• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should dirt be allowed to vote over people?

Should dirt be allowed to vote?

  • Total voters
    30
  • Poll closed .
obvious Child

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Romney backers are posting election results via county (just as McCain voters and Bush voters did in 2000-2008).

Their argument is essentially a sea of red in America means for some reason that Obama/Kerry/Gore are clearly losers.

Except that they ignore that much of that space is essentially empty land. Hawaii has more electoral votes then several Republican voting states but has far less land, because it has far more people.

Therefore, if we take the logic they are pushing, that land, not people matter, should dirt be allowed to vote?
 
Dirt would vote green.
 
I understand thier reasoning. Its pretty disheartening to see just a few counties appear to matter more than the majority of counties in any given state. The whole state is suppose to matter and make a difference, not one or two counties.

But you are right that it is the people that matter and the reason that its just a few counties that "appear" to matter more than the rest is beacause that is where the majority of people live. The solid red and blue is illusionary. I would bet that if you used dots instead of solid colors the whole thing would look more purple than red or blue in most (not all) counties across the US.
 
The dirt would vote native american, true to the people who originally inhabited America.
 
Actually, it is a useful means of showing another layer of how Americans actually vote. I see nothing really wrong with considering that.
 
Dirt is allowed to run for office ergo dirt should be allowed to vote. See: dirt bags, etc.
 
Kal'Stang said:
I understand thier reasoning. Its pretty disheartening to see just a few counties appear to matter more than the majority of counties in any given state. The whole state is suppose to matter and make a difference, not one or two counties.

But you are right that it is the people that matter and the reason that its just a few counties that "appear" to matter more than the rest is beacause that is where the majority of people live. The solid red and blue is illusionary. I would bet that if you used dots instead of solid colors the whole thing would look more purple than red or blue in most (not all) counties across the US.
Click to expand...

Breaking it up by counties just makes it look more red, which is why it's liked there. You could break it up by precinct too, but I get the feeling it wouldn't be as popular because it wouldn't help their cause.

When you think about it, all the states have more electoral votes than the county I live in. Yet, there's more people here. So it's swung to their favor in that way.

I don't think anybody is seriously arguing that land should vote. But that map makes them feel better about losing.The population centers went Democrat in 2004 also, but Bush won becaue he was able to pull enough votes in cities to pick off a few states that Romney couldn't get.
 
rocket88 said:
Breaking it up by counties just makes it look more red, which is why it's liked there. You could break it up by precinct too, but I get the feeling it wouldn't be as popular because it wouldn't help their cause.

When you think about it, all the states have more electoral votes than the county I live in. Yet, there's more people here. So it's swung to their favor in that way.

I don't think anybody is seriously arguing that land should vote. But that map makes them feel better about losing.The population centers went Democrat in 2004 also, but Bush won becaue he was able to pull enough votes in cities to pick off a few states that Romney couldn't get.
Click to expand...

I like the county divisions because it really helps people understand the politics of the state. In my state, we have a nearly complete east/west split in party lines. Of course, in Presidential terms this doesn't entirely come through, but it's worth keeping in mind how the senatorial/house races are perceived.
 
Last edited:
Fiddytree said:
I like the county divisions because it really helps people understand the politics of the state. In my state, we have a nearly complete east/west split in party lines.
Click to expand...

Is the West Democatic? My wif's family lives in the Eastern half, and they don't vote Democratic.
 
rocket88 said:
Is the West Democatic? My wif's family lives in the Eastern half, and they don't vote Democratic.
Click to expand...

West is certainly more Republican. Now, of course, you have to keep in mind even further how our Democratic-NPL Party functions in terms of ideology, but it is more liberal in the East.

Edit: Temporary memory loss with what is "East" and what is "West" :p
 
Referring to republicans as dirt, which is what you are really doing backhandedly, is exactly the sort of class I would expect from the left....
 
Fisher said:
Referring to republicans as dirt, which is what you are really doing backhandedly, is exactly the sort of class I would expect from the left....
Click to expand...

Actually, he was closer to making an argument against the Electoral College rather than Republicans.
 
obvious Child said:
Romney backers are posting election results via county (just as McCain voters and Bush voters did in 2000-2008).

Their argument is essentially a sea of red in America means for some reason that Obama/Kerry/Gore are clearly losers.

Except that they ignore that much of that space is essentially empty land. Hawaii has more electoral votes then several Republican voting states but has far less land, because it has far more people.

Therefore, if we take the logic they are pushing, that land, not people matter, should dirt be allowed to vote?
Click to expand...

well the few knuckle heads doing that are just that, knuckle heads, they arent to be taken seriously neither is their flawed logic.
 
Fiddytree said:
Actually, he was closer to making an argument against the Electoral College rather than Republicans.
Click to expand...

To a degree yes. It's more of a mockery on the land > people argument that is coming out. Basically people posting the map that ignores population are saying that people don't actually matter. It's stupid and it deserves to be mocked.
 
Fisher said:
Referring to republicans as dirt, which is what you are really doing backhandedly, is exactly the sort of class I would expect from the left....
Click to expand...

this didnt happen AT ALL., thats just dishonesty

he should of said SOME Romney backers but he didnt call anybody dirt LMAO
 
Objective-J said:
this didnt happen AT ALL., thats just dishonesty

he should of said SOME Romney backers but he didnt call anybody dirt LMAO
Click to expand...

Well, I haven't seen any Obama backers post those maps. And not everyone who backed Romney is posting those maps. So logically, it would conclude that I was talking purely about Romney backers who were posting those maps. Fisher is trying (and failing) to move the discussion away from the idiots arguing Land > People to some pathetic illusion that I'm attacking all Republicans.
 
obvious Child said:
Well, I haven't seen any Obama backers post those maps. And not everyone who backed Romney is posting those maps. So logically, it would conclude that I was talking purely about Romney backers who were posting those maps. Fisher is trying (and failing) to move the discussion away from the idiots arguing Land > People to some pathetic illusion that I'm attacking all Republicans.
Click to expand...

well its obvious what he was trying to do as multiple posters pointed out his blatant dishonesty. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom