How you figure ?

what we have been watching for the past 5 yrs is people unafraid of accountability and punishment under the law.

The rules are gone because no one held anyones feet to the fire when they went WAY out of bounds. Ryan stopped people like Nunes and Grassley from being able to use their chair positions to hold people accountable.

Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Yates, etc etc all walked off laughing and that emboldened everyone else to do what they feel, thats how you ended up with Vindman, Nuland, Eric Ciaramella, etc etc etc, lying their asses off and walking away laughing.

Since everyone skates now when they break the law, now you have Milley and Blinken  and Biden just doing whatever enters their minds.

You let go of the check and balance brakes and its full steam ahead til the wheels fall off.   

That's why nobody on here likes you.  Everything has to be right or wrong with you.  There's no such thing as sharing information and discussing the pros and cons.

You're exactly what's wrong with this divisive nation.

Says the people who obsess that I am "wrong". 

Says the people who obsess that I am "wrong".

When you can't admit it, sure.  Stating opinions as if they are facts is when you get jumped on the most, but you prefer to argue and fight about nuances and move the goal posts rather than agree that you were incorrect.

Act like a child, get treated like one.

Ranked choice is an interesting voting concept.  Looks to try help solve the broken 2 party system we currently have.

It doesn't eliminate the 2 party system but it is a promising solution to keeping the far right most and far left most candidates from dominating and dragging the politics away from the center.

Rank choice makes things more complicated on purpose so that they can hide more cheating.

How so?

Its quite simple, among the candidates rank them in order that you would want them in office.

How would it hide more cheating?

Can't use RANKED-CHOICE voting for President, Vice President, Representatives or Senators unless the Constitution is changed.

There would have to be some compelling reason why a different system is needed.

Ranked-Choice might be useful for choosing your favorite band, food or car, but it's not suitable for electing our leadership.

This is not a dog race where you bet win, place or show.  This is a race to put someone in office you actually want.  If your #1 fails to win, would you really be happy your #2 crossed the finish line?

People today are polarized, and in spite of arguments to the contrary, ranked-choice will not reduce the polarization.  If you don't like Candidate "D", you'll put Candidates "A", "B", and "C" as your top 3 choice to try and keep "D" out.  The difference is there's now a chance to defeat "D" if your #2 gets more votes than "A" or "D". 

If preventing someone from winning is how you define winning, then maybe this system is what you're looking for -- more of a chance you'll get your wish. Just remember -- the other party can use the same system against your guy, too.

In Presidential races, the winner must get a majority of votes.  If no candidates makes that threshold, the race is decided by Congress.

Most state and local races are by plurality -- the one with the most votes wins regardless of whether anyone received a majority of votes.

The reason there is a difference is a plurality is based on the total number of people voting.  That number changes election to election.  The general election is based on electoral votes, the total of which is decided by the number and population of states.  That keeps the elections from being decided every 4 years by a few states having the majority of residents.

There's little that can be done to fix the polarization of our political system.  Pushing a new method of voting is just another way of trying to destroy the electoral college system.  There is already an effort to get states to swing their electoral votes to whoever wins the popular vote.

The constitution wouldn't need to be changed, ranked choice voting is already used in two states for presidential races.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked-choice_voting_in_the_United_States

There are a number of compelling reasons why a different system is needed.

If #1 fails to win would I really be happy if my #2 won? Heck yeah, better than my #8 choice.

Ranked choice voting would absolutely help fix the polarization. What we have seen so many times is the far left and the far right candidates winning their parties nominations. The current system incentivises candidates to be more extreme in their views.

That's why nobody on here likes you.  Everything has to be right or wrong with you.  There's no such thing as sharing information and discussing the pros and cons.

You're exactly what's wrong with this divisive nation.

You do jump on other people all the time saying that they say something wrong but can't admit they were wrong. No Omni caught you making an incorrect statement and you are not admitting you are wrong.

How so?

Its quite simple, among the candidates rank them in order that you would want them in office.

How would it hide more cheating?

#1 - they need to wait for all ballots to be counted.
#2 - If they set a threshold of 50% of the vote total, and nobody meets it, the lowest total candidate is eliminated, his voters' votes are reallocated to their #2 candidate, and the percentages are run again.
#3 - if they fail to get a candidate above 50% again, they do another round of elimination, shifting votes to remaining candidates and recalculation.
#4 - once a candidate or candidates top 50%, they can then announce the winner having the most votes over the remaining candidates who survived elimination.

