When results do not favour the Republicans

[Tommy Tainant]

I see that as a different issue.The electoral college is surely worth discussing ?

whining is whining. saying one topic means more to you than another isn't being very objective overall.

again - human nature, not left or right.

Well the electoral college delivered a President that only a minority voted for. Questioniing that is not "whining".

it is when that's how we've done it for 250+ years and they ONLY question it when they lose or it doesn't work in their favor.

same damn thing.

and questioning why 1 county in florida can NEVER get voting done properly is valid then too, by your standards.

But they arent questioning incompetence or the process. They are accusing dark deeds - sans proof.

sounds like a russia-chase to me.

Maybe they need a Russia style enquiry to get to the bottom of it Everybdy would benefit.

 

[Care4all]

Is there always this chorus of whining ?

This board is sinking under the weight of bogus fake news articles relating only to elections where the Republican has lost.

"BREAKING - man says that Dem owned warehouse run by Hillary has thousands of counterfeit ballot papers printed by gay illegal pro abortion migrants paid by Soros". Infowars

Or is this just a symptom of the age of Trump ?

I havent seen any evidence of any of it and I cant help but feel that it undermines the Nation and they would be better off by putting a sock in it and showing a bit of class.

so when the results don't favor the democrats, they don't do thinks like suddenly hate the EC and demand recounts (gore) and so forth?

human nature people keep trying to delegate to the OTHER side far too often.

I see that as a different issue.The electoral college is surely worth discussing ?

whining is whining. saying one topic means more to you than another isn't being very objective overall.

again - human nature, not left or right.

Well the electoral college delivered a President that only a minority voted for. Questioniing that is not "whining".

it is when that's how we've done it for 250+ years and they ONLY question it when they lose or it doesn't work in their favor.

same damn thing.

and questioning why 1 county in florida can NEVER get voting done properly is valid then too, by your standards.

Democratic elected Presidents, in all of our History, have never lost the popular vote, and won only the Electoral College.... they have ALWAYS won both. So no, they have never had to bitch about the process when it comes to themselves, because they win both popular and electoral college, with their Presidents.

Something is wrong with the system, when in just the past 18 years, the 2 Republican Presidents have been elected without the popular vote..... And they have turned out to be the most contentious presidents and have caused great division in our Nation.

We as a Nation are much better off when the President who won, is also chosen by the citizens... we tend to give those presidents an easier job at serving us.... well, because we chose them along with the electoral college.

In the 200 years before Bush2 and Trump, only 1 or 2 other presidents won with just the electoral college, and now, the past 2 out of 3 Presidents were solely picked, by the electoral college....

Something is wrong with what States have done with their electoral college votes... they are giving the winner of the State, ALL of them, instead of proportionately dividing their electors, by who won the vote in their State.
My state of Maine does it that way....

WINNER TAKES ALL electors is a very poor representation of a Democratic Republic imo. And James Madison, who created the elector process with Adams, agrees with me.


(this is not the thread for this topic, but Tommy is right....that we need to have a good debate on it)

 

[iceberg]

so when the results don't favor the democrats, they don't do thinks like suddenly hate the EC and demand recounts (gore) and so forth?

human nature people keep trying to delegate to the OTHER side far too often.

I see that as a different issue.The electoral college is surely worth discussing ?

whining is whining. saying one topic means more to you than another isn't being very objective overall.

again - human nature, not left or right.

Well the electoral college delivered a President that only a minority voted for. Questioniing that is not "whining".

it is when that's how we've done it for 250+ years and they ONLY question it when they lose or it doesn't work in their favor.

same damn thing.

and questioning why 1 county in florida can NEVER get voting done properly is valid then too, by your standards.

Democratic elected Presidents, in all of our History, have never lost the popular vote, and won only the Electoral College.... they have ALWAYS won both. So no, they have never had to bitch about the process when it comes to themselves, because they win both popular and electoral college, with their Presidents.

Something is wrong with the system, when in just the past 18 years, the 2 Republican Presidents have been elected without the popular vote..... And they have turned out to be the most contentious presidents and have caused great division in our Nation.

We as a Nation are much better off when the President who won, is also chosen by the citizens... we tend to give those presidents an easier job at serving us.... well, because we chose them along with the electoral college.

In the 200 years before Bush2 and Trump, only 1 or 2 other presidents won with just the electoral college, and now, the past 2 out of 3 Presidents were solely picked, by the electoral college....

Something is wrong with what States have done with their electoral college votes... they are giving the winner of the State, ALL of them, instead of proportionately dividing their electors, by who won the vote in their State.
My state of Maine does it that way....

