The Popular Vote Excuse Destroyed!

[Marion Morrison]

I was wrong more than 14 million voted against the Orange Doofus than for him.

He got less than 46% of the total vote.

2016 Presidential General Election Results

View attachment 200740

but..Who's the President of The United States, though?

 

[dblack]

Here I will answer for butthurt liberals, but but but...but...hello popular vote command is it true Trump won 7 out of the 10 largest states by population? Its true?

And? Therefore you shouldn't be afraid of the popular vote. Or is that your safe place now?

take out the Ca. vote and she lost the popular vote.

And? He still lost to Clinton, and more than 14 MILLION MORE VOTED AGAINST THAN FOR HIM. He did not get 46% of the vote.

And if he had? If he'd actually had a majority? Would that make him a good president?

The fact of the matter is, our founders did not share the modern liberal's blind trust in 'democracy', and for good reason. They recognized that there is nothing inherent in majority rule that leads to good government. They deliberately put limitations and safeguards in place to insulate government from the whim of the majority. One of these safeguards was the electoral college.

I agree that the electoral college system failed us in the last election. But not in the way most of you think. It didn't fail us by inaccurately representing the will of the majority. That part was actually an example of the electoral college working as intended. The distribution of EC votes is intended to give states with lower populations more relative and mitigate domination of urban voting blocks. More than anything, the 2016 election showed an urban/rural divided among voters. Every major city voted for Clinton. Pretty much everywhere else voted for Trump. Trump winning, despite not having a majority, or even a plurality, of the votes was a feature - not a bug.

The electoral college did fail us, however. Another key way that the EC is supposed to moderate 'democracy' hinges on the electors' freedom to vote their conscience, despite the will of the voters. If voters have been duped by a dangerous demagogue, the electors have a responsibility to deny the voters their choice. Despite the fact that many Republican electors stated their opposition to Trump, they voted for him anyway. They failed us by blindly adhering to democracy, and refraining from exercising their power to override it.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Can anyone tell me who the president of The United States is? Kinda quiet in here now.

 

[dblack]

Can anyone tell me who the president of The United States is? Kinda quiet in here now.

If you really don't know, you're probably not prepared to have intelligent conversation on a message board dedicated to US Politics. Google can help.

 

[CowboyTed]

HRC still got 3,000,000 more votes than your messiah.

Winning the popular vote in the most populous states will win you the most electoral votes. That's why the founders devised a counter to the popular vote, exactly for this reason.

We can't be held responsible for your lack of strategic thinking.

The Founding Fathers didn't think that the US would vote for and Orange turd but they were wrong....

Do you think the Founding Fathers would have supported ripping families apart?

 

[RealDave]

HRC still got 3,000,000 more votes than your messiah.

Trump CRUSHED Hillary in 7 out of the 10 largest states by population overwhelmingly winning the popular vote.

3 Million less votes is not crushing anything.

Yeah, do me a favor and tell me had Hillary not won California by a landslide how close would the Popular vote been then?

California is why our Founding Fathers were smarter than you!

Great thinking dickfuck.

"Take away Hillary votes & see how close it is"? Really?

 

[Rustic]

Disappointing to say the least. I'm more encouraged that the "conservatives" had a choice between Cruz and Trump and chose Trump; exposing people like yourself and just how empty the rhetoric was for so long....lol. Equally encouraging is that every passing day makes Obama look more distinguished, more presidential, and reminds us of just how good it was to have a real man in office

I couldn't make this up if I tried. A real man!

The blob can't drink without using 2 hands.

View attachment 200895

Very weak, very senile.


Meanwhile Obama

View attachment 200896

One hand one beer.

That's the best you have and a topic you want to use to divert to so real topics are missed?

Me?

You're the one that posted pictures of President Obama first.
I was just responding in kind.

Obama is 10X the man Trump (the pervert) is.
Each day reveals how superior a man, a president, a father, a husband he was (and is) compared to the whore monger orange blob who is currently in the White House.

Lol
Obama was, is and will always be a shit stain...

