ago that the situation was reversed. The point is, you can't argue out of one side of your mouth that we live in a democracy, while celebrating the manipulation of that system to benefit a minority of voters. Why, because it won't always be as it is now. Roles reverse. Furthermore, your point that family and friends of yours have stopped voting because they're convinced that California is blue and will remain that way. For what its worth, the same is true in Texas for Democrats. I would argue this is yet another failing of the electoral college. People who live in states that reliably vote red or blue rightly understand that if they are in the minority their vote is for naught. How can you argue that this is a functioning system? And lastly, Roberts has been consistently conservative in his opinions with very few exceptions. Why are you focusing on just the handful of opinions you don't like? A court that leans too far one direction or the other will eventually lose credibility with the public. I realize you are a very conservative person, but not everyone in this country shares your views. Compromise is the genius of the American system. The one time compromise failed we had a civil war. You can scream at the top of your lungs all day long that this country has veered hard left, but the fact of the matter is power has shifted between the two parties for decades. Social issues have shifted to the left, then again what is your basis for comparison? What period of time in American history was better socially, according to you? Of course politically, conservatives have dominated the state and local landscape and largely redrawn the maps to ensure their dominance. You engage in nonstop whataboutisms. What about the dems? What about Hillary? You condone extremism on the right because you've made up your mind that liberals either have or would do the same given the chance. You claim to be a religious person, and yet in life you argue in favor of doing as much damage as possible to others just in case they might do it to you first. That's a paranoid way to live your life, man.
Nebraska as a state is just as important as Texas as a atate. Just because they have several times the population doesn't mean they should have several times the say in the nation's decisions.
 

mwulf

Graduate Assistant
Dec 15, 2013
5,080
2,971
113
Thigh Land
Texas is not a full on red state anymore. They're more and more in play as immigration has changed their profile.

The electoral college is not a vestige of slavery. It's a conscious effort to give states with fewer voters a fair voice in choosing a President. Nothing more and nothing less. It had nothing to do with slavery. Anything that indicates otherwise is revisionist history.
The populations in the North and South were approximately equal, but roughly one-third of those living in the South were held in bondage. Because of its considerable, nonvoting slave population, that region would have less clout under a popular-vote system. The ultimate solution was an indirect method of choosing the president, one that could leverage the three-fifths compromise, the Faustian bargain they’d already made to determine how congressional seats would be apportioned. With about 93 percent of the country’s slaves toiling in just five southern states, that region was the undoubted beneficiary of the compromise, increasing the size of the South’s congressional delegation by 42 percent. When the time came to agree on a system for choosing the president, it was all too easy for the delegates to resort to the three-fifths compromise as the foundation. The peculiar system that emerged was the Electoral College.
 

GretnaShawn

Graduate Assistant
Sep 28, 2010
5,612
5,138
113
The problem in congress is that they kicked all their power to the other branches. They right vague laws and have the executive branch fill in the gaps and then the judicial branch figure out where the executive went wrong. They gave up their power to stay elected.

That is the biggest issue plaguing our government at the moment. Two of the three branches have an outsized power because the other chose to give up responsibility to stay in the game.

It was embarrassing to watch Congress cry about the President’s tariffs when they had given him to power to impose them and had the ability to take the power back but refused to do so.
 

Capdanjou

Redshirt Freshman
Sep 14, 2020
590
384
63
Texas is not a full on red state anymore. They're more and more in play as immigration has changed their profile.

The electoral college is not a vestige of slavery. It's a conscious effort to give states with fewer voters a fair voice in choosing a President. Nothing more and nothing less. It had nothing to do with slavery. Anything that indicates otherwise is revisionist history.
Wrong. It's not revisionist, I'm sorry to inform you, it's historical fact. The electoral college was created as a compromise, specifically so that the balance wouldn't tip toward northern states. According to James Madison, “the right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes.” Furthermore, the compromise allowed the south to count slaves as 3/5 of a person in spite of the fact that they were not allowed to vote. What's revisionist is the attempt to obscure the role of slavery in its creation.

Anyway, even if the above weren't true, it is, but for arguments sake let's pretend you're right, how is giving some people additional weight to their vote "a fair voice" as you say? A vote in Nebraska, based on the electoral college, is equivalent to several dozen votes in California. That's ludicrous. One man, one vote, right? You've even admitted the system is flawed when it comes to your friends and family. You claim they don't vote in California, presumably because they feel their vote will count for nothing in a blue state.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chicolby

Capdanjou

Redshirt Freshman
Sep 14, 2020
590
384
63
Nebraska as a state is just as important as Texas as a atate. Just because they have several times the population doesn't mean they should have several times the say in the nation's decisions.
I understand the impulse, but does that mean one vote in Nebraska should be disproportionally weighted to carry greater value? In what other system could you image such an arrangement being acceptable. Let's say ten people are voting for something, and my vote counts 10 times more than yours. Would you agree that's fair? As a practical matter the largest states still have a disproportionate impact on the outcome of the elections. A candidate can just about seal the election by capturing a majority of the largest states.
 

