jakee 1,489 #201 October 21, 2020 7 hours ago, brenthutch said: The top 50% of income earners pay 97% of income tax the bottom 50% pay the remaining 3%. The lower 17% did not only pay zero income tax, they got $65 billion in earned income tax credit handouts. Please explain just how this “shift” occurred. It was globalization and open boarders that demolished the lower and middle class not tax policy. You post the statistic as if it has any relevance to, let alone support for, your 'explanation'. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #202 October 21, 2020 (edited) 11 hours ago, brenthutch said: Don’t forget Crackhead Hunter Why should we not forget him? Unlike the culpable members of the Trump clan he will not help run the election campaign, he will not be offered a nepotistic position in the White House, he will not oversee a fraudulent charity on behalf of the president, and he will not be a director of the President's businesses. Edited October 21, 2020 by jakee 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #203 October 21, 2020 (edited) . Edited October 21, 2020 by jakee Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #204 October 21, 2020 4 hours ago, Coreece said: Fine, but if Clinton didn't win the popular vote I doubt we'd even be talking about this right now. If the dems think it's better, it's only because they think it'll be easier to win - it's "fairness" is only a selling point. A) Doesn't matter if some Dems think it's better because it helps them. If it's fairer it's fairer. Republicans bring this out all the time, like with Puerto Rico for instance. 'Dems only want Puerto Rico to have the vote because it helps them, not because it's the right thing to do'. But it is the right thing to do, and Reps only oppose it because it will hurt them. When right and wrong become a partisan issue, right is still right and wrong is still wrong. The side that is wrong doesn't get to win by pointing out that the side who are right are also in line for a partisan advantage. B ) We've been talking about it here long before the 2016 election, so you are simply wrong to doubt. Quote On the other hand, I can see how a popular vote would not only encourage a better turnout, but also encourage candidates to appeal to a broader base. A popular vote would make it worth while to grind out votes in every state if needed, rather than just a few select regions. So you disagree with every Republican argument against the popular vote. You think the popular vote will encourage better turnout, better campaigning and fairer representation... but you are against it because it will be easier for Democrats to win? 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #205 October 21, 2020 10 hours ago, brenthutch said: The top 50% of income earners pay 97% of income tax And Trump contributed how much to that? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #206 October 21, 2020 4 hours ago, jakee said: Why should we not forget him? Unlike the culpable members of the Trump clan he will not help run the election campaign, he will not be offered a nepotistic position in the White House, he will not oversee a fraudulent charity on behalf of the president, and he will not be a director of the President's businesses. What are you talking about, he was flying Around on AF2 and cutting pay-to-play deals with his dad. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #207 October 21, 2020 (edited) 10 hours ago, SkyDekker said: 11 hours ago, Coreece said: I think my wording may've been a bit unclear. I wasn't referring to an accurate vote count, just an accurate estimate of conservative vs progressives/liberals. A popular vote would obviously change the dynamics of the election, so I just think it would be a bit misguided to use 2016 as a reliable indicator of what it would look like were the EC eliminated. Why do you think it would change how people vote? It would change how many people vote. If suddenly one felt that their vote would actually count they'd likely be more inclined to vote, especially if candidates were actively seeking and asking for their votes in states that they would've typically avoided under the EC. The question I'm asking is which way do these new potential voters lean? Let's say that there are a million people in the mountains of Cali that never vote but identify with conservative ideology. A popular vote would then incentivize republicans to mine them out. In addition to that, let's say millions more conservatives came out of the woodwork (similar to white supremacists when Obama was president) and dominated the elections for the next 50 years? Would you still be ok with it? Would the dems still be ok with it's "fairness" and graciously accept defeat - maybe chalk it up as just another "unintended consequence?" Edited October 21, 2020 by Coreece Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #208 October 21, 2020 5 hours ago, jakee said: You think the popular vote will encourage better turnout, better campaigning and fairer representation... but you are against it because it will be easier for Democrats to win? I'm not strongly against either. I like the EC simply because it's hasn't been one-sided. I like the popular vote for the reasons listed above, along with the possibility that it might discourage an appeal to radicalism on both sides. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,444 #209 October 21, 2020 I like the part about discouraging the appeal to radicalism. There are lots of states (and even counties) where the districts are so gerrymandered that it really didn't matter who you voted for (as was the case for me in Texas, and is the case for many conservatives in Massachusetts). As long as we have this "identify and mine the divide" attitude in politics, things can improve, but not all that much. We all have to remember that the "worst" racist reprobate, and the "worst" leftie name calling demonstrator, are still Americans, and still have more in common with us than not. Wendy P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #210 October 21, 2020 7 minutes ago, wmw999 said: I like the part about discouraging the appeal to radicalism. To be clear tho, that's just a thought that popped in my head - not sure if it's wishful thinking or not. I haven't read any thing supporting that idea nor anything suggesting that would be the case. But it's nice to think about a system that might actually help unite the country by focusing on issues that appeal to voters as broadly as possible, especially as wedge issues weather away. