The electoral college is a disaster for democracy

[Clementine]

Said Donald Trump in 2012.

I betcha he wishes he could take that one back.

Are we playing the game where we bring up what people said in the past? Hillary was against gay marriage, for border control, and she called the inner city thugs super predators. Or are we just going to pick on one person?

 

[Pogo]

Neither party wants it so far. We lost the election in 2000 because of the EC. The Democrats need to push for abolition of the EC. I predict Trump will be a one term president and that in 2020 the presidency, the House and the Congress will go to the Democrats, and then we can get rid of the EC, as we should have done 40 or more years ago.

It would require a constitutional amendment.

It would recieve popular support, but with Republicans being strategically advantaged by it, they would oppose it. If the amendment process got underway, they would just make a state rights argument.

There isn't any possible "states' rights" argument.

What it means in effect is that anybody who lives in a state that isn't close is disenfranchised. If you live in California your votes are going to the Democrat; if you live in Texas they're going to the Republican. That's true whether you vote with the state, vote against the state, or stay home and don't vote at all. They all have the same effect; your individual vote means absolutely NOTHING.

And that discourages voting, because what's the point. And that's bad for democracy.

Simple as that.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Said Donald Trump in 2012.

I betcha he wishes he could take that one back.

Are we playing the game where we bring up what people said in the past? Hillary was against gay marriage, for border control, and she called the inner city thugs super predators. Or are we just going to pick on one person?

The far right and Trump sheeple do it all the time.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Neither party wants it so far. We lost the election in 2000 because of the EC. The Democrats need to push for abolition of the EC. I predict Trump will be a one term president and that in 2020 the presidency, the House and the Congress will go to the Democrats, and then we can get rid of the EC, as we should have done 40 or more years ago.

It would require a constitutional amendment.

It would recieve popular support, but with Republicans being strategically advantaged by it, they would oppose it. If the amendment process got underway, they would just make a state rights argument.

There isn't any possible "states' rights" argument.

What it means in effect is that anybody who lives in a state that isn't close is disenfranchised. If you live in California your votes are going to the Democrat; if you live in Texas they're going to the Republican. That's true whether you vote with the state, vote against the state, or stay home and don't vote at all. They all have the same effect; your individual vote means absolutely NOTHING.

And that discourages voting, because what's the point. And that's bad for democracy.

Simple as that.

We are a republic not a democracy.

 

[Pogo]

Neither party wants it so far. We lost the election in 2000 because of the EC. The Democrats need to push for abolition of the EC. I predict Trump will be a one term president and that in 2020 the presidency, the House and the Congress will go to the Democrats, and then we can get rid of the EC, as we should have done 40 or more years ago.

It would require a constitutional amendment.

It would recieve popular support, but with Republicans being strategically advantaged by it, they would oppose it. If the amendment process got underway, they would just make a state rights argument.

There isn't any possible "states' rights" argument.

What it means in effect is that anybody who lives in a state that isn't close is disenfranchised. If you live in California your votes are going to the Democrat; if you live in Texas they're going to the Republican. That's true whether you vote with the state, vote against the state, or stay home and don't vote at all. They all have the same effect; your individual vote means absolutely NOTHING.

And that discourages voting, because what's the point. And that's bad for democracy.

Simple as that.

We are a republic not a democracy.

I speak of the practice of democracy, not the structure of the nation.

Moreover the EC, antique that it is, dates from, and was designed to accomodate, a time when there was no 'popular vote'. So the evolution of that process has made it long since obsolete.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Neither party wants it so far. We lost the election in 2000 because of the EC. The Democrats need to push for abolition of the EC. I predict Trump will be a one term president and that in 2020 the presidency, the House and the Congress will go to the Democrats, and then we can get rid of the EC, as we should have done 40 or more years ago.

It would require a constitutional amendment.

It would recieve popular support, but with Republicans being strategically advantaged by it, they would oppose it. If the amendment process got underway, they would just make a state rights argument.

There isn't any possible "states' rights" argument.

What it means in effect is that anybody who lives in a state that isn't close is disenfranchised. If you live in California your votes are going to the Democrat; if you live in Texas they're going to the Republican. That's true whether you vote with the state, vote against the state, or stay home and don't vote at all. They all have the same effect; your individual vote means absolutely NOTHING.

And that discourages voting, because what's the point. And that's bad for democracy.

Simple as that.

We are a republic not a democracy.

I speak of the practice of democracy, not the structure of the nation.

The structure controls the practice.

 

[xyz]

I have said the President should be elected by the people even before Trump was elected.

The Electoral College is an 18-th century experiment, and the United States were a very progressive state for that period in some areas, but are not today. The Constitution needs to be amended.

 

[Pogo]

Neither party wants it so far. We lost the election in 2000 because of the EC. The Democrats need to push for abolition of the EC. I predict Trump will be a one term president and that in 2020 the presidency, the House and the Congress will go to the Democrats, and then we can get rid of the EC, as we should have done 40 or more years ago.

It would require a constitutional amendment.

It would recieve popular support, but with Republicans being strategically advantaged by it, they would oppose it. If the amendment process got underway, they would just make a state rights argument.

There isn't any possible "states' rights" argument.

What it means in effect is that anybody who lives in a state that isn't close is disenfranchised. If you live in California your votes are going to the Democrat; if you live in Texas they're going to the Republican. That's true whether you vote with the state, vote against the state, or stay home and don't vote at all. They all have the same effect; your individual vote means absolutely NOTHING.