Each step creates another opportunity in the process for manipulation.Who's going to audit the ballots to be sure votes when to the appropriate #2, #3, etc. candidates as each round is completed?  They are working with reports, not individual ballots.  Nobody will know if there was incorrect vote shifting happening until it's long over unless a full and transparent audit is done after every election.

The Democrats seem to have an issue with audits.

You do jump on other people all the time saying that they say something wrong but can't admit they were wrong. No Omni caught you making an incorrect statement and you are not admitting you are wrong.

That's your opinion.

Some people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.  No matter how much you believe you're right, it's still just your opinion.

Omni said people OBSESS over him being wrong.  Again, that's his opinion.  I, for one, don't obsess over him. 

I just find it fascinating that he's been on here for this long and appears to have learned nothing that we've tried to help him learn.  He'd rather argue about what he said or meant than admit his comments were incorrect at least, or total BS at worst.

He trolls, too.  Much of what he posts is purely to provoke others even when he wasn't provoked at all.

He's been caught making shit up all the time, but he still persists.  Maybe that's why he gets called out so often -- nothing to do with anyone's obsession.

what we have been watching for the past 5 yrs is people unafraid of accountability and punishment under the law.

The rules are gone because no one held anyones feet to the fire when they went WAY out of bounds. Ryan stopped people like Nunes and Grassley from being able to use their chair positions to hold people accountable.

Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Yates, etc etc all walked off laughing and that emboldened everyone else to do what they feel, thats how you ended up with Vindman, Nuland, Eric Ciaramella, etc etc etc, lying their asses off and walking away laughing.

Since everyone skates now when they break the law, now you have Milley and Blinken  and Biden just doing whatever enters their minds.

You let go of the check and balance brakes and its full steam ahead til the wheels fall off.   

Ryan set the precedent ?
To current times ?
Hard to believe.
And didn’t they all testify before Congress ?  Ryan didn’t let them off the hook. IMO. (Yeah some was the Senate tried to hold their feet to the fire. Off the hook though.)

He held that much power as Speaker of the House ?
So Pelosi has holy crap power too ?
Hard to believe but possible. (Not to mention don’t want to believe.)

I miss “let’s go have a drink and talk about this” Tip O’Neil.
It’s really just let’s make a deal. But they can’t even play that game any more.

The center cannot please any side because it’s so divided.
The farther the left goes left, the right goes right. Opposite reactions. People went way left, so people went way right. The middle got stranded.
Except Hawaii. Democrat. Winner. Except a couple districts.
In my opinion.

He held that much power as Speaker of the House ?
So Pelosi has holy crap power too ?
Hard to believe but possible. (Not to mention don’t want to believe.)

Speaker has MASSIVE power, they are 3rd in line in succession of the US Presidency.

They literally decide what can and cannot be voted on in the House.
Bills have to pass both House and Senate to become Law.
They have to sign off on all subpoenas issued by the House, any charges of perjury / lying in testimony / contempt.

Ryan promised to fund Trumps Wall publicly dozens of times, but would not let the funding vote come to the floor ever.
SoH is the only person with power to issue subpoenas
Jordan, Gaetz and Nunes repeatedly tried to issue subpoenas for information on the Comey shenanigans, Hillary shenanigans, Clapper shenanigans, Mueller shenanigans,  Andrew Weissman shenanigans, Eric Ciaramella shenanigans, Ryan blocked them all, Trey Gowdy also was in cahoots with Ryan for all that.
House republicans wanted to impeach Rod Rosenstein, Ryan blocked that too. 

SoH also can stack the deck the way they like, not only by giving committee assignments but literally control what members are allowed to speak on the floor during debates.

They literally set and control the entire agenda for the house (and by extension the senate) during their term. Arguably they are much more powerful than the POTUS whos main powers are VETO, foreign affairs and the Bully Pulpit.


Edit - Also Capitol Police are outside the scope of the rest of the Fed and answer only to a committee headed by SoH.

Ryan could have made it his agenda to clean house of bad actors, he decided to let it all burn because he hated Trump.

Ryan was Romneys running mate and Mitt hates Trump too.

#1 - they need to wait for all ballots to be counted.
#2 - If they set a threshold of 50% of the vote total, and nobody meets it, the lowest total candidate is eliminated, his voters' votes are reallocated to their #2 candidate, and the percentages are run again.
#3 - if they fail to get a candidate above 50% again, they do another round of elimination, shifting votes to remaining candidates and recalculation.
#4 - once a candidate or candidates top 50%, they can then announce the winner having the most votes over the remaining candidates who survived elimination.