WINNER TAKES ALL electors is a very poor representation of a Democratic Republic imo.


(this is not the thread for this topic, but Tommy is right....that we need to have a good debate on it)

if they won w/o popular vote then i'd say the system is working as designed. this is the baseline for how we are and how we function. getting pissy cause you suddenly feel cheated and so forth is sour grapes to me. we ran under this system we all agree to, live with it and hush. if you *really* want to give it a go then present a bill and go through the process to try and change the amendment.

best of luck.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Is there always this chorus of whining ?

This board is sinking under the weight of bogus fake news articles relating only to elections where the Republican has lost.

"BREAKING - man says that Dem owned warehouse run by Hillary has thousands of counterfeit ballot papers printed by gay illegal pro abortion migrants paid by Soros". Infowars

Or is this just a symptom of the age of Trump ?

I havent seen any evidence of any of it and I cant help but feel that it undermines the Nation and they would be better off by putting a sock in it and showing a bit of class.

Agreed.

Of course, that’s not going to happen.

The myth of voter ‘fraud’ is an article of religious faith among Republicans.

They’re unwilling – and indeed incapable – of accepting the fact that a Republican candidate for office was defeated because a majority of the voters rejected him, and because he’s wrong on the issues.

Instead they contrive and propagate ridiculous, ignorant lies about voter ‘fraud’ or immigrants voting or other such nonsense.

What’s even more idiotic is that Republican think there are those who actually believe their lies.

 

[Care4all]

I see that as a different issue.The electoral college is surely worth discussing ?

whining is whining. saying one topic means more to you than another isn't being very objective overall.

again - human nature, not left or right.

Well the electoral college delivered a President that only a minority voted for. Questioniing that is not "whining".

it is when that's how we've done it for 250+ years and they ONLY question it when they lose or it doesn't work in their favor.

same damn thing.

and questioning why 1 county in florida can NEVER get voting done properly is valid then too, by your standards.

Democratic elected Presidents, in all of our History, have never lost the popular vote, and won only the Electoral College.... they have ALWAYS won both. So no, they have never had to bitch about the process when it comes to themselves, because they win both popular and electoral college, with their Presidents.

Something is wrong with the system, when in just the past 18 years, the 2 Republican Presidents have been elected without the popular vote..... And they have turned out to be the most contentious presidents and have caused great division in our Nation.

We as a Nation are much better off when the President who won, is also chosen by the citizens... we tend to give those presidents an easier job at serving us.... well, because we chose them along with the electoral college.

In the 200 years before Bush2 and Trump, only 1 or 2 other presidents won with just the electoral college, and now, the past 2 out of 3 Presidents were solely picked, by the electoral college....

Something is wrong with what States have done with their electoral college votes... they are giving the winner of the State, ALL of them, instead of proportionately dividing their electors, by who won the vote in their State.
My state of Maine does it that way....

WINNER TAKES ALL electors is a very poor representation of a Democratic Republic imo.


(this is not the thread for this topic, but Tommy is right....that we need to have a good debate on it)

if they won w/o popular vote then i'd say the system is working as designed. this is the baseline for how we are and how we function. getting pissy cause you suddenly feel cheated and so forth is sour grapes to me. we ran under this system we all agree to, live with it and hush. if you *really* want to give it a go then present a bill and go through the process to try and change the amendment.

best of luck.

No, not the way the States are doing it... even James Madison and Adams who created the electoral college, disagree with you.... on how the States have manipulated it and given all electors from their states to the one winner, INSTEAD OF giving the electors, proportionately to the candidates within the State of how many votes they won, and then the 2 extra electors the States are given to represent their 2 Senators, go to the winner of their State.

I have spend untold hours and hours and hours and hours researching this all the way back to the creators of the process.

It's not that you are wrong about the process allowing for a win, by just the electors...

But you are wrong on not understanding the process overall....

States are given 1 elector, for every House of Representative member they are given by population...

AND
The States are ALSO given 2 Electors for their 2 Senators...

THIS is the soul advantage that the small states are given, just like in Congress with the Senate.... each state get 2 senators, and in the Senate, the smaller states have GREATER representation than what their population would call for.... As example, the unpopulated Montana, has the same representation in the Senate, as a populated state like California.

That is the all the founders wanted with the electoral college, which was set up, exactly like both houses of congress....

And it is set up that way still, 1 elector for each congressional district, and 2 electors for their 2 Senators.

