Posted on

Assuming that every eligible voter in the US casts a vote, what minimum percentage of those voters can get someone elected as president?

22 percentage

Let’s assume there is only two candidates that gets any votes, just to make it more simple.

The electoral college ensures that the total amount of votes really isn’t that important; as we have seen both in 2000 and 2016.

What’s also important to understand is that the small states gets a certain advantage in the electoral college, since the amount of electoral votes a state has is decided by the amounts of representatives the state has in both the House of Representative and the Senate.

This means that since every state has two representatives in the Senate. The consequence of this is that a vote in states such as Vermont and Wyoming ultimately matters more than a vote in California.

Enough of that, let’s go on to the states.

The smallest state is Wyoming. Candidate A only needs one more vote than Candidate B in order to win – and that’s exactly how much Candidate A is going to win by. Candidate A gets 292 751 votes and wins Wyoming and the states’ three electoral votes.

Next on the list is Vermont. Candidate A wins 312 298, and just barely beats Candidate B. In an extremely close race, Candidate A beats Candidate B in all of the 38 smallest states, plus North Carolina, securing Candidate A 270 electoral votes.

What’s interesting about this election is that Candidate B won California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Georgia, Michigan, New Jersey, Virginia and Washington. Those states weren’t close; every single voter voted for Candidate B.

When the results are coming in, it’s quite early made clear that Candidate B is projected to win about 78 % of the votes.

The Candidate B camp is cheering. With such a large landslide, B has written history. He runs up to the podium and holds his victory speech. The party on Candidate B’s camp continues, and suddenly someone notices that Candidate A is projected to win 270 electoral votes.

There has never been a night with more fingernail biting in the history, and when the final vote is counted in North Carolina, it’s clear that the winner is Candidate A, with only 22 % of the votes and an extremely slim majority in the electoral co

Posted on

Why do many Catalans want to secede from Spain?

There are many of reasons why Catalonia considers itself different  from the rest of Spain and has made repeated calls for independence.  Here's a quick run through of some reasons for Catalan independence  knocked out without too much thought.

Historical
Following  the invasion of the Iberian peninsula by the Moors in 711, the  Christian 'reconquest' of the north-eastern coastline was begun by the  Franks and the Catalan counties were originally a buffer zone between  Christian and Muslim territory known as the Marca Hispanica.

Most  of this territory became hereditary under Wilfred the Hairy of the House  of Barcelona in 897, declared independence from the Franks under  Borrell II in 988 and was grouped together Ramon Berenguer IV when he  married the Aragonese heiress Petronila in 1137 and became Prince Regent  of Aragon.

Their son Alfons became King of Aragon but the  Principality of Catalonia retained its laws, charters and political  institutions until after the War of the Spanish Succession in 1714 when  all of the Crown of Aragon was annexed by force by the Crown of Castile  and Spain began to exist as we know it.

Since the mid-19th century  increased autonomy and independence have been a permanent source of  tension between Catalonia and the Spanish government in Madrid.

Territorial
Located  in the north-east corner of the Iberian Peninsula between the Pyrenees  and the Mediterranean, Catalonia has always been a strategic passageway  between France and Spain and has not only received cultural influences  but has also been invaded from both the north and south.

It has  also always been open influence from the sea. The Greeks founded  Emporion, the Romans made Tarragona their capital and Barcelona has long  been one the Mediterranean's most cosmopolitan cities and an important  trading capital for centuries.

In fact, Barcelona is still the  capital of a European megaregion that begins at Marseille and stretches  down to Valencia and is quite distinct economically from the rest of the  Iberian peninsula.

Linguistic
Catalan was one of the  first languages to develop out of Vulgar Latin and has almost as much in  common with modern French and Italian as it does with modern Spanish.

Its earliest written text, the Homilies d'Organyà, dates from the 11th century but it was a vernacular language long before.

Catalan  is not a minority language but rather a stateless one and is spoken as a  mother tongue by around 9.5 million people mainly in Catalonia, the  Balearic Island, Valencia and the French region of Rousillon.

