The Electoral College Needs to Go

[JoeB131]

I could get behind ending the EC as we know if accompanied by the following conditions:
Revoke all voting rights from anyone here on a stolen citizenship.

You guys have yet to prove this is happening in any significant numbers.

Set minimum voting age at 25.

That's just plain stupid. It's absolutely insane that we send 18 years old off to war, but we don't give them a say in how the government is run. So if you want to use your logic, then don't let anyone join the military until they are 25. I don't think you will get a lot of takers.

Prohibit anyone from voting who has been taxpayer dependent in the last 36 months leading up to the election.

Again, why? It seems that all your schemes involved "not letting people who disagree with me vote". The vote is one of those things that shouldn't be wealth based.

Require all voters to pass a 50 question test to earn voting rights each election cycle.

They did that in the Old South, they were called "Literacy Tests". It's like you guy don't even come up with original ideas.

Here's a crazy idea. Instead of finding new ways to block poor and minorities from voting, how about actually finding messages that appeal to them.

The aforementioned makes perfect sense for anyone with America’s best interest in mind, for anyone patriotic, decent and sane...the problem is; we all know said conditions would end the Dem Party as they prey on and count on the the illiterate, the politicly ignorant, the desperate, the social issue voter.

Funny, the only illiterate ones I see are the Republican rednecks in the red states, clinging to their guns and bibles dating their cousins.

 

[JoeB131]

So we are basically agreed? You call it 'runoffs' I call it 'ranked-choice'. Same difference?

No, because ranked choosing means secondary votes cast the same night.

I might want to vote for my third party guy in the first round and THEN consider why voting for top two afterwards.

 

[JoeB131]

If New New York and California were rock solid red states instead of blue ones how many liberals would still want to do away with the EC and go to the popular vote?

Actually, for a long time CA was a solid red state. From 1952 to 1988, the Democrats only carried it ONE TIME, in 1964 (when they carried nearly everything because Goldwater was nuts...)

And most of the arguments against the Electoral College were still valid.

The only difference is you didn't have the EC overruling the popular vote being a regular thing. Before 2000, the last time we had that situation was 1888.

 

[LeftofLeft]

This was a pretty good argument up until the partisan jabs at GOP outcomes, the ubiquitous racist card, and the bullshit about “mischief” occurring on the backend. You people just got done yelling and screaming that this was the “fairest” election ever and there were no counts of fraud (mischief). Now, you are “concerned” about fraud because you don’t like the EC???

Naw, dude, I'm concerned about mischief because after the people clearly made their choice known, they shouldn't be subject to judges, electors, legislators or congressmen making mischief of gaming the system.

Yes, when you give White Votes more weight than the votes of people of color, that's racist. Sorry.

Here’s another problem with your argument, GUY. You provided nothing empirically nor from a third party validation perspective to counter battleground states stop counting with Trump in the lead only to have the counting pickup after the Mail-In ballots came in. Boy, do you know enough about probability to appreciate that?

You also failed to back up your bullshit racist card on how Whites are given more weight through the Electoral College.

 

[BrokeLoser]

I could get behind ending the EC as we know if accompanied by the following conditions:
Revoke all voting rights from anyone here on a stolen citizenship.

You guys have yet to prove this is happening in any significant numbers.

Set minimum voting age at 25.

That's just plain stupid. It's absolutely insane that we send 18 years old off to war, but we don't give them a say in how the government is run. So if you want to use your logic, then don't let anyone join the military until they are 25. I don't think you will get a lot of takers.

Prohibit anyone from voting who has been taxpayer dependent in the last 36 months leading up to the election.

Again, why? It seems that all your schemes involved "not letting people who disagree with me vote". The vote is one of those things that shouldn't be wealth based.

Require all voters to pass a 50 question test to earn voting rights each election cycle.

They did that in the Old South, they were called "Literacy Tests". It's like you guy don't even come up with original ideas.

Here's a crazy idea. Instead of finding new ways to block poor and minorities from voting, how about actually finding messages that appeal to them.

The aforementioned makes perfect sense for anyone with America’s best interest in mind, for anyone patriotic, decent and sane...the problem is; we all know said conditions would end the Dem Party as they prey on and count on the the illiterate, the politicly ignorant, the desperate, the social issue voter.

Funny, the only illiterate ones I see are the Republican rednecks in the red states, clinging to their guns and bibles dating their cousins.