What has messed the system up, is the States are not sending to the electoral college, electors that represent how their State citizens voted.... they are taking away the electors that the other candidates earned, and giving them all to the person that won the State..... How Madison had it set up, the States send to the electoral college, electors that proportionately represent how their state citizens voted.... with the exception of the two electors that the States have to represent their Senators.... States gave those 2 Electors, to the winner of their State... this is the advantage for the less populated States, that the founders wanted, to help the smaller states.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

whining is whining. saying one topic means more to you than another isn't being very objective overall.

again - human nature, not left or right.

Well the electoral college delivered a President that only a minority voted for. Questioniing that is not "whining".

it is when that's how we've done it for 250+ years and they ONLY question it when they lose or it doesn't work in their favor.

same damn thing.

and questioning why 1 county in florida can NEVER get voting done properly is valid then too, by your standards.

Democratic elected Presidents, in all of our History, have never lost the popular vote, and won only the Electoral College.... they have ALWAYS won both. So no, they have never had to bitch about the process when it comes to themselves, because they win both popular and electoral college, with their Presidents.

Something is wrong with the system, when in just the past 18 years, the 2 Republican Presidents have been elected without the popular vote..... And they have turned out to be the most contentious presidents and have caused great division in our Nation.

We as a Nation are much better off when the President who won, is also chosen by the citizens... we tend to give those presidents an easier job at serving us.... well, because we chose them along with the electoral college.

In the 200 years before Bush2 and Trump, only 1 or 2 other presidents won with just the electoral college, and now, the past 2 out of 3 Presidents were solely picked, by the electoral college....

Something is wrong with what States have done with their electoral college votes... they are giving the winner of the State, ALL of them, instead of proportionately dividing their electors, by who won the vote in their State.
My state of Maine does it that way....

WINNER TAKES ALL electors is a very poor representation of a Democratic Republic imo.


(this is not the thread for this topic, but Tommy is right....that we need to have a good debate on it)

if they won w/o popular vote then i'd say the system is working as designed. this is the baseline for how we are and how we function. getting pissy cause you suddenly feel cheated and so forth is sour grapes to me. we ran under this system we all agree to, live with it and hush. if you *really* want to give it a go then present a bill and go through the process to try and change the amendment.

best of luck.

No, not the way the States are doing it... even James Madison and Adams who created the electoral college, disagree with you.... on how the States have manipulated it and given all electors from their states to the one winner, INSTEAD OF giving the electors, proportionately to the candidates within the State of how many votes they won, and then the 2 extra electors the States are given to represent their 2 Senators, go to the winner of their State.

I have spend untold hours and hours and hours and hours researching this all the way back to the creators of the process.

It's not that you are wrong about the process allowing for a win, by just the electors...

But you are wrong on not understanding the process overall....

States are given 1 elector, for every House of Representative member they are given by population...

AND
The States are ALSO given 2 Electors for their 2 Senators...

THIS is the soul advantage that the small states are given, just like in Congress with the Senate.... each state get 2 senators, and in the Senate, the smaller states have GREATER representation than what their population would call for.... As example, the unpopulated Montana, has the same representation in the Senate, as a populated state like California.

That is the all the founders wanted with the electoral college, which was set up, exactly like both houses of congress....

And it is set up that way still, 1 elector for each congressional district, and 2 electors for their 2 Senators.

What has messed the system up, is the States are not sending to the electoral college, electors that represent how their State citizens voted.... they are taking away the electors that the other candidates earned, and giving them all to the person that won the State..... How Madison had it set up, the States send to the electoral college, electors that proportionately represent how their state citizens voted.

Do all states work that way ?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Is there always this chorus of whining ?

This board is sinking under the weight of bogus fake news articles relating only to elections where the Republican has lost.

"BREAKING - man says that Dem owned warehouse run by Hillary has thousands of counterfeit ballot papers printed by gay illegal pro abortion migrants paid by Soros". Infowars

Or is this just a symptom of the age of Trump ?

I havent seen any evidence of any of it and I cant help but feel that it undermines the Nation and they would be better off by putting a sock in it and showing a bit of class.

so when the results don't favor the democrats, they don't do thinks like suddenly hate the EC and demand recounts (gore) and so forth?

human nature people keep trying to delegate to the OTHER side far too often.

I see that as a different issue.The electoral college is surely worth discussing ?

whining is whining. saying one topic means more to you than another isn't being very objective overall.

again - human nature, not left or right.

Well the electoral college delivered a President that only a minority voted for. Questioniing that is not "whining".

Correct.

It is ignorance.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

States also appointed their senators.

That was screwed up with the passage of the 17th amendment.