Not  surprisingly, Catalans feel that the 14th most spoken language in the  European Union should have the support of its own state.

Cultural
Obviously  speaking the same language is an important unifying factor but there  are other cultural differences that distinguish Catalans from other  Spaniards.

They have a reputation for being hard-working and mean  probably because of their mercantile history and the fact that Catalonia  was one of the few places to undergo the industrial revolution.

Catalans  are also very group-oriented and have clubs for everything from  collecting mushrooms to football supporting. The first peñas or  supporters' clubs in Spain were Catalan, their famous human  castle-building involves incredible teamwork and even their national  Sardana dances has people forming ordered circles whereas passionate  flamenco is much more individualistic.

The Spanish national sport of bullfighting was declared illegal by the Catalan Parliament in 2010.

Economic
Catalonia  suffers a tax deficit with respect to the Spanish state of around 8% of  its GDP which in 2010 amounted to €16,000,000,000 of Catalan taxes that  were paid to Madrid and not reinvested in Catalonia. This makes  Catalonia the most highly taxed region in Europe and its schools, health  services, roads and infrastructures are suffering in comparison to  supposedly poorer regions of Spain.

Furthermore, many decisions taken by central government have negative effects on the local economy. Here are two examples.

Barcelona  Airport despite being Spain's busiest airport some months of the year  still has no metro connection, a very poor train service and out of date  roads whilst Madrid Barajas has train, metro, new roads and there are  plans for a high-speed AVE connection. AENA, the central airport  authority, also prioritises intercontinental flights to Madrid meaning  there are no direct flights from many destinations to Barcelona, which  has a detrimental effect on multinational business in Catalonia.

The  Port of Barcelona is one of the busiest in Europe and is so profitable  it subsidises other Spanish ports that run at a loss. The Port of  Barcelona would be even more successful if it had a freight railway line  that could take goods north into Europe because ships from Asia that  currently dock in Rotterdam could access the Mediterranean via the Suez  Canal. Both Catalonia and the EU have been lobbying for the so-called  Mediterranean Corridor, which would also benefit Valencia, Cartagena,  Malaga and Algeciras, but central government has blocked the  Mediterranean Corridor for years because it doesn't pass through Madrid.

And Finally
If Catalonia is such an important part of Spain, why doesn't the Vuelta de España cycle race ever come here?
Catalonia is perfect cycling territory with flat plains and Pyrenean mountain ranges and regularly hosts the Tour de France!

I'm currently writing a book on the history of the relations between Catalonia and Spain with a deliberately provocative title

Catalonia Is Not Spain: A Historical Perspective

And you can find out more in general on my blog

Page on barcelonas.com

Posted on

What are some of the reasons people should follow you on Quora? What types of people do you follow, and what types of people should follow you?

This should be interesting to write.

If you are interested in technology, want to learn more about it, and/or have questions about it, I feel that I can help. Although I can be useful in other areas of technology as well, a lot of my tech knowledge is with Apple. I am a registered Apple Developers in both the iOS and OS X departments; I've used Mac OS Classic since OS 9 and iPhone OS since 1.1.1, so I know not only a lot of inner-workings of the platforms but also the history of them. I follow Apple Press Releases and watch all the Keynotes either live or as soon as they are available online to watch.

If you are interested in photography, I may be only freelance but I know some things that I can help with. I am also fairly well experienced with editing software such as Adobe Photoshop and Aperture. I also follow news for the company my DSLR is from, Canon, so I can help in some areas there.

If you are interested in religion — specifically Christianity — I am no expert but I've been a Christian my whole life and can do my best to help in areas involving Christianity and matters related to it.

If you are interested in relationships, both romantic and non-romantic relationships, I am definitely no expert but can share experiences. I have been with my girlfriend for three years as of November 2012, and even though she's the first serious girlfriend I've ever had I see myself marrying her someday without a doubt. If I can help without sharing personal details I don't wish to share, I will be glad to do so.