"You guys have yet to prove this is happening in any significant numbers."
Anchor babies are voting....it's how the party of filth wins CA, AZ, NV and NM...their citizenship was stolen, We The People gave them no mandate.

"Again, why? It seems that all your schemes involved "not letting people who disagree with me vote". The vote is one of those things that shouldn't be wealth based. "
Nobody taking free shit should be able to vote for more free shit.

"They did that in the Old South, they were called "Literacy Tests". It's like you guy don't even come up with original ideas.
Here's a crazy idea. Instead of finding new ways to block poor and minorities from voting, how about actually finding messages that appeal to them."
That's awfully racist of you...I was referring to white trash and woke white guilt whacks as well.
The only things appealing to dark people and weirdos are free shit and social issues...We're too busy trying to run a nation, we have no time to babysit and coddle.
Why would you want ignorant people to vote? Do you think Bezos wants ignorant people deciding the direction of Amazon?

"Funny, the only illiterate ones I see are the Republican rednecks in the red states, clinging to their guns and bibles dating their cousins."
Incestual relations run rampant among dark folks...aren't dark folks Democrats?
“Race and ethnicity are an important factor in identified sexual abuse. African American children have almost twice the risk of sexual abuse than white children. Children of Hispanic ethnicity have a slightly greater risk than non-Hispanic white children."
https://www.d2l.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/all_statistics_20150619.pdf

This is all common sense shit Joe, you definitely won't be able to understand it.

 

[jknowgood]

The darkies are turning into Republicans, since liberals are turning away from them.

No, actually, they aren't. "Look, look, Trump got 10% of the black vote, maybe!" isn't anything to brag about


Trump's numbers with minorities will end up being worse than Bush's in 2004.

You mean Harris now?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It’s kind of racist. The fact that small homogenous rural states have outsized influence over diverse urban states in this system is a real problem in a country that has historically oppressed minorities. The fact is that it has contributed to the racial divide in this country, where one party has effectively become a white identity party, while the other had tied its fortunes to minority turnout.

The Electoral college prevents some of the cheating such as california or new york manufacturing millions of fake ballots and stealing elections which I suspect is why you want it gone so much.

By "fake ballots", you mean, "Letting the darkies vote."

Yes, when you give White Votes more weight than the votes of people of color, that's racist. Sorry.

 

[JoeB131]

Here’s another problem with your argument, GUY. You provided nothing empirically nor from a third party validation perspective to counter battleground states stop counting with Trump in the lead only to have the counting pickup after the Mail-In ballots came in. Boy, do you know enough about probability to appreciate that?

Actually, it was pretty clear why that happened. Biden encouraged his supporters to vote by mail, Trump told his supporters to vote in person. Those states counted in person votes before mail votes.

This isn't even anything new, because Urban centers take longer to get their vote totals, and urban centers trend Democratic.

Nothing to do with the argument of why using an 18th century system to select presidents is a bad idea.

 

[JoeB131]

It’s kind of racist. The fact that small homogenous rural states have outsized influence over diverse urban states in this system is a real problem in a country that has historically oppressed minorities. The fact is that it has contributed to the racial divide in this country, where one party has effectively become a white identity party, while the other had tied its fortunes to minority turnout.

The Electoral college prevents some of the cheating such as california or new york manufacturing millions of fake ballots and stealing elections which I suspect is why you want it gone so much.

By "fake ballots", you mean, "Letting the darkies vote."

Yes, when you give White Votes more weight than the votes of people of color, that's racist. Sorry.

View attachment 431771

For those playing along at home, Mormon Bob belongs to a cult that didn't allow black people to become members until 1978 and whose religious texts call dark skin a curse from God.

 

[JoeB131]

"You guys have yet to prove this is happening in any significant numbers."
Anchor babies are voting....it's how the party of filth wins CA, AZ, NV and NM...their citizenship was stolen, We The People gave them no mandate.

"Anchor babies" are citizens under the 14th Amendment. They have every right to vote.

"Again, why? It seems that all your schemes involved "not letting people who disagree with me vote". The vote is one of those things that shouldn't be wealth based. "
Nobody taking free shit should be able to vote for more free shit.

Again, you guys should talk to the Middle Class White People getting unemployment, Medicare, Social Security, and Veteran's Benefits.... You guys are all for "Free Shit" when you are the ones getting it.