Capdanjou

Redshirt Freshman
Sep 14, 2020
590
384
63
US House of Representatives is still alive if you're looking for representatives by population. The much bigger problem is that both major parties represent their donors and not the people who elect them.
I'd tend to agree with you. People on both sides of the political divide feel disenfranchised as big donors have in recent decades pulled the strings of government. It's a shame.
 

baseball31ne

Recruiting Coordinator
Mar 8, 2002
6,117
835
113
I don't think her family and friends are reading the free board at Huskers Illustrated. It's fine.
Be surprised if they did but if the vitriol and power before the person stupidity was limited to here, then they would be something fine, indeed.
 

Reditus

Walk On
Jun 20, 2019
290
370
63
Every vote counts the same...within your state.

Everyone knows our form of gov't incorporates many checks and balances. It can be frustrating at times but it works in the long run. We are a republic of states. States that are suppose to have power over their decisions and that power is balanced against serving the needs of population.

California gets 55 electoral votes. Nebraska, New Mexico, West Virginia, Idaho, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, Hawaii, Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota, Delaware, Vermont and Alaska have a sum total of 56 votes if my math is correct. That's 15 states. Why should California have more say than any combination of these 14 diverse states? Population of course. Checks&balances.
 

Capdanjou

Redshirt Freshman
Sep 14, 2020
590
384
63
Every vote counts the same...within your state.

Everyone knows our form of gov't incorporates many checks and balances. It can be frustrating at times but it works in the long run. We are a republic of states. States that are suppose to have power over their decisions and that power is balanced against serving the needs of population.

California gets 55 electoral votes. Nebraska, New Mexico, West Virginia, Idaho, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, Hawaii, Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota, Delaware, Vermont and Alaska have a sum total of 56 votes if my math is correct. That's 15 states. Why should California have more say than any combination of these 14 diverse states? Population of course. Checks&balances.
We were founded as a state nation, rather than nation state. But today, and for many decades prior, the vast majority of the nation's citizens have taken a nation state view of our republic. MAGA, for example. I get your point, I do, I'm from Nebraska, so of course I do. On the other hand, if the electoral college were removed you would largely remove the California vs. Nebraska comparisons. The vote of every single citizen of the nation would count equally. California wouldn't have electoral votes, no state would. The citizens of the nation would elect the president. Period.
 

GBRforLife1

Junior
Feb 18, 2020
1,908
3,049
113
I understand the impulse, but does that mean one vote in Nebraska should be disproportionally weighted to carry greater value? In what other system could you image such an arrangement being acceptable. Let's say ten people are voting for something, and my vote counts 10 times more than yours. Would you agree that's fair? As a practical matter the largest states still have a disproportionate impact on the outcome of the elections. A candidate can just about seal the election by capturing a majority of the largest states.
Are you advising Biden? Is that why he's so inane?

Just kidding we all know it's the dementia. But seriously lay off the drugs.
 
Jun 18, 2001
54
21
8
Whomever they pick won't impact normal folk like us. It might fire up voters but the bases are set in that fashion too. I'm not going to get to fired up either way. Not worth the energy
It sure will. The ACA(ObamaCare) stayed in place because Roberts sided with the libs to break the tie 5-4. This nomination will likely guarantee that it gets repealed and we will go through another round of healthcare reform.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyLvr

Capdanjou

Redshirt Freshman
Sep 14, 2020
590
384
63
Are you advising Biden? Is that why he's so inane?

Just kidding we all know it's the dementia. But seriously lay off the drugs.
I have zero problems with anyone who dislikes Biden. He's a hugely error-prone candidate, and it is our duty as citizens to hold power to account. But your one-sided attacks on Biden while refusing to hold Trump to the same standard make you look supremely foolish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rednwash

huskerfan66

Head Coach
Dec 8, 2004
11,567
5,360
113
Texas is not a full on red state anymore. They're more and more in play as immigration has changed their profile.

The electoral college is not a vestige of slavery. It's a conscious effort to give states with fewer voters a fair voice in choosing a President. Nothing more and nothing less. It had nothing to do with slavery. Anything that indicates otherwise is revisionist history.
AND there's a silent movement to get people to move there to make it blue. TX going blue would be the end
 

huskerfan66

Head Coach
Dec 8, 2004
11,567
5,360
113
I have zero problems with anyone who dislikes Biden. He's a hugely error-prone candidate, and it is our duty as citizens to hold power to account. But your one-sided attacks on Biden while refusing to hold Trump to the same standard make you look supremely foolish.
That's because Biden is a Trojan horse and will be kicked to the curb once he would be elected
 

GBRforLife1

Junior
Feb 18, 2020
1,908
3,049
113
I have zero problems with anyone who dislikes Biden. He's a hugely error-prone candidate, and it is our duty as citizens to hold power to account. But your one-sided attacks on Biden while refusing to hold Trump to the same standard make you look supremely foolish.
Trump doesn't have dementia. Trump wasn't against killing Bin Laden or Sulemani, Trump hates how China screws over America. Trump didn't go full retard with the mask bullshit. They don't get held to the same standard because they're no where close. Only a fool would conflate the two. 🤡
 