 

[Rustic]

Although I didnt vote for Hillary....honestly america should be ashamed of itself by using a system that dates back to the 18th century...the result, the crazy minority elected qu idiot and the whole world is laughing.

Lol
Says a control freak

 

[Rustic]

HRC still got 3,000,000 more votes than your messiah.

Winning the popular vote in the most populous states will win you the most electoral votes. That's why the founders devised a counter to the popular vote, exactly for this reason.

We can't be held responsible for your lack of strategic thinking.

The Founding Fathers didn't think that the US would vote for and Orange turd but they were wrong....

Do you think the Founding Fathers would have supported ripping families apart?

Lol
Illegal aliens have no constitutional rights, So shut the **** up

 

[miketx]

HRC still got 3,000,000 more votes than your messiah.

Tell us all, liar, when has the popular vote EVER elected a president?

 

[Rustic]

Winning against Hillary Clinton is not much to crow about.
Both parties offered unqualified, inappropriate candidates.
Another example of the duopoly dictatorship; it didn't matter who 'won', we lost.

LOL Karma is a *****

 

[miketx]

HRC still got 3,000,000 more votes than your messiah.

Trump CRUSHED Hillary in 7 out of the 10 largest states by population overwhelmingly winning the popular vote.

Sorry, the facts are far different from what you're reporting.

Republican Secretaries of State in 30+ states have certified the results. Ms. Clinton got 3,000,000 more votes than your blob.

Trump won 7 out of 10 of the largest states. Hillary a mere 30% that's sad, 30% popularity poor Hillary.

3M more votes overall speaks to her popularity--hence her landslide superiority in the popular vote.

Meskin votes don't count liar.

 

[dblack]

HRC still got 3,000,000 more votes than your messiah.

Winning the popular vote in the most populous states will win you the most electoral votes. That's why the founders devised a counter to the popular vote, exactly for this reason.

We can't be held responsible for your lack of strategic thinking.

The Founding Fathers didn't think that the US would vote for and Orange turd but they were wrong....

Do you think the Founding Fathers would have supported ripping families apart?

Lol
Illegal aliens have no constitutional rights, So shut the **** up

Of course they do. So, no.

 

[Rustic]

The popular vote doesn't matter.

Obviously, it matters to a lot of folks.
That it is not the determining factor in Presidential elections remains the lamentable fact.

This is a republic not a shit eating democracy...
We don’t want mob rule

 

[Rustic]

Here I will answer for butthurt liberals, but but but...but...hello popular vote command is it true Trump won 7 out of the 10 largest states by population? Its true?

And? Therefore you shouldn't be afraid of the popular vote. Or is that your safe place now?

take out the Ca. vote and she lost the popular vote.

And? He still lost to Clinton, and more than 14 MILLION MORE VOTED AGAINST THAN FOR HIM. He did not get 46% of the vote.

 

[Rustic]

Here I will answer for butthurt liberals, but but but...but...hello popular vote command is it true Trump won 7 out of the 10 largest states by population? Its true?

And? Therefore you shouldn't be afraid of the popular vote. Or is that your safe place now?

take out the Ca. vote and she lost the popular vote.

And? He still lost to Clinton, and more than 14 MILLION MORE VOTED AGAINST THAN FOR HIM. He did not get 46% of the vote.

And if he had? If he'd actually had a majority? Would that make him a good president?

The fact of the matter is, our founders did not share the modern liberal's blind trust in 'democracy', and for good reason. They recognized that there is nothing inherent in majority rule that leads to good government. They deliberately put limitations and safeguards in place to insulate government from the whim of the majority. One of these safeguards was the electoral college.

I agree that the electoral college system failed us in the last election. But not in the way most of you think. It didn't fail us by inaccurately representing the will of the majority. That part was actually an example of the electoral college working as intended. The distribution of EC votes is intended to give states with lower populations more relative and mitigate domination of urban voting blocks. More than anything, the 2016 election showed an urban/rural divided among voters. Every major city voted for Clinton. Pretty much everywhere else voted for Trump. Trump winning, despite not having a majority, or even a plurality, of the votes was a feature - not a bug.

