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

[GennGreymane]

Eh, that's a two way street as he's sending signals and dropping hints that he's going to go back to his community organizing schtick once he's out of office. Kind of hard to get over the guy who doesn't actually go away you know.

Huh? Wow, good dodge there. I almost thought you tried.

[Zeth Hawkins]

What does that lie of a meme even mean? I've seen it posted before, not sure if you did it or someone else.

By all means, point out the falsehood. Or is calling it a lie and a meme your only argument?

[TZucchini]

Sweet. Proposals are like petitions.

^ I'd say something stupid like that too if I were just embarrassed.

[Deleted]

Of we did popular vote, literally four states could decide the presidency. Those four states have more people than the rest combined. It's why we have the electoral college. So every state means something. Otherwise the other 46 wouldn't have a voice. Nobody has an issue with it until their candidate loses.

The founding fathers implemented the Electoral college as a way they could overturn the voting result of the general population.

There is nothing fair about the Electoral vote, let me rephrase it, for a country that claims to be democratic, it's entire voting platform isn't democratic because it has the legitimate ability or opportunity to override popular vote based by the amount of Electoral votes gained.

The day any European politician proposes the same system in any Western EU country, his career would end the same day.

-

The only reason it's still even there is because of the Republicans, because they know, the day the electoral vote is removed, they might aswell disband their party because they won't be ruling the country ever again. Just gotta wait for the new wave of young voters and a solid candidate in 2020... the republicans will be done.

[Damajin]

Jesus. You really have no clue. Let me help:

Over 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College. There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject.

Go ahead, call a Constitutional Convention over that. You sure you want to open up that can of worms? Because I guarantee you while you're focused on reforming the EC so no one else gets Hillary'd that the corporate interests would be working night and day to embed new things or remove old things that the American citizen depends on.

Just speaking tactically here. Understand the situation and appreciate what it could really do.

[Yoshimiko]

Jesus. You really have no clue. Let me help:

Over 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College. There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject.

People on the left and right disagree with the Electoral System. It's something that has been fought for a very long time. The Electoral College is in place for a reason - but that reason is becoming less and less relevant as time goes by. Abolishing the EC would probably be a good decision. That being said, if the popular vote is what mattered, we'd still be counting votes. There's still something around 1.5 to 3 million illegal votes. The final tallies for popular vote are going to be extremely close, depending on how many illegal aliens voted red / blue(early numbers show mostly blue).

There are some extreme estimates that a total of over 7 million votes were cast by either illegals or the dead. This election's results will be very interesting in the coming weeks - months, as far as official numbers go.

[A dot Ham]

It doesn't matter who won the electoral vote count. It doesn't matter who won the popular vote count.

There is no federal law that requires electors to vote for either. The electors can simply vote for George Washington, and he'd become President.

It's the dumbest system on earth.

Doubts if this guy actually votes himself.

(1) All voters can write in an alternative vote
(2) Most STATES rig their electoral votes to go to the majority/popular vote.

So in California despite the fact that 32.7% voted republican... democrats still got all 55 electoral votes. 55/270 I'd say the electoral college is working to your advantage. But fuck it #calexit amirite? Genius!

You guys like to claim to voting ratios of Wyoming vs California.

Which makes it:
194,717:1 Wyoming
705,454:1 California

Which isn't actually true 2 because that doesn't take into account that every state gets at least 2 representatives regardess of population. So its really:
584,153:1
732,075:1
Which is far less alarming.

But what about the 3,841,134 people who voted republican in California? You have the nerve to talk about not being represented? Try voting one way and having your votes go for the other guy.

Not to mention who knows anything about the process of becoming and elector? Anyone remember talk about pledged votes? Which is why Hilary was the DNC's candidate and not Bernie. Pledged aka purchased?

[GennGreymane]

Go ahead, call a Constitutional Convention over that. You sure you want to open up that can of worms? Because I guarantee you while you're focused on reforming the EC so no one else gets Hillary'd that the corporate interests would be working night and day to embed new things or remove old things that the American citizen depends on.

Just speaking tactically here. Understand the situation and appreciate what it could really do.

Whhhoooaaaa boy, are you in for a treat once Trump officially picks his cabinet and other federal officials.

[Damajin]

Huh? Wow, good dodge there. I almost thought you tried.

