THE DEBATES 2016

Cliffy6745

Lol to anyone who doesn't think population size has anything to do with government

ledvedderman

Cliffy6745 said:

Lol to anyone who doesn't think population size has anything to do with government

Respectfully, I just don't believe that to be true. Like stated earlier, it's all relative. Each country has so many different variables that play into the general makeup of it's government. It wouldn't be fair to say that the size of a country does or does not matter. Just way too many factors coming into play.

Degeneratefk

Free said:

...due to the rigging of the election.

Where is your proof of the rigging?

HughFreakingDillon

Cliffy6745 said:

Lol to anyone who doesn't think population size has anything to do with government

it's the same idea as taking a poll. you take a certain group and it's pretty accurate to state that it's going to have a pretty good representation of the population. 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million. this is no different.

Godfather.

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Lol to anyone who doesn't think population size has anything to do with government

it's the same idea as taking a poll. you take a certain group and it's pretty accurate to state that it's going to have a pretty good representation of the population. 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million. this is no different.

totally disagree, polls are normally done by groups of people who lean towards a certain interest there for the calls and info made or used are going to lean towards those groups of peoples interest: democratic party calls 300 to a thousand voters in each state....maybe 3 to 5 states are called and chances are those states are known for their interest in democratic government values, so saying that " 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million" is ridicules......there is your first area of a "rigged system" but I'm sure you don't believe that a rigged system is even possible.

Godfather.

HughFreakingDillon

Godfather. said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Lol to anyone who doesn't think population size has anything to do with government

it's the same idea as taking a poll. you take a certain group and it's pretty accurate to state that it's going to have a pretty good representation of the population. 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million. this is no different.

totally disagree, polls are normally done by groups of people who lean towards a certain interest there for the calls and info made or used are going to lean towards those groups of peoples interest: democratic party calls 300 to a thousand voters in each state....maybe 3 to 5 states are called and chances are those states are known for their interest in democratic government values, so saying that " 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million" is ridicules......there is your first area of a "rigged system" but I'm sure you don't believe that a rigged system is even possible.

Godfather.

I wasn't talking about political polls specifically. any poll.

dignin

Godfather. said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Lol to anyone who doesn't think population size has anything to do with government

it's the same idea as taking a poll. you take a certain group and it's pretty accurate to state that it's going to have a pretty good representation of the population. 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million. this is no different.

totally disagree, polls are normally done by groups of people who lean towards a certain interest there for the calls and info made or used are going to lean towards those groups of peoples interest: democratic party calls 300 to a thousand voters in each state....maybe 3 to 5 states are called and chances are those states are known for their interest in democratic government values, so saying that " 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million" is ridicules......there is your first area of a "rigged system" but I'm sure you don't believe that a rigged system is even possible.

Godfather.

Not a surprise that you have no idea how scientific polls work.

mrussel1

dignin said:

Godfather. said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Lol to anyone who doesn't think population size has anything to do with government

it's the same idea as taking a poll. you take a certain group and it's pretty accurate to state that it's going to have a pretty good representation of the population. 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million. this is no different.

totally disagree, polls are normally done by groups of people who lean towards a certain interest there for the calls and info made or used are going to lean towards those groups of peoples interest: democratic party calls 300 to a thousand voters in each state....maybe 3 to 5 states are called and chances are those states are known for their interest in democratic government values, so saying that " 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million" is ridicules......there is your first area of a "rigged system" but I'm sure you don't believe that a rigged system is even possible.

Godfather.

Not a surprise that you have no idea how scientific polls work.

Or statistics...

Godfather.

glad I could help.

Godfather.

mace1229

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Lol to anyone who doesn't think population size has anything to do with government

it's the same idea as taking a poll. you take a certain group and it's pretty accurate to state that it's going to have a pretty good representation of the population. 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million. this is no different.

I guess it depends on your definition of "roughly the same".
Polls can be 3 or 4 or 5 percentage points off, and in many cases is the difference between who wins or loses.

And consider the states. There is a large polarization, but if we divide the country into 10 regions the size of Canada, the extreme of the polarization shrinks.
Take New England and it will be very similar, but completely different than the south, or Midwest, each with their own values and agendas. Size definitely plays a role.

oftenreading

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Lol to anyone who doesn't think population size has anything to do with government

it's the same idea as taking a poll. you take a certain group and it's pretty accurate to state that it's going to have a pretty good representation of the population. 1000 people is going to be roughly the same outcome as 300 million. this is no different.

I guess it depends on your definition of "roughly the same".
Polls can be 3 or 4 or 5 percentage points off, and in many cases is the difference between who wins or loses.

And consider the states. There is a large polarization, but if we divide the country into 10 regions the size of Canada, the extreme of the polarization shrinks.
Take New England and it will be very similar, but completely different than the south, or Midwest, each with their own values and agendas. Size definitely plays a role.

First off, you can't divide your country into 10 regions the size of Canada. Maybe 10 regions roughly the population of Canada, but not the size. And of course there is regional disparity. There is regional disparity in Canada, too, like most other countries. That has very little to do with size and much to do with the differences between rural and urban, between coastal and prairie, between founding cultures/values, and the like.

mace1229

Yes, what I meant was population size. Since that is what everyone else was referring to, why would you assume this conversation took a drastic turn into land mass? So if we agree there is a difference in regional disparity, how does it not make sense that a larger country will have larger differences? If we split into 10 countries the polarization within each new country that is the size of Canada (yes, by population again, we all know Canada is a huge land mass that is 90% empty) would be much, much smaller. Because you will have more urban areas, large cities, coastal and prairies and everything else you mentioned is more prominent when a country is 10 times larger. I don't see how those two are not related.