The electoral college did fail us, however. Another key way that the EC is supposed to moderate 'democracy' hinges on the electors' freedom to vote their conscience, despite the will of the voters. If voters have been duped by a dangerous demagogue, the electors have a responsibility to deny the voters their choice. Despite the fact that many Republican electors stated their opposition to Trump, they voted for him anyway. They failed us by blindly adhering to democracy, and refraining from exercising their power to override it.

Rural America and urban America will never have the same interests, as it should be.
The election proved it

 

[Pellinore]

Here I will answer for butthurt liberals, but but but...but...hello popular vote command is it true Trump won 7 out of the 10 largest states by population? Its true?

And? Therefore you shouldn't be afraid of the popular vote. Or is that your safe place now?

take out the Ca. vote and she lost the popular vote.

And? He still lost to Clinton, and more than 14 MILLION MORE VOTED AGAINST THAN FOR HIM. He did not get 46% of the vote.

And if he had? If he'd actually had a majority? Would that make him a good president?

The fact of the matter is, our founders did not share the modern liberal's blind trust in 'democracy', and for good reason. They recognized that there is nothing inherent in majority rule that leads to good government. They deliberately put limitations and safeguards in place to insulate government from the whim of the majority. One of these safeguards was the electoral college.

I agree that the electoral college system failed us in the last election. But not in the way most of you think. It didn't fail us by inaccurately representing the will of the majority. That part was actually an example of the electoral college working as intended. The distribution of EC votes is intended to give states with lower populations more relative and mitigate domination of urban voting blocks. More than anything, the 2016 election showed an urban/rural divided among voters. Every major city voted for Clinton. Pretty much everywhere else voted for Trump. Trump winning, despite not having a majority, or even a plurality, of the votes was a feature - not a bug.

The electoral college did fail us, however. Another key way that the EC is supposed to moderate 'democracy' hinges on the electors' freedom to vote their conscience, despite the will of the voters. If voters have been duped by a dangerous demagogue, the electors have a responsibility to deny the voters their choice. Despite the fact that many Republican electors stated their opposition to Trump, they voted for him anyway. They failed us by blindly adhering to democracy, and refraining from exercising their power to override it.

This is correct. The Founders knew that the weakness of our type of government was the dangerous demagogue you mentioned, so they intentionally designed the Electoral College to provide an educated Elector to act as a safeguard, as stated. However, since voting is performed and regulated mostly on a state level, over the years, the states - well-intentioned or otherwise - have passed a slew of laws requiring Electors to reflect the votes of the people; in some states, the Elector is required to cast their vote that way, in others they can be fined, and in others they can be replaced with someone who will. The effect is that the EC now does the opposite of what it was intended - it serves to reinforce the votes of the people, whatever they may be, rather than provide a check to them.

This is a big reason why we've had two Presidents win the EC while losing the popular vote twice within the past twenty years, compared to three times total in the other 208.

 

[Pellinore]

HRC still got 3,000,000 more votes than your messiah.

Winning the popular vote in the most populous states will win you the most electoral votes. That's why the founders devised a counter to the popular vote, exactly for this reason.

We can't be held responsible for your lack of strategic thinking.

The Founding Fathers didn't think that the US would vote for and Orange turd but they were wrong....

Do you think the Founding Fathers would have supported ripping families apart?

On the contrary. The Founding Fathers knew full well that, if not checked, we very much would.

 

[Rustic]

Progressives make for real shitty leaders...

 

[Pellinore]

HRC still got 3,000,000 more votes than your messiah.

Winning the popular vote in the most populous states will win you the most electoral votes. That's why the founders devised a counter to the popular vote, exactly for this reason.

We can't be held responsible for your lack of strategic thinking.

The Founding Fathers didn't think that the US would vote for and Orange turd but they were wrong....

Do you think the Founding Fathers would have supported ripping families apart?

Lol
Illegal aliens have no constitutional rights, So shut the **** up

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Emphasis mine.