Elizabeth Warren: 'End Electoral College'

[Pogo]

Once AGAIN you're ass-uming the remedy is a Constitutional Amendment to abolish the EC.

I don''t understand why yo don't understand that until the EC is replaced by amendment, it remains in place.

Just answered that. Read up ↑

No. You didn't. You prattled on about something unrelated.
To "end" the EC, there must be an amendment.

Only if you're taking the complaint literally. It's not necessary to "abolish" something altogether in order to correct a major flaw of it. It's not a perfect solution but it goes a long way while preserving the original motif.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Once AGAIN you're ass-uming the remedy is a Constitutional Amendment to abolish the EC.

I don''t understand why yo don't understand that until the EC is replaced by amendment, it remains in place.

Just answered that. Read up ↑

No. You didn't. You prattled on about something unrelated.
To "end" the EC, there must be an amendment.

Only if you're taking the complaint literally. It's not necessary to "abolish" something altogether in order to correct a major flaw of it. It's not a perfect solution but it goes a long way while preserving the original motif.

It's not necessary to "abolish" something altogether in order to correct a major flaw of it.

Ending Hillary's political career is a feature, not a flaw.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

But that's not what this is about. This is about changing the rules until Democrats can win every election.

Here is a history of changes Democrats have suggested or had done in the past years.

* Get rid of punchcard ballots and go to electronic voting.
* Get rid of Diebold machines and replace them with another brand.
* Votes counted in exit polls (after John Kerry's loss) should be the decider of President.
* Illegals be allowed to vote.
* Prisoners be allowed to vote.
* Ex cons be allowed to vote.
* Children be allowed to vote.
* People with no identification be allowed to vote.

Do you see a pattern here? If you're honest with yourself, every suggestion was to try and favor the Democrat candidate.

Yeah I see a pattern. I take it this is your entry for the "Can You Top This" list of fabrications.

And not a bad piece of work in that vein if I may say. Keep it going though. The key to good comedy is to stretch it beyond the absurd, and then keep on going.

Nothing is fabricated. Democrats at one time or another proposed those things. As for the change over of voting machines, that was all by the Democrats and their constant whining about losing elections.

Oh I know about Diebold and Wally the CEO pledging to do whatever needed to be done to ensure Bush got elected. That's a no-brainer although nobody needs to be a "Democrat" to get that. Not even Wally.

What I don't know about is anyone anywhere ever advocating children, illegals, exit polls or electronic voting. If you could, you know, go ahead and try to link any of that, that'd be great.

You must not watch the news that much.

You must not read your posts that much. You said "children".
You also said "electronic voting", "illegals" and "exit polls".

You don't even get the children thing yet alone anything else. Yes, you are a child in this country until the age of 18. When you are 18, you are an adult in this country. Therefore anybody suggesting that kids 16 year olds should vote is saying they want children to vote.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Once AGAIN you're ass-uming the remedy is a Constitutional Amendment to abolish the EC.

I don''t understand why yo don't understand that until the EC is replaced by amendment, it remains in place.

Just answered that. Read up ↑

No. You didn't. You prattled on about something unrelated.
To "end" the EC, there must be an amendment.

Only if you're taking the complaint literally.

What evidence do you have that Warren did not mean it, literally?

"We can make that happen by replacing the Electoral College with a national popular vote. Add your name if you agree that everyone’s vote should have equal weight," she added before linking to the petition.

Warren, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, said during a CNN town hall in Mississippi that her view "is that every vote matters."

"And the way we can make that happen is that we can have national voting and that means get rid of the Electoral College," she added.

Thus: Amendment.
Which will never come to pass.

 

[Pogo]

Interesting.
Why don't states like CA and IL and NY award the electors by proportion of the popular vote in the state?

That's where it gets interesting. They all cave in to WTA out of ..... wait for it..... "mob mentality". Which is ironic given the EC-clingers want to engage this Doublethinkian phrase "mob rule" yet where it actually applies is to their own status quo.

What you REALLY mean to say is the Democrats know they have to the full EV form each of those states to win, and therefore are more than happy to disenfranchise Republicans with WTA.

No, I mentioned nothing about political party interests. I mentioned voter interests. Know the difference.

Do the republican voters in CA IL and NY not have an interest in their franchise?

Once AGAIN you're hanging up for some unknown reason on "political parties".

If EC votes were allocated proportionally TWO things would happen, One, all those millions of Rump votes in California and New York would actually have counted for something, and Two, and this is probably far more impactful, millions MORE in those states, on both sides, would bother to show up on election day since their vote would now suddently start counting for something. Which means in effect the end result would be unpredictable. A crapshoot.

As it stands now no New Yorker and no Californian (and no resident of fill-in-name-of-"red"-or-"blue" state here) has any reason to show up on election day at all. Their state's ENTIRE vote is predetermined, with or without their participation. They can go vote with the state, vote against the state, vote third party or stay home and bake cookies, ALL FOUR of which produce exactly the same result with the exception that in the fourth case you at least get some cookies.