Cliffy6745

Yes, providing healthcare for 300 something million people is a very different task than providing for 30 something million people, same goes for infrastructure, same goes for education, etc.

Having significantly larger populations of various religions, cultures and immigration in general also poses significantly different challenges.

mace1229

Cliffy6745 said:

Yes, providing healthcare for 300 something million people is a very different task than providing for 30 something million people, same goes for infrastructure, same goes for education, etc.

Having significantly larger populations of various religions, cultures and immigration in general also poses significantly different challenges.

Obviously there's other factors, even geography can create political divides. I don't think there's a big debate about whether or not to build a wall on their southern boarder and how to treat illegals coming from the south.
But you're right, there's huge differences on how to run a program with you're talking 30 million vs 300 million

HughFreakingDillon

Cliffy6745 said:

Yes, providing healthcare for 300 something million people is a very different task than providing for 30 something million people, same goes for infrastructure, same goes for education, etc.

Having significantly larger populations of various religions, cultures and immigration in general also poses significantly different challenges.

no it's not. again, relativity is everything. you have the same relative amount of people paying into it, you have the same relative amount of people providing it, you have the same relative amount of doctors, health care workers, IT guys, teachers, road workers, people at all levels of government making sure the machine is running, etc.

it's not like we have the exact same amount of people in government working for 1/10th of the population.

PJ_Soul

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Yes, providing healthcare for 300 something million people is a very different task than providing for 30 something million people, same goes for infrastructure, same goes for education, etc.

Having significantly larger populations of various religions, cultures and immigration in general also poses significantly different challenges.

no it's not. again, relativity is everything. you have the same relative amount of people paying into it, you have the same relative amount of people providing it, you have the same relative amount of doctors, health care workers, IT guys, teachers, road workers, people at all levels of government making sure the machine is running, etc.

it's not like we have the exact same amount of people in government working for 1/10th of the population.

Of course. Seems obvious, right?

Cliffy6745

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Yes, providing healthcare for 300 something million people is a very different task than providing for 30 something million people, same goes for infrastructure, same goes for education, etc.

Having significantly larger populations of various religions, cultures and immigration in general also poses significantly different challenges.

no it's not. again, relativity is everything. you have the same relative amount of people paying into it, you have the same relative amount of people providing it, you have the same relative amount of doctors, health care workers, IT guys, teachers, road workers, people at all levels of government making sure the machine is running, etc.

it's not like we have the exact same amount of people in government working for 1/10th of the population.

ha, okay. Canada has it all figured out...pretty cute you guys are up there...

So I guess the mayor of NYC's job is no more difficult than the mayor of Utica? Come on...

PJ_Soul

Cliffy6745 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Yes, providing healthcare for 300 something million people is a very different task than providing for 30 something million people, same goes for infrastructure, same goes for education, etc.

Having significantly larger populations of various religions, cultures and immigration in general also poses significantly different challenges.

no it's not. again, relativity is everything. you have the same relative amount of people paying into it, you have the same relative amount of people providing it, you have the same relative amount of doctors, health care workers, IT guys, teachers, road workers, people at all levels of government making sure the machine is running, etc.

it's not like we have the exact same amount of people in government working for 1/10th of the population.

ha, okay. Canada has it all figured out...

So I guess the mayor of NYC's job is no more difficult than the major of Utica? Come on...

I'm pretty sure the mayor of NYC has a much bigger support system than the mayor of Utica does. It really is all relative.

Cliffy6745

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Yes, providing healthcare for 300 something million people is a very different task than providing for 30 something million people, same goes for infrastructure, same goes for education, etc.

Having significantly larger populations of various religions, cultures and immigration in general also poses significantly different challenges.

no it's not. again, relativity is everything. you have the same relative amount of people paying into it, you have the same relative amount of people providing it, you have the same relative amount of doctors, health care workers, IT guys, teachers, road workers, people at all levels of government making sure the machine is running, etc.

it's not like we have the exact same amount of people in government working for 1/10th of the population.

ha, okay. Canada has it all figured out...

So I guess the mayor of NYC's job is no more difficult than the major of Utica? Come on...

I'm pretty sure the mayor of NYC has a much bigger support system than the mayor of Utica does. It really is all relative.

You didn't answer my question

PJ_Soul

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

Yes, providing healthcare for 300 something million people is a very different task than providing for 30 something million people, same goes for infrastructure, same goes for education, etc.

Having significantly larger populations of various religions, cultures and immigration in general also poses significantly different challenges.

no it's not. again, relativity is everything. you have the same relative amount of people paying into it, you have the same relative amount of people providing it, you have the same relative amount of doctors, health care workers, IT guys, teachers, road workers, people at all levels of government making sure the machine is running, etc.

it's not like we have the exact same amount of people in government working for 1/10th of the population.

ha, okay. Canada has it all figured out...

So I guess the mayor of NYC's job is no more difficult than the major of Utica? Come on...

I'm pretty sure the mayor of NYC has a much bigger support system than the mayor of Utica does. It really is all relative.

You didn't answer my question

You weren't asking me, were you?