And that discourages voting, because what's the point. And that's bad for democracy.

Simple as that.

We are a republic not a democracy.

I speak of the practice of democracy, not the structure of the nation.

The structure controls the practice.

Yes it does. And as such it's antidemocratic.

 

[S.J.]

If we didn't have the EC, Trump would have simply used a different strategy and would still have won. Get over it, libs, Hillary lost. Deal with it.

 

[Pogo]

If we didn't have the EC, Trump would have simply used a different strategy and would still have won. Get over it, libs, Hillary lost. Deal with it.

This has nothing to do with this week's election -- as post 27 noted, a lot of us have been saying the EC needs to go for years.

Although it does have to do with Rump. You see Skippy .... that's what he tweeted four years ago on a different election night. And guess what --- he was right.

Are you calling His Rumpitude WRONG? There are penalties coming for that yanno. Starting with waterboarding just for fun.

 

[S.J.]

If we didn't have the EC, Trump would have simply used a different strategy and would still have won. Get over it, libs, Hillary lost. Deal with it.

This has nothing to do with this week's election -- as post 27 noted, a lot of us have been saying the EC needs to go for years.

Although it does have to do with Rump. You see Skippy .... that's what he tweeted four years ago on a different election night. And guess what --- he was right.

Are you calling His Rumpitude WRONG? There are penalties coming for that yanno. Starting with waterboarding just for fun.

Go back and read my post again, only slower so you don't miss anything, loser.

 

[tyroneweaver]

We are a constitutional republic that elects representatives. An extent of that republicanism is that our EC elects the presidents. An amendment would have to change the process, and neither party wants such, despite what certain members of those parties may say.

Neither party wants it so far. We lost the election in 2000 because of the EC. The Democrats need to push for abolition of the EC. I predict Trump will be a one term president and that in 2020 the presidency, the House and the Congress will go to the Democrats, and then we can get rid of the EC, as we should have done 40 or more years ago.

So you want Southern Cal, Chicago and New York controlling what's good for the rest of us?

 

[bripat9643]

Neither party wants it so far. We lost the election in 2000 because of the EC. The Democrats need to push for abolition of the EC. I predict Trump will be a one term president and that in 2020 the presidency, the House and the Congress will go to the Democrats, and then we can get rid of the EC, as we should have done 40 or more years ago.

It would require a constitutional amendment.

It would recieve popular support, but with Republicans being strategically advantaged by it, they would oppose it. If the amendment process got underway, they would just make a state rights argument.

You think it would be popular in Kansas? Really?

 

[Esmeralda]

If we didn't have the EC, Trump would have simply used a different strategy and would still have won. Get over it, libs, Hillary lost. Deal with it.

This has nothing to do with this week's election -- as post 27 noted, a lot of us have been saying the EC needs to go for years.

Although it does have to do with Rump. You see Skippy .... that's what he tweeted four years ago on a different election night. And guess what --- he was right.

Are you calling His Rumpitude WRONG? There are penalties coming for that yanno. Starting with waterboarding just for fun.

Take this for example:

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

- H. L. Mencken -

We don't have a democracy because our president is not elected by the majority.

I've been saying it since high school when I first understood how it worked. It is a ridiculous system for a modern democracy.

 

[Esmeralda]

You won't get 38 States to ratify that one.

Small states and battleground states would be willfully giving up their power in elections.

But the individual would be gaining his/her power, and that is more important!!

 

[Esmeralda]

Said Donald Trump in 2012.

I betcha he wishes he could take that one back.

Im happy Trump won, but i agree with what he said. We need to get rid of that system and go with a system that requires photo IDs and then log every one of them in a computer database so no one can cheat. Trump would have beaten Hillary much worse if illegals werent able to vote.

What an idiot. Illegals did not vote. You stupid people who have no critical thinking skills believe everything you are told by the RW pundits. What a fool. Get a brain,.

 

[Esmeralda]

View attachment 97773

Yeah because mob rule works so well... Like it did recently in Portland, Oakland, Baltimore, Ferguson, Dallas, Baton Rouge, and the list goes on...

*****SMILE*****

Again, such stupidity. No wonder you voted for a stupid man to be president. Protesting is not mob rule. What an idiot.

 

[Esmeralda]

Said Donald Trump in 2012.

I betcha he wishes he could take that one back.

Trump would have won without that, if that's why you are now making the argument.

You see, the rules affect how the game is played.

It isn't a game.

 

[Esmeralda]

SUDDENLY 'The electoral college is a disaster for democracy' because Hillary won the Popular but not electoral...

And you would be saying the same if the situation were reversed. Don't be a hypocrite. And it isn't a sudden belief for me. I have believed this for 40 years.

 

[Esmeralda]

We are a constitutional republic that elects representatives. An extent of that republicanism is that our EC elects the presidents. An amendment would have to change the process, and neither party wants such, despite what certain members of those parties may say.

Neither party wants it so far. We lost the election in 2000 because of the EC. The Democrats need to push for abolition of the EC. I predict Trump will be a one term president and that in 2020 the presidency, the House and the Congress will go to the Democrats, and then we can get rid of the EC, as we should have done 40 or more years ago.

But, of course, if Trump had won the popular vote, and lost the EC vote, then all would have been fine as wine - right?

I have believed and stated so on countless occasions that I think the EC should be abolished. It is not something new with me.