That's awfully racist of you...I was referring to white trash and woke white guilt whacks as well.
The only things appealing to dark people and weirdos are free shit and social issues...We're too busy trying to run a nation, we have no time to babysit and coddle.
Why would you want ignorant people to vote? Do you think Bezos wants ignorant people deciding the direction of Amazon?

Heh, funny thing. Amazon is very responsive to the opinions of the great unwashed. When George Floyd was martyred, Amazon came out in support of BLM that week. So another failed argument.

You guys got a chance to run the country... we got 320,000 dead, 16 million sick, 65 million jobs lost, 160,000 businesses shuttered. We gave you the keys to the car, and you wrapped it around a tree.

Incestual relations run rampant among dark folks...aren't dark folks Democrats?
“Race and ethnicity are an important factor in identified sexual abuse. African American children have almost twice the risk of sexual abuse than white children. Children of Hispanic ethnicity have a slightly greater risk than non-Hispanic white children."

Wow, you totally changed the subject to something else, didn't you?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

For those playing along at home, Mormon Bob belongs to a cult that didn't allow black people to become members until 1978 and whose religious texts call dark skin a curse from God.

For those paying along, Incel Joe has some sort of weird fetish about Mormonism, which he constantly manifests by posting absurd lies and distortions about it, even where it has no relevance whatsoever to what is otherwise being discussed.

 

[georgephillip]

There is a very simple solution to the problems above. Adopt a system like the French have. You have a presidential election, where if the winner gets 50%+1, he wins, but if no one clears 50%, there would be a runoff. This will allow fuller participation, allow third parties greater exposure, and at the end, we will have a president with a clear mandate for change.

There's also a movement that keeps the Electoral College but does away with its winner-take-all mandate that ensures minority rule in this country:

Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote

"The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact will guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes across all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

"The Compact ensures that every vote, in every state, will matter in every presidential election.

"The Compact is a state-based approach that preserves the Electoral College, state control of elections, and the power of the states to control how the President is elected."

 

[Beef_Supreme]

I'd propose a modified EC. No more winner-take-all, you get state EC votes based how well you did in the popular state vote. This would allow many parties to win EC votes in each state. If no candidates the majority of EC votes for the country they could negotiate with the losers to build a coalition, similar to parliamentary systems.

Another option is ranked-choice voting. You get a slate of maybe 10 candidates from 10 different parties and the winner best reflects the majority inclination.

Those seem like really convoluted methods when a simple one person, one vote system would be so much better.

Majority rule is not a good idea.
The party/ideology that ruined the senate now wants to “change” the EC.
Surprise surprise

 

[BrokeLoser]

By JoeB131

The 2020 Election has proven one thing, that it is past time for America go get rid of the 18th century anachronism of the Electoral College.

The reasons that the electoral college is detrimental can be identified pretty easily.

• The presidents it chooses over the will of the people always turn out to be bad for the country. Not only the modern examples of George W. Bush (crashing the economy, getting us into a war based on lies), and Trump (the list is too long of his failings) but the earlier ones like Rutherford B. Hayes, whose administration reversed victory in the Civil War, or John Q. Adams, who corrupted congress to win. They are almost always a mistake the voters needed to correct the next election.
• It creates a false sense of mandate. Even when the people are clear in their choice, a 60/40 win like Reagan in 1984 or Nixon in 1972 appear to have a mandate with a mostly single color map when in fact there were plenty who didn’t support them.
• It makes it impossible for third parties to gain any traction. Every year, we hear about how we are “Stuck with the lesser of two evils”. American history is full of third parties that challenged the duopoly of the Democrats and Republicans, but none of them really last beyond an election cycle or two. Why? Because at the end of the day, the best they could hope for is to throw the election into Congress. Case in point, the Reform Party. Ross Perot was a bit eccentric, but he brought issues to the fore that other parties didn’t. Yet by 2000, the Reform party was done.
• At some point, it will make it impossible for the GOP to win. This is something that the GOP should consider. Texas came closer to turning blue this time than it ever has, and demographic changes will make that inevitable. Once that happens, it will be nearly impossible for the GOP to get an electoral majority, even if they win the popular vote.
• It depresses voter participation. If you didn’t live in one of the ten “Swing states”, there was really not much reason for you to come out and vote, was there? Even though 2020 was a record turnout, 80 million Americans, or about 34% of the eligible electorate, did not vote. Why should they, when they were already painting their state red or blue before a single vote was counted.
• It causes candidates to pander to the interests of small groups over the good of the country. The Cuban American community in Florida is still bitter about a revolution that happened 60 years ago, but it still factors into our politics, keeping us from normalizing relations with Cuba. Meanwhile, in Iowa, we are still spending money to subsidize ethanol nobody really wants to put in their cars. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
• It’s kind of racist. The fact that small homogenous rural states have outsized influence over diverse urban states in this system is a real problem in a country that has historically oppressed minorities. The fact is that it has contributed to the racial divide in this country, where one party has effectively become a white identity party, while the other had tied its fortunes to minority turnout.
• It is subject to a lot of potential mischief after the votes are tallied. The 2020 election itself was not in doubt. Biden won by 7 million votes. Yet we have had endless arguments about some 45,000 votes in Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin. State Legislatures, federal and state courts, faithless electors and congress have all been called upon to change the results, calling the whole system into question.