Capdanjou

Redshirt Freshman
Sep 14, 2020
590
384
63
Trump doesn't have dementia. Trump wasn't against killing Bin Laden or Sulemani, Trump hates how China screws over America. Trump didn't go full retard with the mask bullshit. They don't get held to the same standard because they're no where close. Only a fool would conflate the two. 🤡
It's impossible to follow your logic because there is none. You jump from one random thought to another. You are making an argument to hold one politician to a lower standard.
 

dinglefritz

College Football Hall of Fame
Jan 14, 2011
24,454
18,508
113
Every vote counts the same...within your state.

Everyone knows our form of gov't incorporates many checks and balances. It can be frustrating at times but it works in the long run. We are a republic of states. States that are suppose to have power over their decisions and that power is balanced against serving the needs of population.

California gets 55 electoral votes. Nebraska, New Mexico, West Virginia, Idaho, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, Hawaii, Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota, Delaware, Vermont and Alaska have a sum total of 56 votes if my math is correct. That's 15 states. Why should California have more say than any combination of these 14 diverse states? Population of course. Checks&balances.
Don't argue. They've been indoctrinated in the modern revisionist history since they were in Kindergarten. It's sad really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OzzyLvr and bluenrg

dinglefritz

College Football Hall of Fame
Jan 14, 2011
24,454
18,508
113
Wrong. It's not revisionist, I'm sorry to inform you, it's historical fact. The electoral college was created as a compromise, specifically so that the balance wouldn't tip toward northern states. According to James Madison, “the right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes.” Furthermore, the compromise allowed the south to count slaves as 3/5 of a person in spite of the fact that they were not allowed to vote. What's revisionist is the attempt to obscure the role of slavery in its creation.

Anyway, even if the above weren't true, it is, but for arguments sake let's pretend you're right, how is giving some people additional weight to their vote "a fair voice" as you say? A vote in Nebraska, based on the electoral college, is equivalent to several dozen votes in California. That's ludicrous. One man, one vote, right? You've even admitted the system is flawed when it comes to your friends and family. You claim they don't vote in California, presumably because they feel their vote will count for nothing in a blue state.
We are a representative republic. Why was in necessary for the south to need to include blacks as part of their population? It was because they had less eligible voters than the northern states and would have not had any say really in who the President was. IF you were going to establish a union of states as you say, you had to give some fair voice in choosing a President. That's the fact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: baseball31ne

chipotlehusker

Junior
Gold Member
Dec 8, 2001
1,872
305
83
Austin Texas
Let's get someone in there ASAP. Clarence Thomas will retire soon. We can't risk having two two loons added to the court
you mean two reasonable legal minds who will interpret the Constitution in a way to help ALL Americans and slow down or even prevent our AG from tearing up the Constitution . Sedition Act, my ass for demonstrating. I think I want "loons" per your likely definition.
 

Capdanjou

Redshirt Freshman
Sep 14, 2020
590
384
63
Don't argue. They've been indoctrinated in the modern revisionist history since they were in Kindergarten. It's sad really.
You apparently never learned our history. Why is it so challenging for you to comprehend? Does it undermine your revisionist narrative of an infallible nation? That's the difference between people like you and me. I acknowledge the past, warts and all, and I celebrate the aspirational nature of our nation. Indoctrinated? You are choosing to believe a false narrative. The facts are well documented. It's not a left wing conspiracy. But I guess that's the problem with the right these days. You refuse to believe anything that interferes with your narrow worldview, even if that means living a lie.
 

Capdanjou

Redshirt Freshman
Sep 14, 2020
590
384
63
We are a representative republic. Why was in necessary for the south to need to include blacks as part of their population? It was because they had less eligible voters than the northern states and would have not had any say really in who the President was. IF you were going to establish a union of states as you say, you had to give some fair voice in choosing a President. That's the fact.
So you acknowledge the link to slavery?
 

litespeedhuskerfan

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Aug 27, 2006
18,109
9,419
113
You forgot hypocrisy. The right must have forgotten that one.
I have come full circle on this issue and am glad we're kicking the Dems teeth in on this issue. Hypocrisy and all, Dems deserve it. I think back to Nancy's golf clap, the ripping up of the speech....the refusal to stand for the SOTU address....the black dress she wore tyying to feign sadness....the pens she gave away signing the sham impeachment circus...salon appointment. I cannot think of somebody more deserving to have her face smashed in with this than her.
 

resdog851

Blackshirt
Dec 30, 2003
3,317
1,402
113
Papillion, Nebraska
Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.” – President Obama

The GOP had the Senate when Scalia died unexpectedly. They stalled for a year, much like the left has went Weekend At Bernies with RBG the last couple years. The GOP still owns the Senate FOR NOW while Trump is prez. I consider this karma for the Kavanaugh hearings.
 

Latest posts