15. This illustrates my other key point about the Electoral College's legitimizing function: situations where nobody gets a majority of the popular vote, so the "winner" can be somebody who got a third of the vote, all of it from one radicalized regionhttps://twitter.com/icaito/status/1124634949452161024 …
-
Show this thread
-
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted
16. This is a genre of response you get a lot from supposedly adult progressives: Conservative: [argue policy or point out that a progressive has misstated the facts] Progressive: Oh boo hoo you poor snowflake. https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1124633649222168576 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
This Tweet is unavailable.30 replies 51 retweets 305 likesShow this thread -
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted Michael McDonald
17. States have a distinct role in the United States that counties do not. The country is broader & more diverse than any one state. And no state weights counties by population as does the Electoral Collegehttps://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/1124636582496153600 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
20 replies 25 retweets 193 likesShow this thread -
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted Elizabeth Picciuto
18. Again, this ignores the fact that the Electoral College is weighted by population. Texas, for example, has so many electoral votes because it has 28 million peoplehttps://twitter.com/epicciuto/status/1124634500959436801 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
Elizabeth PicciutoVerified account @epicciutoThe D. People have agency and land does not. If there was one Democrat living on the Atlantic ocean (which has just become a state in this scenario), and the whole ocean was thus D-colored blue because of one vote, would someone who endorsed spatial elections think D should win? https://twitter.com/baseballcrank/status/1124323414720876549 …34 replies 22 retweets 192 likesShow this thread -
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted Charles #GetVaxxed! 💉
19. I submit that my hypothetical, which assumes 2016 turnout in every state & gives the R the same average share in winning states as Lincoln in 1860 (& more in the losing states than Lincoln got) is considerably more realistic than thishttps://twitter.com/charles_gaba/status/1124648192082087936 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
Charles #GetVaxxed! 💉Verified account @charles_gabaRegarding@baseballcrank's idiotic Electoral College defense: In which I prove how someone could theoretically win the U.S. Presidential election with only 0.00001% of the popular vote: http://acasignups.net/19/03/19/those-who-still-dont-get-how-stupid-electoral-college …11 replies 16 retweets 148 likesShow this thread -
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted Jonathan Chait
20. I don't see the need for that: not how it has historically been done & few states are as vast & diverse as the whole country. But not a terrible idea for, say, California if the districts were regularly re-weighted by pop like the EC.https://twitter.com/jonathanchait/status/1124654444715626497 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
Jonathan ChaitVerified account @jonathanchaitReplying to @ElectProjectI'd be interested if@baseballcrank believes states should adopt an electoral college-like system, in which a party that wins huge vote totals in a couple urban counties and loses everywhere else should lose, even if they get more votes?13 replies 14 retweets 123 likesShow this thread -
21. Again, bear in mind - as noted in my column - that in practical effect, the Electoral College in nearly every case goes to the winner of popular *majorities*; it comes into play mainly where neither candidate gets one.https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/what-the-electoral-college-saves-us-from/ …
6 replies 26 retweets 123 likesShow this thread -
22. You: but if we eliminated winner-take-all states, what might the candidate field look like? Me: Let's consider a real-world example:pic.twitter.com/Eoc8YPFLAS
2 replies 12 retweets 83 likesShow this thread -
23. As for Trump's tax returns: the norm of candidates releasing their taxes is a valuable one, & both Trump & Romney did themselves political damage by delaying/flouting it. But it's not a job requirement. Until 1916, no presidential candidate even paid income taxes.
74 replies 29 retweets 157 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @baseballcrank
Dude this is hilarious. Did you stop to wonder why Presidents didn’t pay income tax until 1916 before you typed this?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
There was no income tax! That's my point. Somehow, the Republic survived without using income tax forms to get disclosure of their finances.
-
-
Replying to @baseballcrank
I think you’re missing the essence of the problem. The forms exist because everyone does, in fact, file. Hence forms. The president is a taxpayer. This stuff is not optional or discretionary.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.