Things that we all know....

[Simpletruther]

The lower population states are already equally represented in the senate. And disproportionately represented in the EC and house.
But the less populous states already got the senate balanced. It was originally elected by the House.

And? That means the Congress has some geographic balance. It’s best the executive branch have the same balance.

And political gerrymandering is officially ok now, so those hard gerrymandered republican districts are permanently safe.

I don't think making the presidential election reflect the popular vote would in any way make republicans "powerless" or "subject" to the left and right coasts.

That is a canard. Both sides have gerrymandered. And in many cases it benefits the left.

 

[CMPancake]

People in other states and particularly in rural areas don't want California and New York forcing liberalism on the whole country.

I don't want Fascism being pushed onto this country. It's fine if you want to continue living in a country in the bottom half of America's GDP, that's fine. But New York and California have far greater to lose economically by electing Republicans who historically have tanked and ruined economies.

That's why we have 50 states and only one country. California and New York and some of the other blue states can have their liberal ideas and they can keep them to themselves. Leave everyone else the hell alone.

>Being left alone
>Wanting a disproportionate amount of influence over the Nation mostly based on population density.

Pick one.

 

[Simpletruther]

The purpose of the EC had/had nothing to do with "big states"; IT AbsaByGodLutely failed it's "stated" purpose of keeping a glib unqualified Conman from becoming President.

"Regardless of the Founding Fathers"? OK, functionally it dilutes individual votes in our only NATIONAL election for President and Vice President. "Every Vote should count / EVERY vote should matter". Since it's failing in it's stated purpose and, I'm sure, the Founding Fathers AbsaByGodLutely would want everyone's vote to matter the EC has proven itself outdated.

If every vote should count the same (in the manner you are speaking) we have to disband the senate.

No, regions should get some equalized representation, rather than be at the whims of large population centers far away with different values and lifestyles. That is basic common sense that anyone living in a much smaller population center would agree with.

And it’s why I doubt it’s going to change. You hit population centers could always break away if you don’t like it.

 

[bullseyelqcs]

If every vote should count the same (in the manner you are speaking) we have to disband the senate.

No, regions should get some equalized representation, rather than be at the whims of large population centers far away with different values and lifestyles. That is basic common sense that anyone living in a much smaller population center would agree with.

And it’s why I doubt it’s going to change. You hit population centers could always break away if you don’t like it.

Make the EC proportional. If a candidate wins 67% of a states votes, they get 67% of the electoral votes, rounded up.

It would more accurately reflect the will of the people, and would prevent candidates from just ignoring areas they feel they currently arent going to win.

Then, everywhere matters.

 

[Moderate Right]

I don't want Fascism being pushed onto this country. It's fine if you want to continue living in a country in the bottom half of America's GDP, that's fine. But New York and California have far greater to lose economically by electing Republicans who historically have tanked and ruined economies.



>Being left alone
>Wanting a disproportionate amount of influence over the Nation mostly based on population density.

Pick one.

So now you're calling red states and rural areas fascist?

 

[CMPancake]

So now you're calling red states and rural areas fascist?

Absolutely. Most of them are leeches surviving off of those Neoliberal states you hate so much.

 

[Moderate Right]

Absolutely. Most of them are leeches surviving off of those Neoliberal states you hate so much.

CT forum is further down. Why are you so filled with hate and intolerance?

 

[CMPancake]

CT forum is further down. Why are you so filled with hate and intolerance?

Why are you so utterly incapable of actually defending or even articulating yourself? It's sincerely pathetic.

 

[Moderate Right]

Why are you so utterly incapable of actually defending or even articulating yourself? It's sincerely pathetic.

Why are you so utterly incapable of actually defending or even articulating yourself? It's sincerely pathetic. You can't defend yourself from nuts who call you fascists. They're just nuts.

 

[CMPancake]

Why are you so utterly incapable of actually defending or even articulating yourself? It's sincerely pathetic. You can't defend yourself from nuts who call you fascists. They're just nuts.

Ok, boomer.

 

[Simpletruther]

Make the EC proportional. If a candidate wins 67% of a states votes, they get 67% of the electoral votes, rounded up.

It would more accurately reflect the will of the people, and would prevent candidates from just ignoring areas they feel they currently arent going to win.

Then, everywhere matters.

That is a good compromise

 

[bullseyelqcs]

That is a good compromise

Of course it is....

It would prevent 48% of a states electorate from getting to speak for 100% of the electorate in said state.

 

[Irwin Corey]

If every vote should count the same (in the manner you are speaking) we have to disband the senate.

Why, Senate races are Local State elections.

No, regions should get some equalized representation, rather than be at the whims of large population centers far away with different values and lifestyles. That is basic common sense that anyone living in a much smaller population center would agree with.

That's the standard gripe of the right, but the EC was not created to address that problem. The President and the Vice President are the only offices elected Nationally, every AmeriCAN's vote should count equally in that National Election.

And it’s why I doubt it’s going to change. You hit population centers could always break away if you don’t like it.

I don't think it will change either short of a Constitutional Amendment, because the EC is in the Constitution NOT because of your bogus argument. Your argument has noting to do with why we have the EC in the first place; read Federalist 68.

(Your last sentence makes no sense; btw.)

 

[Linc]

All states should split there electoral college vote by popular vote and congressional district popular vote like Maine and Nebraska.
But democrats don't want that even thou they benefit from it as per example of the 2016 election. Because of fear that Republicans would benefit from it more often.
If All States Voted Like Maine and Nebraska: Trump 290 Clinton 248

Romney would have beaten Obama by the congressional district method of apportioning electoral votes, even though Romney lost by 5 million votes.

It’s understandable that you as a republican would want this system, especially with the 3-to-1 advantage R’s have in gerrymandered seats.