Lastly, if there is something I don't know about or not quite enough to answer about, I will do my best to gather information to help answer a question I am asked to answer. If I feel confident to answer it, I will do so to the best of my ability and I am open to conversation in the comments. I love to help people, so I feel at home with Quora. I'm nobody spectacular, but I strive to improve myself wherever possible.

I hope this has interested you and you will give me a follow!

Posted on

Should I do anything when I see that websites are republishing my article without my permission?

Yes. If you have reason to believe they didn’t know better and you’re feeling generous, try to email them directly and tell them they have four hours to remove the stolen content before you file a formal DMCA takedown notice.

(I have a more detailed article on the DMCA takedown process here. )

And for the record, it’s absolutely NOT TRUE that you can’t do anything if they give you credit.

When you create and publish original content, whether it’s in the form of text, images, video, or audio, you own that content under the law and have full rights to control where and how that content is used.

The only exceptions are that someone can quote a small portion of your text or use a thumbnail image for educational or other limited non-commercial purposes. They may also be able to parody your work. There are no 100% hard and fast rules as to how many words they can post, but you can find guidelines at U.S. Copyright Office or Plagiarism.org or consult with an attorney if you’re interested in learning more.

You are only required to file for a formal copyright if you plan to sue an infringer, but it’s not a bad idea to file for content that you value.

If your articles were stolen by websites that publish infringed content on a regular basis, first file takedown notices with Google. My article referenced above gives you the link for that. This will make their version of your article disappear from Google. Then file your takedown notice with the host.

If you can’t find out who the host is, they may be hiding behind a service like Cloudflare. In that case, file a notice with Cloudflare and they will respond with information about the true host. Then you can file with that host.

If it turns out that the host is in another country, it’s possible that you may only be able to remove them from Google search results, but that’s better than nothing.

There are times you might not want to force someone to remove your content; if they only post a small portion of your article and link back to your site, they might be doing you more good than harm. But that’s usually the exception.

One reason that you should force infringers to remove your content is that you may end up with a “duplicate content” penalty from Google. This is thought to not be as much of a problem as it was once thought to be, but if you’re putting hard work into creating your own content to grow your website traffic, don’t take that chance.

One example of why people should enforce their copyrights is this: I have a client who does auto body repair, and when his photos are stolen to use on other auto body repair sites, it can make potential clients think his photos are not original before and after shots of his own work. But they are. This can damage his reputation, so we get them removed immediately when we find them on other sites without permission.

So, yes. In most cases, you should do something to protect your property. All the instructions are posted on the article I added the link for, and after you send one notice you can use that as a template to send others if needed.

EDIT: As David Thomas pointed out, if you voluntarily post your content on a website that you do not own/control, you may be subject to their terms. You even have to be careful using Google Drive, for example, because if you make an image public, their terms (which you accept automatically when you use their service) allow them to use that for advertising, and that’s been an issue with Facebook, too. But rarely would those terms allow others to use your content without your explicit permission. The only exception I can think of is when sites like YouTube offer embedding. And even there you can disable embedding of your videos.

So always read the terms of service when you post content to a site you don’t own, and consider adding your own terms of service to your site to spell out what you do and do not allow others to do with your work.

Posted on

How would a college/university student know his headings and subheadings from the textbook by studying for an open book test? What if they don't have a heading and subheading from their textbook?

If your University textbook doesn't have headings and subheadings, you should create them yourself.

Anytime there is a line break, an extra line between two blocks of text, a new subject is usually being introduced.

For every block of text, identify the subject by the number of sentences that refer to the subject, usually a noun, i.e World War I. This noun may be qualified by adjectives, such as “the start” or “life during” or similar and some statement about it's importance, such as “poverty grew" or “people rationed food."

These can be considered subheadings.

Headings are usually created for a series of subheading sections where the topic relates to the same subject.

Anyone can find topics by highlighting frequently used nouns–person's, places, or things about which most of the writing is about.

Posted on

Why are you a theist? Without the backing of empirical evidence, could your spiritual experiences be mere illusions?

Why am I a theist? I think that’s because language can be used for classification and division.

