Dems hate voter suppression but want to deprive entire states of their right to vote via the compact

[Missouri_Mike]

Lol
The old saying, don’t fix it if it ain’t broke…

That is the saying of losers. People that follow that rule never make anything better. We would still be driving Model Ts, they were not broken.

it is the saying for those with no vision and no drive.

The only people bitching about it are democrats. Proportional EC votes would be based on what? You get exactly the number of EC's based on your vote totals? So a state with 3 EC's get's them divided by 51.9% to the winner and the rest to the loser?

It is done by Congressional District with the overall winner getting 2 on top of what districts they won.

A state with only 3 ECs only has one Congressional District, thus the winner of the state gets them all of course.

So have you worked out the math of how that would have effected the 2016 election? How would those numbers have worked?

No, I have not done it for every state. I do not care about a single election.

Why not? Wouldn't the best place to test your theory be the last election?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

That is the saying of losers. People that follow that rule never make anything better. We would still be driving Model Ts, they were not broken.

it is the saying for those with no vision and no drive.

The only people bitching about it are democrats. Proportional EC votes would be based on what? You get exactly the number of EC's based on your vote totals? So a state with 3 EC's get's them divided by 51.9% to the winner and the rest to the loser?

It is done by Congressional District with the overall winner getting 2 on top of what districts they won.

A state with only 3 ECs only has one Congressional District, thus the winner of the state gets them all of course.

So have you worked out the math of how that would have effected the 2016 election? How would those numbers have worked?

No, I have not done it for every state. I do not care about a single election.

Why not? Wouldn't the best place to test your theory be the last election?

It is not about who wins, I didn’t want either Trump or Hillary to win.

It is about giving more people a reason to get out and vote

 

[BrokeLoser]

What the compact would achieve is to give the winner of the popular vote more electoral votes than he or she would ordinarily have achieved.

With a much larger electoral vote, the winner could then claim he or she had a "mandate".

The compact would allow the Mexicrat Party to finally utilize all their anchor baby recruits. They’ve been planning this shit for decades.
“BUT, BUT, BUT...RUSSIA!”

 

[Harpy Eagle]

That is the saying of losers. People that follow that rule never make anything better. We would still be driving Model Ts, they were not broken.

it is the saying for those with no vision and no drive.

The only people bitching about it are democrats. Proportional EC votes would be based on what? You get exactly the number of EC's based on your vote totals? So a state with 3 EC's get's them divided by 51.9% to the winner and the rest to the loser?

It is done by Congressional District with the overall winner getting 2 on top of what districts they won.

A state with only 3 ECs only has one Congressional District, thus the winner of the state gets them all of course.

So have you worked out the math of how that would have effected the 2016 election? How would those numbers have worked?

No, I have not done it for every state. I do not care about a single election.

Why not? Wouldn't the best place to test your theory be the last election?

So, you got me thinking about it and I went to 270towin and they have a map where you can do alternate ways of voting. one of them is my plan.

Trump got 16 less EC votes but still won handily.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The only people bitching about it are democrats. Proportional EC votes would be based on what? You get exactly the number of EC's based on your vote totals? So a state with 3 EC's get's them divided by 51.9% to the winner and the rest to the loser?

It is done by Congressional District with the overall winner getting 2 on top of what districts they won.

A state with only 3 ECs only has one Congressional District, thus the winner of the state gets them all of course.

So have you worked out the math of how that would have effected the 2016 election? How would those numbers have worked?

No, I have not done it for every state. I do not care about a single election.

Why not? Wouldn't the best place to test your theory be the last election?

So, you got me thinking about it and I went to 270towin and they have a map where you can do alternate ways of voting. one of them is my plan.

Trump got 16 less EC votes but still won handily.

So then what would be the point of going through a Constitutional amendment to change it?

 

[ThisIsMe]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Sure it did. Each state holds a popular vote, the one who wins gets to have their electors cast votes, but each person had a voice in the matter, even if their side loses.

Under this compact, they are saying they dont care about the voice of the citizens. If one side actually wins, their voice is negated.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Fact: there are rural Americans in every state. Do rural CA or NY voters now have a meaningful voice? Getting rid of the winner take all EC would give them one.

That why this is supposed to be an republic, Founding fathers were genius.