 

[Simpletruther]

If every vote should count the same (in the manner you are speaking) we have to disband the senate.

Why, Senate races are Local State elections.



That's the standard gripe of the right, but the EC was not created to address that problem. The President and the Vice President are the only offices elected Nationally, every AmeriCAN's vote should count equally in that National Election.



I don't think it will change either short of a Constitutional Amendment, because the EC is in the Constitution NOT because of your bogus argument. Your argument has noting to do with why we have the EC in the first place; read Federalist 68.

(Your last sentence makes no sense; btw.)

Each state gets exactly 2 votes in the senate. Do 5e math. Thst obviously means the voice/vote of very small states count vastly more in the senate.

 

[Irwin Corey]

Each state gets exactly 2 votes in the senate. Do 5e math. Thst obviously means the voice/vote of very small states count vastly more in the senate.

Which has NOTHING to do with the Presidency.

 

[Simpletruther]

Which has NOTHING to do with the Presidency.

But it does have to do with the principal.

the left isn’t whining or complaining about the senate giving small states extra power and diluting the vote of larger states.
But they are the potus.
Of course the reason is because it’s hurting dems right now. If it was not, there wouldn’t be a peep. You know this.

 

[Paradoxical]

I may start a series here.

One thing we all know is the crying over electoral college is mostly about advantage rather than principal.

Yes, I know it, you know it, everyone knows it. Many will go to their grave denying it out of blind bias.

And this goes for both sides. This isn’t a liberal thing, it’s a human thing.

If the situation were reversed, and Obama had won two terms loosing popular vote, there would be crying on the right about how liberal are usurping the will of the people.

Likewise, there wouldn’t be a peep from the left agreeing with that conservative whining, nor any agreement that something should be done. There would be deafening silence from the left in contrast to the crying and moaning about democracy right now from the left.

That is plain cold reality, anyone disagreeing either can’t set aside their bias or is playing spin politics for their side.

What you need to do is convince 2/3rds of the states to go to a popular vote. Good luck with that.

 

[Paradoxical]

Here are some things we all know:

Most americans do not understand socialism.

Most americans do not understand communism.

Most americans do not understand libertarianism.

Most americans do not understand authoritarianism.

Most americans do not understand solidarity.

Most americans do not understand anarchism.

In fact, most americans have no ****ing clue what a political system is, what an economic system is, and what the media has done along with our established political parties to confuse and stupefy the american public into accepting an oligarch's wet dream, capitalism with fake control.

I don't understand Libertarian Left. Is that another made up term by leftists to make it sound better?

 

[Irwin Corey]

But it does have to do with the principal.

the left isn’t whining or complaining about the senate giving small states extra power and diluting the vote of larger states.
But they are the potus.
Of course the reason is because it’s hurting dems right now. If it was not, there wouldn’t be a peep. You know this.

It's obvious you're very emotional about this subject and your argument is equally so.

But, sorry pallie, your argument has no basis Constitutionally. <- period

 

[Condor060]

Read (I know it will be an new experience, but try it, you'll like it) Federalist 68; it is the argument for the EC and ONLY address how slaves will be counted; NOTHING about "every state having and equal say".

Well, Federalist 68 also argues for the EC because the Founders were worried a glib unqualified Conman would wow the uneducated AmeriCANs and get himself elected. The EC was to be a buffer between the presidency and the general population, well, we saw (in 16) that that doesn't work.

IF you're going to keep trying to cite the Constitution you should (1) read it, (2) for extra credit, read the Federalist Papers so you know why the Founders wrote what they did.

In case you didn't know it, we don't govern by the Federalist 68, we govern by the constitution. So now that we have that settled, I doubt the Federalist 68 mentioned anything about a glib unqualified conman.

So going back to the actual Constitution, please explain how the constitution didn't mean for every state to have a say in an election where a candidate had to win the most electoral votes to be elected

 

[Simpletruther]

What you need to do is convince 2/3rds of the states to go to a popular vote. Good luck with that.

Why would I do that?

 

[Simpletruther]

It's obvious you're very emotional about this subject and your argument is equally so.

But, sorry pallie, your argument has no basis Constitutionally. <- period

I don’t need s constitutional argument. Lol. It’s in the constitution.

I am just backing up the constitution with good reasoning, the same point everyone would make if they were living in a small population region being dictated to by a far away large population region.

 

[Obscurity]

I don't understand Libertarian Left. Is that another made up term by leftists to make it sound better?

Nope. It's a real political ideology.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Irwin Corey]

Each state gets exactly 2 votes in the senate. Do 5e math. Thst obviously means the voice/vote of very small states count vastly more in the senate.

To which I replied: "Which has NOTHING to do with the Presidency."

And you replied

But it does have to do with the principal.

YOUR "principal"; which as I pointed out is really just emotion.

the left isn’t whining or complaining about the senate giving small states extra power and diluting the vote of larger states.
But they are the potus.

Which makes no sense (as a sentence) but is a perfect example of your emotional gibberish.

Of course the reason is because it’s hurting dems right now. If it was not, there wouldn’t be a peep. You know this.

I know that is more emotional gibberish that cannot be backed up by fact; cite it if you can and I will concede.

I don’t need s constitutional argument. Lol. It’s in the constitution.

Which I conceded in my post #63: "I don't think it will change either, short of a Constitutional Amendment, because the EC is in the Constitution”. To Constitutionally abolish the EC would require an Amendment to the Constitution which isn't likely.

I am just backing up the constitution with good reasoning

NOPE.

the same point everyone would make if they were living in a small population region being dictated to by a far away large population region.

Actually, even under the EC large states still get a bigger say in who's elected President and Vice President.