And no, they're not "Democratic" or "Republican" cookies, so lose the Dichotomy-think. In fact losing the Duopoly is a major side benefit. No longer would it be necessary in a close-race state to hold one's nose and vote for the lesser of two evils; a third party would actually have a chance to upset the Duopoly.

Oh noes, we can't have THAT.

---- which, in turn, also means the Demoplican and Republicrat Parties could not be so complacent as to hand us a choice between a turd and a turd, and they'd actually have to take a side and put some work into it.

Why don't the Democrats in those states want Republican votes to count?

Actually the National Popular Vote Compact is already law in both those states, so your premise is inoperative.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If EC votes were allocated proportionally TWO things would happen, One, all those millions of Rump votes in California and New York would actually have counted for something, and Two, and this is probably far more impactful, millions MORE in those states, on both sides, would bother to show up on election day since their vote would now suddently start counting for something. Which means in effect the end result would be unpredictable. A crapshoot.

Uh-huh. And why is it again CA NY and IL do not allow this?

 

[Pogo]

What evidence do you have that Warren did not mean it, literally?

I am not concerned with, nor have I been discussing, "what Warren meant". That's irrelevant. Rather, I'm laying out the flaws in the system as practiced, and in the above case examining how one remedy would work. Whether that's Warren's remedy or not, I really don't care. This is the same examination of the EC I've been doing for decades.

 

[Pogo]

Yeah I see a pattern. I take it this is your entry for the "Can You Top This" list of fabrications.

And not a bad piece of work in that vein if I may say. Keep it going though. The key to good comedy is to stretch it beyond the absurd, and then keep on going.

Nothing is fabricated. Democrats at one time or another proposed those things. As for the change over of voting machines, that was all by the Democrats and their constant whining about losing elections.

Oh I know about Diebold and Wally the CEO pledging to do whatever needed to be done to ensure Bush got elected. That's a no-brainer although nobody needs to be a "Democrat" to get that. Not even Wally.

What I don't know about is anyone anywhere ever advocating children, illegals, exit polls or electronic voting. If you could, you know, go ahead and try to link any of that, that'd be great.

You must not watch the news that much.

You must not read your posts that much. You said "children".
You also said "electronic voting", "illegals" and "exit polls".

You don't even get the children thing yet alone anything else. Yes, you are a child in this country until the age of 18. When you are 18, you are an adult in this country. Therefore anybody suggesting that kids 16 year olds should vote is saying they want children to vote.

Oh that's only half of it. I deliberately left the other half unsaid. But you said it, namely that "Democrats" advocate your laundry list, and then you cited "Nancy Pelosi". Nancy Pelosi is a singular, not a collective.

And back to the first thing, you didn't back up your ipse dixit declaration of what defines "children".

 

[M14 Shooter]

What evidence do you have that Warren did not mean it, literally?

I am not concerned with, nor have I been discussing, "what Warren meant". That's irrelevant.

Ah. You're not discussing the topic.
Tsk.

 

[Pogo]

Once AGAIN you're ass-uming the remedy is a Constitutional Amendment to abolish the EC.

I don''t understand why yo don't understand that until the EC is replaced by amendment, it remains in place.

Just answered that. Read up ↑

No. You didn't. You prattled on about something unrelated.
To "end" the EC, there must be an amendment.

Only if you're taking the complaint literally. It's not necessary to "abolish" something altogether in order to correct a major flaw of it. It's not a perfect solution but it goes a long way while preserving the original motif.

It's not necessary to "abolish" something altogether in order to correct a major flaw of it.

Ending Hillary's political career is a feature, not a flaw.

Thank you for the periodic reminder of why you're on Ignore. Inability to address the topic.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I don''t understand why yo don't understand that until the EC is replaced by amendment, it remains in place.

Just answered that. Read up ↑

No. You didn't. You prattled on about something unrelated.
To "end" the EC, there must be an amendment.

Only if you're taking the complaint literally. It's not necessary to "abolish" something altogether in order to correct a major flaw of it. It's not a perfect solution but it goes a long way while preserving the original motif.

It's not necessary to "abolish" something altogether in order to correct a major flaw of it.

Ending Hillary's political career is a feature, not a flaw.

Thank you for the periodic reminder of why you're on Ignore. Inability to address the topic.

You're not discussing the topic.

 

[Ame®icano]

Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Monday that she fully supports abolishing the Electoral College and moving toward a national vote, the first time the 2020 presidential candidate has publicly taken the stance.

“My view is that every vote matters,” the Massachusetts Democrat said to roaring applause at her CNN presidential town hall at Jackson State University in Mississippi. “And the way we can make that happen is that we can have national voting, and that means get rid of the Electoral College.”

