Comments by "k98killer" (@k98killer) on "David Pakman Show" channel.

  1. My attempt to explain the failure of instant run-off voting/alternative vote/"ranked choice" in the 2009 Burlington mayoral race: there were 5 candidates, 4 of which were competitive; for the first and second tabulation rounds, Kurt Wright had the plurality of votes; in the third round, Bob Kiss eked out a majority (of unexhausted ballots); however, the Condorcet winner (Andy Montroll) was not elected despite being preferred to all other candidates by a majority of voters.
    3
  2. The electoral college functions as intended -- what some call a "failure" due to differences from the popular vote is actually the exact merit of the system: it elects the candidate with majority support in the vast majority of counties and municipalities, with small, densely populated regions unable to concentrate federal power/influence. However, we can still improve it by adopting range voting, with the electors then placing their votes for whichever candidate has the highest score; all that is required for your state electors to better represent your preferences as a voter is a state constitutional amendment/referendum rather than a federal constitutional amendment.
    1
  3.  @paultidwell8799  It's almost like you stopped reading my comment after the first half of the first sentence and then decided to spout off ignorantly.
    1
  4. "I denounce violence, but he was baiting antifa to attack him merely by being there, that's true, but the violence is bad." "I denounce rape, but look at that slutty skirt, you could see her ass, but the rape was still bad."
    1
  5.  @Caitlin_TheGreat  Actually, if you look at the electoral college map from the last presidential election, it is clear that the vast majority of counties and municipalities supported Trump more than Hillary. The value of the nation is not merely the number of its citizens, regardless of what they do or where they live -- maybe it sounds a bit too tree-hugging hippy dippy, but the land contributes significantly to the health of the nation; in fact, if the whole country were like NYC or San Francisco, we would all have starved a long time ago. Considering how much the city dwelling Democrats rely upon the work of the food producing rural Republicans, it makes no sense to fully disenfranchise the majority of the nation's communities for the sake of "fairly representing" the will of those crazy enough to jam themselves into cramped cement boxes all over each other in NYC and then pay $5k a month in rent for that cramped cement box. If San Francisco votes away the water rights of the towns on its outskirts, is that somehow "fair" just because of the higher population? Without city folk paying exorbitant taxes from their proximity to the funny money banking warlords, farmers would arguably have shittier roads and fewer super carriers roaming the South Pacific on their behalf; without farmers producing food, city folk would have no food. You can't eat money, but money and waste are all that a city produces. Abolishing the electoral college would effectively mean that those farmers who grow all the food for the city folk no longer have any say in how the executive branch is run in this country -- disenfranchisement of the sharecroppers was tried by Jim Crow, and it was ended because it was a bad idea.
    1
  6. Kamala isn't anti-child. The fact she loves children is apparent by the eay she talks as if there are no adults present.
    1