There is a very simple solution to the problems above. Adopt a system like the French have. You have a presidential election, where if the winner gets 50%+1, he wins, but if no one clears 50%, there would be a runoff. This will allow fuller participation, allow third parties greater exposure, and at the end, we will have a president with a clear mandate for change.

So realistically you want foreigners / barely legals out of touch with American principles and values, poverty stricken welfare dwellers, criminals and young, unwise wokeologists deciding who the POTUS should be....Right?
So you want the duopoly fighting over said constituency?
What could possibly go wrong with our country when America elects the party willing to offer the most free shit, the party willing to vilify whitey the most, the party willing to legalize the most drugs, the party willing to decriminalize the most criminal acts, the party willing to pretend we become a better nation with more darkies and more fags?

 

[JoeB131]

For those paying along, Incel Joe has some sort of weird fetish about Mormonism, which he constantly manifests by posting absurd lies and distortions about it, even where it has no relevance whatsoever to what is otherwise being discussed.

Please point out what I got wrong? Were blacks denied membership into the LDS Cult until 1978? Yes they were.

Do the scriptures of Mormonism claim that the Lamanites were cursed with dark skin for killing the Nephites, and the descendants of Ham were cursed with dark skin because of his disobedience to Noah? Yes, they do.

(Psst. Psst. It's possible to get laid without being married! Not sure why you are worried about my sex life, but hey, whatever, Mormon Bob.)

 

[JoeB131]

So realistically you want foreigners / barely legals out of touch with American principles and values, poverty stricken welfare dwellers, criminals and young, unwise wokeologists deciding who the POTUS should be....Right?

If they are citizens, yes. If you have people voting to change our system because it doesn't work for a majority of them, that's kind of on you guys. If you guys put as much effort into ending poverty that you put into trying to stop poor people from voting, you might actually make this a country with "principles and values".

What could possibly go wrong with our country when America elects the party willing to offer the most free shit, the party willing to vilify whitey the most, the party willing to legalize the most drugs, the party willing to decriminalize the most criminal acts, the party willing to pretend we become a better nation with more darkies and more fags?

You have equality for everyone? Can't see that as a bad thing.

Here's the thing. America is a GREAT place to live if you are White, Male, Christian and Straight.

The problem is, that's only about 30% of the population. I hit three of those four categories, and if I only cared about myself, maybe I wouldn't be concerned.

But a country that doesn't work well for most of it's people doesn't work. If you have a party that has to keep using various tricks of disenfranchisement to keep itself into power to the point where 80 million people don't bother to vote at all, because what's the point, then you have a problem. It becomes a bigger problem when people show up at the polls, clearly vote out a bad president, and we are seeing all sorts of schemes being played to try to avoid that result.

 

[Lesh]

Majority rule is not a good idea.

Which leaves minority rule?

Interesting.

Which minority?

 

[alang1216]

So we are basically agreed? You call it 'runoffs' I call it 'ranked-choice'. Same difference?

No, because ranked choosing means secondary votes cast the same night.

I might want to vote for my third party guy in the first round and THEN consider why voting for top two afterwards.

Waste of time and money.

 

[alang1216]

Majority rule is not a good idea.

Which leaves minority rule?

Interesting.

Which minority?

Wasn't it minority rule that led the the Revolutionary War in the first place?

 

[Agit8r]

If Republicans play stupid games in January, it will lose favor with everyone who isn't trumpfisti, and will be gone within a few years.

Though if Pence were to pretend that he has any function in the process other than counting the certified results, the people will see that there is According-to-Hoyle tyranny and there will be bloodshed in response. Trumfisti homes will be targeted relentlessly by everyone else, until the problem is irradicated.