More: Elizabeth Warren Calls For Getting Rid Of The Electoral College

Amen! I couldn't agree more! Elections should be about people - not acreage! BTW, the rest of the link is worth reading.

Leftist only seek to change the rules when they can't win with playing by the rules.

This is actually good sign that points they don't believe they can win with electoral college.

 

[Pogo]

Just answered that. Read up ↑

No. You didn't. You prattled on about something unrelated.
To "end" the EC, there must be an amendment.

Only if you're taking the complaint literally. It's not necessary to "abolish" something altogether in order to correct a major flaw of it. It's not a perfect solution but it goes a long way while preserving the original motif.

It's not necessary to "abolish" something altogether in order to correct a major flaw of it.

Ending Hillary's political career is a feature, not a flaw.

Thank you for the periodic reminder of why you're on Ignore. Inability to address the topic.

You're not discussing the topic.

Go read his post. It was some drivel about a "Hillary".

Please to show the class where there's any "Hillary" in this issue.







Exactly. That's why he's on Ignore.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Leftist only seek to change the rules when they can't win with playing by the rules.
This is actually good sign that points they don't believe they can win with electoral college.

Until the Democrats are willing to allocate the electors in the states of CA IL and NY by proportion to the votes in each, any argument they have here falls into the "we just want to to win!" file.

 

[Ame®icano]

I agree. I always thought america was a democracy...but when Bush Jr got elected we the citizens of the world were shocked. And that's when we found about the electoral college. It really gives the power to the crazy minority and that's why we have trump and his crazies....the US should join the democratic countries and abolish the EC.

You always thought... and you thought wrong. America is not a democracy.

On the contrary, we should expand electoral college to the state elections.

 

[Pogo]

If EC votes were allocated proportionally TWO things would happen, One, all those millions of Rump votes in California and New York would actually have counted for something, and Two, and this is probably far more impactful, millions MORE in those states, on both sides, would bother to show up on election day since their vote would now suddently start counting for something. Which means in effect the end result would be unpredictable. A crapshoot.

Uh-huh. And why is it again CA NY and IL do not allow this?

Already answered back in 892. What, are you gonna play whack-a-mole now re-asking the same questions over and over à la Pee Wee Herman?

 

[Ame®icano]

Yes let's have Mexifornia elect Democratic Presidents for the next 50 years. That is the Liberal wet dream of abolishing the E.C.

Why are you against the rule of the majority ?
We used that method in the Senate, Congress supreme court the X factor you name it.
And btw California is the biggest economy and best state of the union, Alabama, Mississippi, north Dakota, etc....are is less states.

If we had democracy and majority (mob) rule, than why do we need Congress and Senate?

 

[Pogo]

Leftist [sic] only seek to change the rules when they can't win with playing by the rules.
This is actually good sign that points they don't believe they can win with electoral college.

Until the Democrats are willing to allocate the electors in the states of CA IL and NY by proportion to the votes in each, any argument they have here falls into the "we just want to to win!" file.

Once AGAIN ---- "Democrats" don't decide how electors are chosen. Nor do "Republicans". STATE LEGISLATURES decide that. That's right there in the Constitution.

You seem to have some kind of mental block. Why are you incessantly trying to morph this into a political party thing?

 

[Oldstyle]

I agree. I always thought america was a democracy...but when Bush Jr got elected we the citizens of the world were shocked. And that's when we found about the electoral college. It really gives the power to the crazy minority and that's why we have trump and his crazies....the US should join the democratic countries and abolish the EC.

Interesting concept...you want the US...with one of the longest standing democracies in world history to change the system that's given us that stability to mirror the rest of the world that sees coups and civil unrest as a matter of course? I'm guessing you don't have the faintest idea WHY the Electoral College was instituted in the first place...do you, Issa?

 

[Pogo]

Yes let's have Mexifornia elect Democratic Presidents for the next 50 years. That is the Liberal wet dream of abolishing the E.C.

Why are you against the rule of the majority ?
We used that method in the Senate, Congress supreme court the X factor you name it.
And btw California is the biggest economy and best state of the union, Alabama, Mississippi, north Dakota, etc....are is less states.

If we had democracy and majority (mob) rule, than why do we need Congress and Senate?

Obviously your premise then is flawed.

And here it is right here:

ma·jor·i·ty
/məˈjôrədē,məˈjärədē/
noun

1. 1.
   the greater number.
   "in the majority of cases all will go smoothly"
   synonyms: larger part/number, greater part/number, major part, best/better part, main part, most, more than half; More

mob
/mäb/
noun

1. 1.
   a large crowd of people, especially one that is disorderly and intent on causing trouble or violence.
   "a mob of protesters"
   synonyms: crowd, horde, multitude, rabble, mass, body, throng

Thus your adjective is just dishonest.

Is your state governor elected by "mob rule"? Why doesn't your state have a state "electoral college" sending in electors from each county?

Same thing.