Hillary Clinton is now 1.5 MILLION ahead of Donald Trump in the popular vote count

[Nadiru]

Why should we bother retaining a party that doesn't forward popular policies let alone remotely good ones?

A whole bunch of contemporary GOP policies are wildly popular, though. Medicare Part D, PEPFAR, the EITC, the Tax Reform Act of 1986, to name a few.

[Krigaren]

Psst, Hillary got 48% of the popular vote. The majority of American voters did not, in fact, choose her.

Psst, if someone doesn't vote, then they forfeit any right to make a claim about what they want. The majority of non-voters did not, in fact, choose anything.

[Elegiac]

Because you don't find them good doesn't mean they're not good.

No, the fact they're objectively not good makes them not good.

But any party in absolute power is a bad thing. And liberals are dangerously close to being that, due to their admittedly outstanding ability to buy votes...particularly in future generations. Do you really think some senator in Washington D.C. gives a rat's ass about an immigrant they let into the country? They're nothing to them but a prospective vote. Or at the very least...their childrens' votes.

>'Liberals are dangerously close to being that'.
> GOP controls every branch of the federal government.

Do you have your head up your ass, or something?

- - - Updated - - -

A whole bunch of contemporary GOP policies are wildly popular, though. Medicare Part D, PEPFAR, the EITC, the Tax Reform Act of 1986, to name a few.

And yet the Republicans have to keep relying on abortive electoral systems to stay in power rather than, you know, actually winning votes.

[Grym]

This is why the Senate exists. There's no reason why the least economically productive states should have a disproportionate say.

Then it isn't democracy either when you bias towards economical value.

[Krigaren]

How can Hillary be America's choice if she only got 25% of Americans to vote for her?
Dems shoved a lackluster candidate down the lefts throats.
The left did not show up in key states to vote for lackluster candidate.
Trump won by the rules that have been around for 200 years.

In the end it is the fault of your peers that failed to show up and vote for Hillary.

But keep protesting.

#triggered?

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

The problem with an EC system, just like with other forms of FPTP, is that people in heavily Republican/Democrat areas may not bother voting, as they know their vote is pretty much worthless.

A straight ballot, with everybody's vote counting, may have come up with a different candidate winning the popular vote, or it may not, so the entire argument is pointless.

It's true it's impossible to accurately predict which candidate would win if there were a different system in place...but that doesn't make the argument that the Electoral College is an extremely flawed system pointless. It's at least worth a discussion as to whether or not the EC still works. It's not going to change the results of this election...but it could affect future elections.

[Elegiac]

Then it isn't democracy either when you bias towards economical value.

Nor is it democracy when you devalue people's votes because they live in California or Texas.

2016 has not been a stellar year for broadcasting how awesome democracy is. All it's really doing is legitimising the propaganda coming out of Russia and the Middle East and making Western civilization look like a joke.

[Mindark]

"Move on", meaning accepting that Trump won. This thread isn't about doing away with the Electoral College system. It's only trying to reaffirm that Hillary won the popular vote.

If people want to fight the current EC system, go for it.

Have you read the thread? It's mostly "The EC system is poor" and "Get over it, Hillary lost." It's not trying to reaffirm that Hillary won the popular vote.

[Nadiru]

And yet the Republicans have to keep relying on abortive electoral systems to stay in power rather than, you know, actually winning votes.

No Democrat is running on a policy of dismantling Medicare D or the EITC, though. Popular GOP policies become part of the political landscape just as popular Dem policies do, to the point where you can't even recognize those policies as being invented by a Republican vs a Democrat.

Democrats also have to rely on that electoral system to stay in power because that's the system both the Democrats and the Republicans agreed upon. Individual voters might not like the EC but at what point did you mistake the Democrat Party for an organization that cares about the likes and dislikes of the individual voter?

[Mindark]

That is exactly what the EC system design to go against.

Stop a couple of large state dictate the whole country, all states have a fair view.