They knew without the electoral college urban America would just roll over rural America.
Like I said the numbers are not there… Not even close

Instead of rural America having an outsized voice and overruling millions of voters from other regions?

Lol
A popularity contest makes no sense when it comes to important policy

Sure it does. "Govt of the people, by the people, for the people."

Which people? The ones not in your state?

We're talking about a national election. No?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It is done by Congressional District with the overall winner getting 2 on top of what districts they won.

A state with only 3 ECs only has one Congressional District, thus the winner of the state gets them all of course.

So have you worked out the math of how that would have effected the 2016 election? How would those numbers have worked?

No, I have not done it for every state. I do not care about a single election.

Why not? Wouldn't the best place to test your theory be the last election?

So, you got me thinking about it and I went to 270towin and they have a map where you can do alternate ways of voting. one of them is my plan.

Trump got 16 less EC votes but still won handily.

So then what would be the point of going through a Constitutional amendment to change it?

Well, first off there is no need for a Constitutional amendment to change it. Two states already do it this way. The Winner Take All concept is not in the Constitution.

And as I said, it is not about one single election, try and see the bigger picture. Again, right now in 2/3 of our states people go off to vote knowing that the state will go to a certain candidate and if they do not vote for that one they are wasting their vote. This discourages people from voting, but if ever vote actually counted and could make a difference then more people would come out and vote. I think that is a good thing.

 

[alang1216]

Lol
Na, not really
Rural America would lose every single presidential election... because the numbers just are not there. Fact

Fact: there are rural Americans in every state. Do rural CA or NY voters now have a meaningful voice? Getting rid of the winner take all EC would give them one.

That why this is supposed to be an republic, Founding fathers were genius.

They knew without the electoral college urban America would just roll over rural America.
Like I said the numbers are not there… Not even close

Looks like you're way off base.
The US population is currently 80% urban. In 1800 it was about 5% urban. Seems to me the system has not kept up with the changes in the US. I'd prefer to see evolution and not revolution.

Quote by Confucius:

“The green reed which bends in the wind is stronger than the mighty oak which breaks in a storm.”​

 

[rightwinger]

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

Nope. That would make us a democracy and not a republic.

Disastrous.

Mob rule.

No thanks.

We would still be a Republic with the Senate and House decided by the state

Only the President would be elected by popular nationwide vote

The Senate is elected by popular vote. It didn't used to be.

We were less of a Republic after the 17th amendment. And now you want to make it even worse.

It is not all about the states

The President is supposed to represent the people of the whole country, not just those states that voted for him

Every vote should count the same....it doesn’t in an EV

 

[rightwinger]

Actually

Everyone’s vote would count as ONE vote for the candidate. Regardless of which state you live in

Nope. That would make us a democracy and not a republic.

Disastrous.

Mob rule.

No thanks.

We would still be a Republic with the Senate and House decided by the state

Only the President would be elected by popular nationwide vote

Lol
With a pure popular vote rural America would zero say in presidential elections... fact

Rural America will have less and less say in any elections as the years pass. That’s because Rural America is disappearing. As areas become more urbanized, voters shift from Republican to Democrat.

I live in a conservative rural area. Very white. Many people share the same attitudes towards the poor and urban that we see on this board. That’s because in rural areas poor people are lazy bums who milk the system. The crew that hangs around the town square all day are welfare mooches and drug addicts.

In the city, people are poor because the cost of living is high and wages are low. It’s poverty born of a system that continues to force taxpayers to subsidize corporate wages to keep prices low and shareholder profits high.

Today, rural clout is far in excess of their population.

They would lose some of that clout in voting for President but would maintain excessive clout in the House and Senate

Why do the 600,000 people in Wyoming get TWO Senators? That is more legislative power than the 40 million in California get

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Bro.



C'mon dude. Just say it.

"I want democrats to always win the white house without regard to the system our founders put in place."

It's okay. We already know. You can go ahead and say it.



.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Did you make Mexico that big on purpose?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Bro.



C'mon dude. Just say it.

"I want democrats to always win the white house without regard to the system our founders put in place."

It's okay. We already know. You can go ahead and say it.



.

Come on dude, you know better than that. You are normally above such petty attacks.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Bro.



C'mon dude. Just say it.

"I want democrats to always win the white house without regard to the system our founders put in place."