Each step creates another opportunity in the process for manipulation.Who's going to audit the ballots to be sure votes when to the appropriate #2, #3, etc. candidates as each round is completed?  They are working with reports, not individual ballots.  Nobody will know if there was incorrect vote shifting happening until it's long over unless a full and transparent audit is done after every election.

The Democrats seem to have an issue with audits.

You do know ranked choice ballots are scanned at once.  Its not 5 different ballots.  So the "fraud" chance is still on one ballot.  A simple machine that can be very transparent can calculate it all.  Its not rocket science, its not even difficult.  You are just fear mongering.  You can't even prove there is fraud in the recent elections much less ranked choice.  This is why we don't have superior ways of voting.

Speaker of the House is powerful.
Shucks. Pelosi’s holding a big hammer.
And she’s not in the center.

Speaker of the House is powerful.
Shucks. Pelosi’s holding a big hammer.
And she’s not in the center.

And our SOH here (Scott Saiki) submitted a mag ban bill last year at request of HPD.  But he also submitted my CCW bill, but it didn't get a hearing. Also wrote a letter to Ige for vaxx passports, he posted it on his IG. Got like 600 (99%)  negative comments so the post was removed.

You do know ranked choice ballots are scanned at once.  Its not 5 different ballots.  So the "fraud" chance is still on one ballot.  A simple machine that can be very transparent can calculate it all.  Its not rocket science, its not even difficult.  You are just fear mongering.  You can't even prove there is fraud in the recent elections much less ranked choice.  This is why we don't have superior ways of voting.

Show me where I mentioned anything at all about "5 different ballots."

Each round of tallying will be working from reports produced supposedly by the scanned ballots.

As we saw in several states, the counting/scanner/rescanning/mysterious origin of ballots were never answered.  If someone injects hundreds of ballots or "corrects" hundreds of ballots by hand, the reports will show fraudulent numbers -- not the actual votes scanned at the precincts.

We used machines in Georgia.  Then we saw workers WITHOUT ANY OBSERVERS dragging cases of ballots from underneath tables and/or rescanning stacks of ballots over and over to duplicate the numbers in the tallies.

Machines only get you to the counting room.  It's what happens in the counting rooms that you have a problem comprehending.

And our SOH here (Scott Saiki) submitted a mag ban bill last year at request of HPD.  But he also submitted my CCW bill, but it didn't get a hearing. Also wrote a letter to Ige for vaxx passports, he posted it on his IG. Got like 600 (99%)  negative comments so the post was removed.

Saiki is a dik

I emailed and wrote him.  No response, not even a canned one. 

I used to listen to "Left Right and Center" on NPR.  That was over a year ago since I last listened since the jackwagons that were usually on when I was driving into work turned into extremist nutbags, inserting extreme opinions in everything.  Worse than M.W. Perry.  Anyways, I used to enjoy the perspective of the group(s). 

How so?

Its quite simple, among the candidates rank them in order that you would want them in office.

How would it hide more cheating?

Are we really going to pretend that there is not a bunch of hyper-confusing math involved? Imagine a challenged election that is uncountable by the average person. You need to put an awful lot of trust in computers, and we know how much cheaters love their computerized voting systems.

Are we really going to pretend that there is not a bunch of hyper-confusing math involved? Imagine a challenged election that is uncountable by the average person. You need to put an awful lot of trust in computers, and we know how much cheaters love their computerized voting systems.

It's math a high schooler should be able to do.  Even Glasser. 

#1 - they need to wait for all ballots to be counted.
#2 - If they set a threshold of 50% of the vote total, and nobody meets it, the lowest total candidate is eliminated, his voters' votes are reallocated to their #2 candidate, and the percentages are run again.
#3 - if they fail to get a candidate above 50% again, they do another round of elimination, shifting votes to remaining candidates and recalculation.
#4 - once a candidate or candidates top 50%, they can then announce the winner having the most votes over the remaining candidates who survived elimination.

Each step creates another opportunity in the process for manipulation.Who's going to audit the ballots to be sure votes when to the appropriate #2, #3, etc. candidates as each round is completed?  They are working with reports, not individual ballots.  Nobody will know if there was incorrect vote shifting happening until it's long over unless a full and transparent audit is done after every election.

The Democrats seem to have an issue with audits.

I have had to do ranked choice type things at work. It is harder to do by hand but a computer program could easily do that.

Could people exploit that to cheat? Possibly but I think the benefits outweigh the risks.