Please spare me Obama's argument on this one. That was when I realized he was not a constitutional scholar after all.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Is there always this chorus of whining ?

This board is sinking under the weight of bogus fake news articles relating only to elections where the Republican has lost.

"BREAKING - man says that Dem owned warehouse run by Hillary has thousands of counterfeit ballot papers printed by gay illegal pro abortion migrants paid by Soros". Infowars

Or is this just a symptom of the age of Trump ?

I havent seen any evidence of any of it and I cant help but feel that it undermines the Nation and they would be better off by putting a sock in it and showing a bit of class.

The real problem is mass mental illness that's become apparent with the age of Trump.

He certainly does bring out the craziness of the left.

 

[Care4all]

Well the electoral college delivered a President that only a minority voted for. Questioniing that is not "whining".

it is when that's how we've done it for 250+ years and they ONLY question it when they lose or it doesn't work in their favor.

same damn thing.

and questioning why 1 county in florida can NEVER get voting done properly is valid then too, by your standards.

Democratic elected Presidents, in all of our History, have never lost the popular vote, and won only the Electoral College.... they have ALWAYS won both. So no, they have never had to bitch about the process when it comes to themselves, because they win both popular and electoral college, with their Presidents.

Something is wrong with the system, when in just the past 18 years, the 2 Republican Presidents have been elected without the popular vote..... And they have turned out to be the most contentious presidents and have caused great division in our Nation.

We as a Nation are much better off when the President who won, is also chosen by the citizens... we tend to give those presidents an easier job at serving us.... well, because we chose them along with the electoral college.

In the 200 years before Bush2 and Trump, only 1 or 2 other presidents won with just the electoral college, and now, the past 2 out of 3 Presidents were solely picked, by the electoral college....

Something is wrong with what States have done with their electoral college votes... they are giving the winner of the State, ALL of them, instead of proportionately dividing their electors, by who won the vote in their State.
My state of Maine does it that way....

WINNER TAKES ALL electors is a very poor representation of a Democratic Republic imo.


(this is not the thread for this topic, but Tommy is right....that we need to have a good debate on it)

if they won w/o popular vote then i'd say the system is working as designed. this is the baseline for how we are and how we function. getting pissy cause you suddenly feel cheated and so forth is sour grapes to me. we ran under this system we all agree to, live with it and hush. if you *really* want to give it a go then present a bill and go through the process to try and change the amendment.

best of luck.

No, not the way the States are doing it... even James Madison and Adams who created the electoral college, disagree with you.... on how the States have manipulated it and given all electors from their states to the one winner, INSTEAD OF giving the electors, proportionately to the candidates within the State of how many votes they won, and then the 2 extra electors the States are given to represent their 2 Senators, go to the winner of their State.

I have spend untold hours and hours and hours and hours researching this all the way back to the creators of the process.

It's not that you are wrong about the process allowing for a win, by just the electors...

But you are wrong on not understanding the process overall....

States are given 1 elector, for every House of Representative member they are given by population...

AND
The States are ALSO given 2 Electors for their 2 Senators...

THIS is the soul advantage that the small states are given, just like in Congress with the Senate.... each state get 2 senators, and in the Senate, the smaller states have GREATER representation than what their population would call for.... As example, the unpopulated Montana, has the same representation in the Senate, as a populated state like California.

That is the all the founders wanted with the electoral college, which was set up, exactly like both houses of congress....

And it is set up that way still, 1 elector for each congressional district, and 2 electors for their 2 Senators.

What has messed the system up, is the States are not sending to the electoral college, electors that represent how their State citizens voted.... they are taking away the electors that the other candidates earned, and giving them all to the person that won the State..... How Madison had it set up, the States send to the electoral college, electors that proportionately represent how their state citizens voted.

Do all states work that way ?

There are 2 States, that kept it the way the founders created it, mine... the State of Maine, and one other State...can't remember who it was....

All the other States, CHANGED IT, to winner of the State takes ALL of the State electors.... instead of giving the electors proportionately by how their citizens voted....

The State legislators did this to cut out the chance, of an Independent Candidate winning.... both Democratic and Republican legislatures did this to squash anyone Independent of the two parties, running for the presidency, never getting a chance to win.

As example, I think it was Ralph Nader, he won 27% or something like that, of the popular vote.... that is huge for an Independent candidate.... BUT guess what?

HE GOT ZERO electoral college votes.... he represented more than a quarter of the Country, but did not get a single electoral college vote, because the States turned them over, to the winner of the State who did not actually win those electors....