So replace "a couple of large states" with "a couple of swing states" and it's no different. Ohio is the new California. Florida is the newer York.

[cubby]

That is exactly what the EC system design to go against.

Stop a couple of large state dictate the whole country, all states have a fair view.

As long as your ok with a vote in Wyoming being worth almost 4x more than a vote in CA/TX, then you can still call the EC "fair". If you know anything about math, then you can't.

[Elegiac]

No Democrat is running on a policy of dismantling Medicare D or the EITC, though. Popular GOP policies become part of the political landscape just as popular Dem policies do, to the point where you can't even recognize those policies as being invented by a Republican vs a Democrat.

Democrats also have to rely on that electoral system to stay in power because that's the system both the Democrats and the Republicans agreed upon. Individual voters might not like the EC but at what point did you mistake the Democrat Party for an organization that cares about the likes and dislikes of the individual voter?

Not being the average American I don't hold politicians to unreasonable expectations of virtue. But I do expect them to be at the very least competent.

[Varitok]

It was indeed childish. Just as this is childish.

Both groups of people refusing to accept the victor are childish.

Wanting your votes to matter isn't childish.

[Kalis]

It's true it's impossible to accurately predict which candidate would win if there were a different system in place...but that doesn't make the argument that the Electoral College is an extremely flawed system pointless. It's at least worth a discussion as to whether or not the EC still works.

Doesn't it work precisely how it was intended to though? Their entire system seems to be state-centric.

[Nadiru]

So replace "a couple of large states" with "a couple of swing states" and it's no different. Ohio is the new California. Florida is the newer York.

So contest those "solid blue/red" states. Trump did, and he won big with Rust Belt constituencies that everybody had written off as being a solid Democrat bloc due to the GOP's animosity towards unions and American manufacturing.

[Coffeh]

No, the fact they're objectively not good makes them not good.

I don't think you know what the word objectively means. Different people have different beliefs and ideals. That's not crazy or bad. It's a reality that sadly most people like yourself can't accept. It's part of the reason our society has become so immature. We have laws in place to deal with the 'objectively bad'.

>'Liberals are dangerously close to being that'.
> GOP controls every branch of the federal government.

Do you have your head up your ass, or something?

As I said...look to the future. Dems are buying millions of votes down the line by opening up the borders and letting in anyone and everyone. They're willing to sacrifice the safety of Americans, their lives and livelihood all to buy themselves more power and control.

[Zeth Hawkins]

Psst, if someone doesn't vote, then they forfeit any right to make a claim about what they want. The majority of non-voters did not, in fact, choose anything.

Who's talking about non-voters? Of those that voted, less than half voted for Trump, and less than half voted for Hillary. Neither of them won the majority.

And what's with that second sentence? ALL of the non-voters did not choose anything.

[Casterbridge]

He hasn't won yet.
Which is why people ask the EC to elect Clinton.
Can you imagine how hard the alt-right would be triggered?

Totally worth it.

Honestly there would most likely be violence in the streets, at the very least the more militia type groups would do something utterly stupid.

[Nadiru]

Not being the average American I don't hold politicians to unreasonable expectations of virtue. But I do expect them to be at the very least competent.

The challenge of designing a good system is designing a system that can withstand an absolute nonce at the helm. Trump is that absolute nonce, and so the stress-testing will commence for the next four years.

[Elegiac]

I don't think you know what the word objectively means. Different people have different beliefs and ideals. That's not crazy or bad. It's a reality that sadly most people like yourself can't accept. It's part of the reason our society has become so immature. We have laws in place to deal with the 'objectively bad'.

Which is why a law to ban discrimination against LGBT persons for federal contractors failed to pass the House. Lol.

As I said...look to the future. Dems are buying millions of votes down the line by opening up the borders and letting in anyone and everyone. They're willing to sacrifice the safety of Americans, their lives and livelihood all to buy themselves more power and control.

Because the Republicans actually care about illegal immigration...lol.