The word for God in Greek is θεός (theos) and the word used in the question is derived from this to classify someone as a believer in a god. Greek language and culture have also provided a great many things, from φιλοσοφία (philosophy), Δημοκρατία (democracy) along with a wealth of art, education, sports and ethical teaching.

For example, Aristotle could be considered one of the founding thinkers for the division and classification of things we find in the everyday world. However, Aristotle was far from being irreligious. If I quote R. Michael Olsen

Aristotle conceives of God as an unmoved mover, the primary cause responsible for the shapeliness of motion in the natural order, and as divine nous, the perfect actuality of thought thinking itself, which, as the epitome of substance, exercises its influence on natural beings as their final cause.These two aspects of God reflect the two defining aspects of Classical Greek Philosophy: the experience of the intelligibility of the natural order and the search for the first principle(s) responsible for its intelligibility.[1]

Image courtesy NT Times.

As we can see from the example above, belief in God or gods has a rich tradition which provides the fabric within the tapestry of ideas derived from the ancient world that continue into the present.

Far from that world view being irrelevant, the way of looking at God as providing rationale for the intelligibility of the natural order is as relevant today as it was when first articulated.

The assumption that the natural order is intelligible without recourse to God or gods is an more modern phenomenon. That is to say, reliance on “empirical evidence” as the only source of truth flies in the face of many thousands of years of thinking and, when held without a degree of self awareness, risks being little more than unsupported assertion.

For instance, the problem of induction remains a problem even if one adopts the most hard line empiricist position. Indeed the more hard line the position is taken the more difficult it is to explain faith in causality, since any evidence used to support that belief is self-referential.

Personally, my beliefs are a result of faith. Something that is seen and observed would typically not be expected to require faith. The call for evidence is the very opposite of a call for faith, with the exception of the underlying assumption of the intelligibility of nature.

I try to draw the boundaries between what I believe, what I can determine by observation and what can be deduced. Faith is not bad in itself, since it becomes the motivator for achievement and enables accomplishment. An unstated faith or assumption however, can lead its owner in unknown directions.

Certainly, any personal experience, or indeed any other perception, spiritual or otherwise could be an illusion. Causality and the reliability of empirical data could themselves be an artefact of sheer random chance. Which is more of concern, statements of faith that are clearly articulated as such or assumptions and faith that are not articulated, but declared to be fact?

Footnotes

[1] Aristotle on God: Divine Nous as Unmoved Mover

Posted on

Lord Krishna is in everyone in this beautiful world. If he is in us, in animals, in you, and in me, then why do people search him only in temples? Why do people build such big temples when he is the creator of this beautiful world?

Yes he is in every one in this world. He is present in every atom of this world and in every one’s heart.

So if Krishna is in every one then certainly he is in deity of temple also. And that deity is direct personal aspect of krishna which is very easy to understand and so we are able to connect with god. If you just see the all thing around us then you will perceive that thing not god .Suppose if you see tree ,you will think about tree,if you see bird ,you will think about bird and so on. So in all these cases you are not able to perceive god directly. Although if you learned the scriptures like bhagavat geeta then you can remember god by seeing all these thing but still you will perceive that material aspect also.

But what about when you see deity of god in temple. Immediately you think of god and connected with god. The devotee who has developed love for god , just by seeing deity they connected with god. And also in temple there are many person , who is there for same purpose to connect with god so you can associate with him and discuss with them and learn from them. This is not possible at all places. In temple i think there are more pure and spiritual atmosphere than any other places . That prasadam, that hyms, that bhajan, that arati and all other things. There are very positive energy so to connect and feel god , there are suitable place.

In short i can say , in temple all the spiritual energy is activated while on other places, it is deactivated or less degree of activation .

Thanks for reading!!

Hare krishna!!

Posted on

What will happen to us after we die?