Democrats and Republicans in the state government, have wiped out the chance of an Independent ever getting an elector, to protect their own asses and to belittle any independent candidate.... it discourages Independents from seriously running by never having a chance to win any electors or win at all....

 

[iceberg]

whining is whining. saying one topic means more to you than another isn't being very objective overall.

again - human nature, not left or right.

Well the electoral college delivered a President that only a minority voted for. Questioniing that is not "whining".

it is when that's how we've done it for 250+ years and they ONLY question it when they lose or it doesn't work in their favor.

same damn thing.

and questioning why 1 county in florida can NEVER get voting done properly is valid then too, by your standards.

Democratic elected Presidents, in all of our History, have never lost the popular vote, and won only the Electoral College.... they have ALWAYS won both. So no, they have never had to bitch about the process when it comes to themselves, because they win both popular and electoral college, with their Presidents.

Something is wrong with the system, when in just the past 18 years, the 2 Republican Presidents have been elected without the popular vote..... And they have turned out to be the most contentious presidents and have caused great division in our Nation.

We as a Nation are much better off when the President who won, is also chosen by the citizens... we tend to give those presidents an easier job at serving us.... well, because we chose them along with the electoral college.

In the 200 years before Bush2 and Trump, only 1 or 2 other presidents won with just the electoral college, and now, the past 2 out of 3 Presidents were solely picked, by the electoral college....

Something is wrong with what States have done with their electoral college votes... they are giving the winner of the State, ALL of them, instead of proportionately dividing their electors, by who won the vote in their State.
My state of Maine does it that way....

WINNER TAKES ALL electors is a very poor representation of a Democratic Republic imo.


(this is not the thread for this topic, but Tommy is right....that we need to have a good debate on it)

if they won w/o popular vote then i'd say the system is working as designed. this is the baseline for how we are and how we function. getting pissy cause you suddenly feel cheated and so forth is sour grapes to me. we ran under this system we all agree to, live with it and hush. if you *really* want to give it a go then present a bill and go through the process to try and change the amendment.

best of luck.

No, not the way the States are doing it... even James Madison and Adams who created the electoral college, disagree with you.... on how the States have manipulated it and given all electors from their states to the one winner, INSTEAD OF giving the electors, proportionately to the candidates within the State of how many votes they won, and then the 2 extra electors the States are given to represent their 2 Senators, go to the winner of their State.

I have spend untold hours and hours and hours and hours researching this all the way back to the creators of the process.

It's not that you are wrong about the process allowing for a win, by just the electors...

But you are wrong on not understanding the process overall....

States are given 1 elector, for every House of Representative member they are given by population...

AND
The States are ALSO given 2 Electors for their 2 Senators...

THIS is the soul advantage that the small states are given, just like in Congress with the Senate.... each state get 2 senators, and in the Senate, the smaller states have GREATER representation than what their population would call for.... As example, the unpopulated Montana, has the same representation in the Senate, as a populated state like California.

That is the all the founders wanted with the electoral college, which was set up, exactly like both houses of congress....

And it is set up that way still, 1 elector for each congressional district, and 2 electors for their 2 Senators.

What has messed the system up, is the States are not sending to the electoral college, electors that represent how their State citizens voted.... they are taking away the electors that the other candidates earned, and giving them all to the person that won the State..... How Madison had it set up, the States send to the electoral college, electors that proportionately represent how their state citizens voted.... with the exception of the two electors that the States have to represent their Senators.... States gave those 2 Electors, to the winner of their State... this is the advantage for the less populated States, that the founders wanted, to help the smaller states.

so now you speak for madison.

 

[Avatar4321]

Here is all you need to remember about Republicans, or more accurately, the more extreme Trumpist:

When the Republicans win, it is a fair and legitimate election and the people have spoken.

When the Democrats win, it is voter fraud.

When the Republicans are behind and the votes need to be counted, it is democracy in action.

When the Democrats are behind and the votes need to be counted, it is a conspiracy.

You know these simple rules, then you know US electoral politics.

It’s only voter fraud when you get caught committing voter fraud

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Is there always this chorus of whining ?

This board is sinking under the weight of bogus fake news articles relating only to elections where the Republican has lost.

"BREAKING - man says that Dem owned warehouse run by Hillary has thousands of counterfeit ballot papers printed by gay illegal pro abortion migrants paid by Soros". Infowars

Or is this just a symptom of the age of Trump ?

I havent seen any evidence of any of it and I cant help but feel that it undermines the Nation and they would be better off by putting a sock in it and showing a bit of class.