It's okay. We already know. You can go ahead and say it.



.

The founders did not put the winner take all in to place. In this past election my plan would not have changed the outcome of the election but the votes of a lot more people would have counted.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Bro.



C'mon dude. Just say it.

"I want democrats to always win the white house without regard to the system our founders put in place."

It's okay. We already know. You can go ahead and say it.



.

Come on dude, you know better than that. You are normally above such petty attacks.

That's why I was doing the laughy face. I was poking at you.


The point of the electoral college was to prevent big states like Virginia from having way too much power vs. New Hampshire.

Now, it's Idaho having virtually no power as a state, giving The Executive incentives to only protect California and completely shit on Idaho.

You know that's why they set up the EC.

At the same time, I agree with you that states should be allowed to cast their EC votes as they choose. I just seems like those who want this are pushing it to right a wrong, like Hillary getting 3 million more illegal votes in California than Trump.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Bro.



C'mon dude. Just say it.

"I want democrats to always win the white house without regard to the system our founders put in place."

It's okay. We already know. You can go ahead and say it.



.

The founders did not put the winner take all in to place. In this past election my plan would not have changed the outcome of the election but the votes of a lot more people would have counted.

...and is Dan Mullins gonna win the East this year?



.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Bro.



C'mon dude. Just say it.

"I want democrats to always win the white house without regard to the system our founders put in place."

It's okay. We already know. You can go ahead and say it.



.

Come on dude, you know better than that. You are normally above such petty attacks.

That's why I was doing the laughy face. I was poking at you.


The point of the electoral college was to prevent big states like Virginia from having way too much power vs. New Hampshire.

Now, it's Idaho having virtually no power as a state, giving The Executive incentives to only protect California and completely shit on Idaho.

You know that's why they set up the EC.

At the same time, I agree with you that states should be allowed to cast their EC votes as they choose. I just seems like those who want this are pushing it to right a wrong, like Hillary getting 3 million more illegal votes in California than Trump.

.

I am not pushing to end the EC, not to end winner take all. In my opinion Maine does it the right way. More votes actually matter and it gives people an incentive to get out and vote. There is a reason Maine had a voter turnout 13 points above the national average

 

[Harpy Eagle]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Bro.



C'mon dude. Just say it.

"I want democrats to always win the white house without regard to the system our founders put in place."

It's okay. We already know. You can go ahead and say it.



.

The founders did not put the winner take all in to place. In this past election my plan would not have changed the outcome of the election but the votes of a lot more people would have counted.

...and is Dan Mullins gonna win the East this year?



.

We should, it comes down to Franks getting better

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

More bizarro world shit from Democrats.
“Republicans are assholes for suppressing black voters...but we think it’s okay to suppress an entire state”
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact - Wikipedia

It is not suppressing the entire state, some of the state will have voted for the winner of the popular vote.

I would say that our current system of winner take all for EC votes does just as much to suppress votes. Think about it, in your state your vote and that of 4.4 million other people did not count at all towards your states EV votes.

Bro.



C'mon dude. Just say it.

"I want democrats to always win the white house without regard to the system our founders put in place."

It's okay. We already know. You can go ahead and say it.



.

Come on dude, you know better than that. You are normally above such petty attacks.

That's why I was doing the laughy face. I was poking at you.


The point of the electoral college was to prevent big states like Virginia from having way too much power vs. New Hampshire.

Now, it's Idaho having virtually no power as a state, giving The Executive incentives to only protect California and completely shit on Idaho.

You know that's why they set up the EC.

At the same time, I agree with you that states should be allowed to cast their EC votes as they choose. I just seems like those who want this are pushing it to right a wrong, like Hillary getting 3 million more illegal votes in California than Trump.

.

I am not pushing to end the EC, not to end winner take all. In my opinion Maine does it the right way. More votes actually matter and it gives people an incentive to get out and vote. There is a reason Maine had a voter turnout 13 points above the national average

I completely agree. I like plurality. It makes people in solid red/solid blue states more likely to vote because it will mean something.

I wish more states would end the "winner take all" and actually allow each electoral vote to be independent, which is different than the winner-take-all popular vote compact.

In fact, I favor a percentage-representation set up, like they have in other countries.

I know that we will have a civil war before the Duopoly gives up power like that, but one can dream.

.