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #211 October 21, 2020 4 hours ago, brenthutch said: What are you talking about, he was flying Around on AF2 and cutting pay-to-play deals with his dad. What are you talking about? Specifically. With evidence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #212 October 21, 2020 1 hour ago, Coreece said: I'm not strongly against either. I like the EC simply because it's hasn't been one-sided. I like the popular vote for the reasons listed above, along with the possibility that it might discourage an appeal to radicalism on both sides. Great. Right now the Republican Party is a dog being wagged by its extremist tail. If it the became less radical it would be better equipped to compete for the popular vote. I fail to see how any of this is not a win. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #213 October 21, 2020 Moscow Mitch has admitted that getting a stimulus bill passed to assist millions of Americans is of less importance than rushing ACB's nomination through the Senate before any election related issues come before SCOTUS. Bananas come to mind in our republic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #214 October 21, 2020 17 hours ago, brenthutch said: The top 50% of income earners pay 97% of income tax the bottom 50% pay the remaining 3% Yep. However, above a certain point, the more money you make the LESS you pay in taxes. Trump is just one example. This is an attempt to shift the tax burden from the very rich to the middle class, and is spearheaded by the richest people in the US (not surprisingly.) Trump's tax cut is just the latest attempt to remove tax burdens from the richest Americans. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,362 #215 October 21, 2020 4 hours ago, Coreece said: It would change how many people vote. If suddenly one felt that their vote would actually count they'd likely be more inclined to vote, especially if candidates were actively seeking and asking for their votes in states that they would've typically avoided under the EC. Hi Coreece, I really doubt this. When I voted last week, I voted for a POTUS + US senator, a US Congresswoman, a state Sec of State, a state Treasurer, a local mayor, a couple of city council critters, four ballot measures, and a lot more that I do not remember. If there was only a vote for POTUS on the ballot, you might be right. I have never voted when only a vote for POTUS was the only thing on the ballot. Lots of reasons to be voting, voting for POTUS is only one of many. Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #216 October 21, 2020 8 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said: Hi Coreece, I really doubt this. When I voted last week, I voted for a POTUS + US senator, a US Congresswoman, a state Sec of State, a state Treasurer, a local mayor, a couple of city council critters, four ballot measures, and a lot more that I do not remember. If there was only a vote for POTUS on the ballot, you might be right. I have never voted when only a vote for POTUS was the only thing on the ballot. Lots of reasons to be voting, voting for POTUS is only one of many. Jerry Baumchen My ballot went on for 2 long pages this year: https://www.broomfield.org/DocumentCenter/View/35951/2020-Broomfield-Sample-Ballot-Eng Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,362 #217 October 21, 2020 9 minutes ago, ryoder said: My ballot went on for 2 long pages this year: https://www.broomfield.org/DocumentCenter/View/35951/2020-Broomfield-Sample-Ballot-Eng Hi Robert, Mine looked very similar. Two pages for me also. Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 333 #218 October 21, 2020 19 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said: Hi Robert, Mine looked very similar. Two pages for me also. Jerry Baumchen Mine is seven pages, but is in two languages, so would be 3.5 - 4. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #219 October 21, 2020 3 hours ago, kallend said: Moscow Mitch has admitted that getting a stimulus bill passed to assist millions of Americans is of less importance than rushing ACB's nomination through the Senate before any election related issues come before SCOTUS. Bananas come to mind in our republic. With Pelosi taking her ball and going home until after the election, there is not much else on his plate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #220 October 21, 2020 Just now, brenthutch said: With Pelosi taking her ball and going home until after the election No reason, really, to stay, when Trump says that there will be no stimulus bill until after he wins. What's the point? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #221 October 21, 2020 Just now, billvon said: No reason, really, to stay, when Trump says that there will be no stimulus bill until after he wins. What's the point? The point is that he can blame Pelosi & the Ds for taking Trump & McConnell at their word. After she goes, both of them will pretend that they really wanted to push a stimulus through, but Pelosi left. Funny how he's ignoring Jakee's request for any sort of evidence that Biden's son was doing 'pay for play' during the Obama administration. Does he really think that if there was any real proof of that, that the Rs wouldn't be screaming it from the roof tops? Instead we have Giuliani & Bannon parroting Russian propaganda, now to include accusations of child porn. Please. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #222 October 21, 2020 32 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said: Does he really think that if there was any real proof of that, that the Rs wouldn't be screaming it from the roof tops? They are, it is just not being ignored by the press. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #223 October 21, 2020 1 hour ago, brenthutch said: With Pelosi taking her ball and going home until after the election, there is not much else on his plate. Donald Trump literally declares to the entire country that he was doing exactly that..... but it’s Pelosi’s fault? You guys are delusional. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #224 October 21, 2020 59 minutes ago, brenthutch said: They are, it is just not being ignored by the press. What is not being ignored by the press? Evidence is not being not ignored, because there isn’t any. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #225 October 21, 2020 (edited) 13 hours ago, jakee said: You post the statistic as if it has any relevance to, let alone support for, your 'explanation'. https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2018-update/ The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (37.3 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (30.5 percent) I would say that is a fair share Edited October 21, 2020 by brenthutch 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