“Do not be amazed at this, for the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who did good things to a resurrection of life, and those who practiced vile things to a resurrection of judgment.” (John 5:28,29)

The Creator’s Original and UNCHANGED Purpose for Mankind

“And Jehovah God went on to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life [Hebrew: nesh-ama, force of life] and the man became a living person [Hebrew: ne-phesh, soul].” (Genesis 2:7)

  • body [Hebrew: gewi·yahʹ] + life-force [neshama] = living soul [nephesh] (being, person)

“And God went on to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them. Further, God blessed them, and God said to them: “Be fruitful and become many, fill the earth and subdue it, and have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving on the earth.” (Genesis 1:27,28)

“Jehovah God took the man and settled him in the garden of Eʹden to cultivate it and to take care of it. Jehovah God also gave this command to the man: “From every tree of the garden you may eat to satisfaction. But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad, you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will certainly die.” (Gen. 2:15-17)

  • Deceived by rebel angel Satan (Hebrew: resister)

“You certainly will not die. For God knows that in the very day you eat from it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and bad.” (Gen. 3: 4,5)

Consequences

“In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return.” (Gen. 3:19)

  • Plug pulled: body minus life-force = unliving soul (person)
  • Immortality of the soul NOT a Bible teaching. Babylonish in origin, spun out by Greeks, “Christianized” by Rome

“The soul who sins is the one who will die.” (Ezekiel 18:4)

“The dead know nothing at all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:5)

“On that very day his thoughts perish.” Psalm 146:4

That it, then?

“O that in the Grave you would conceal me, That you would hide me until your anger passes by, That you would set a time limit for me and remember me! If a man dies, can he live again? I will wait all the days of my compulsory service Until my relief comes. You will call, and I will answer you. You will long for the work of your hands.” (Job 14:13-15)

“You will rest, but you will stand up for your lot at the end of the days.” (Daniel 12:13)

“Martha said to him: “I know he will rise in the resurrection on the last day.”’ (John 11;24)

“Do not be amazed at this, for the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who did good things to a resurrection of life, and those who practiced vile things to a resurrection of judgment.” (John 5:28,29)

“And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.” (Revelation 21:4)

“Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.” (Matthew 5:5)

“The righteous will possess the earth, And they will live forever on it.” (Psalm 37:29)

“He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has even put eternity in their heart; yet mankind will never find out the work that the true God has made from start to finish.” (Ecclesiastes 3:11)

But does not the Bible also teach that some go to Heaven?

  • Yes, “for an administration.” (Ephesians 1:10)

“You are the ones who have stuck with me in my trials; and I make a covenant with you, just as my Father has made a covenant with me, for a kingdom, so that you may eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom, and sit on thrones to judge the 12 tribes of Israel.” (Luke 22:28-30)

“And you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.” (Revelation 5:10)

“Because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise.” (1 Thessalonians 4:16)

Paul’s audience was all those anointed after 33CE that now had the covenant opportunity for heavenly life. But they had to die after Jesus (“the way”) and would not be raised until the end times. So no one had yet gone to heaven.

Those that do must die and give up their mortal bodies and are given spirit bodies – they do not have one floating around inside.

  • Soul and Spirit are falsely mashed by Christendom and the rest.
  • “So it is with the resurrection of the dead
  • It is sown a physical body; it is raised up a spiritual body…What is physical is first, and afterward what is spiritual
  • flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s Kingdom
  • but we will all be changed
  • during the last trumpet
  • and this which is mortal must put on immortality” (1 Corinthians 15:42-54)

How many are sealed in that covenant to rule with Jesus in heaven?

  • A “little flock.” (Luke 12:32)
  • “And I heard the number of those who were sealed, 144,000.” (Revelation 7:9)

Over whom on earth do they rule?

  • “And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those too I must bring in, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.” (John 10:16)

“A great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues.” (Revelation 7:9)

“Just a little while longer, and the wicked will be no more; You will look at where they were, And they will not be there. But the meek will possess the earth, And they will find exquisite delight in the abundance of peace.” (Psalm 37:10,11)

[Source Material: Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY]

Read the Bible Online

What Does the Bible Really Teach?

Why Study the Bible? (brief video)

Mark Hunter's answer to What is the point of living if we are going to die and not remember anything?

Mark Hunter's answer to What is the evidence that Babylon destroyed Judah/Jerusalem in 607 BCE?