Hmm, stating facts is dodging now?

If you want me to address the conspiracy shit, that's not my place as I'm not a GOP member nor one who subscribes to that shit, so I don't have any hand or stake in it at all. Take the bug out of your ass.

[Dug]

The EC should just say fuck em both and elect my boy Harambe. Word on the street his cabinet picks so far are Deez Nutz and Ken Bone

[cubby]

I look forward to nothing changing and whoever loses in 2020 to be a big baby again.

This issue isn't about who wins or loses - I've been an advocate of removing the EC for a long time now - through both Obama wins (not that it would have mattered). Removing the EC is all about making each vote count.

[GennGreymane]

Hmm, stating facts is dodging now?

If you want me to address the conspiracy shit, that's not my place as I'm not a GOP member nor one who subscribes to that shit, so I don't have any hand or stake in it at all. Take the bug out of your ass.

Come on, at least try :P.

I dont care if you are or arent, but you seem to be very "get over it"

Where were ya all those years people just kept going on about Obama being a foreigner?

[Krigaren]

Of we did popular vote, literally four states could decide the presidency. Those four states have more people than the rest combined. It's why we have the electoral college. So every state means something. Otherwise the other 46 wouldn't have a voice. Nobody has an issue with it until their candidate loses.

Well, two problems with your thesis.

1) Five. That is the number of times a president has been elected without the support of the popular vote. Prior to 2000 it hadn't happened since 1888, so that might be the reason you haven't heard many people having an issue with the EC. Though to pretend as though the calls to abolish the EC are new, and are a product of recent events would be to ignore facts, IE: this 1968 law thesis calling to abolish it.

2) Even if a small handful of states have the population density to tip the scales of the presidency in their favor, you're forgetting that, even in a state like California, not everyone votes the same. In California, 39% of voters didn't vote for Clinton. In New York, it was 41%. Also consider that the four largest states: California, New York, Texas, and Florida, evenly split on who went for Clinton and who went for Trump.

So the premise that switching to a popular vote would heavily favor one party over another due to state population density is completely false on it's face.

Oh, and bonus 3) People in lower population areas would also still have a voice. It's called Congress.

[Dug]

Because what they're offering is "stand on your own two legs, you don't need a crutch or to be babied, you're just as strong and as capable as everyone else" and that's seen as a negative thing now a'days for some reason.

Even though rural areas get far more federal aid but okay lol

[Damajin]

Whhhoooaaaa boy, are you in for a treat once Trump officially picks his cabinet and other federal officials.

I'm perfectly aware of that. Do I need to state for the 5643rd time that I'm not a Trump supporter?

[cubby]

Doubts if this guy actually votes himself.

(1) All voters can write in an alternative vote
(2) Most STATES rig their electoral votes to go to the majority/popular vote.

So in California despite the fact that 32.7% voted republican... democrats still got all 55 electoral votes. 55/270 I'd say the electoral college is working to your advantage. But fuck it #calexit amirite? Genius!

The point he was making went right over your head. But I love all the stuff you pretended he said. Way to hallucinate!

[Damajin]

Come on, at least try :P.

I dont care if you are or arent, but you seem to be very "get over it"

Where were ya all those years people just kept going on about Obama being a foreigner?

Getting jettisoned from the limited government Tea Party.

[cubby]

Well, two problems with your thesis.

1) Five. That is the number of times a president has been elected without the support of the popular vote. Prior to 2000 it hadn't happened since 1888, so that might be the reason you haven't heard many people having an issue with the EC. Though to pretend as though the calls to abolish the EC are new, and are a product of recent events would be to ignore facts.

2) Even if a small handful of states have the population density to tip the scales of the presidency in their favor, you're forgetting that, even in a state like California, not everyone votes the same. In California, 39% of voters didn't vote for Clinton. In New York, it was 41%. Also consider that the four largest states: California, New York, Texas, and Florida, evenly split on who went for Clinton and who went for Trump.

So the premise that switching to a popular vote would heavily favor one party over another due to state population density is completely false on it's face.

Oh, and bonus 3) People in lower population areas would also still have a voice. It's called Congress.

You knock it off with all that logic, reasoning, and evidence. This is a Trumpet world now - if you say it, it's true!

[Deleted]

Doubts if this guy actually votes himself.

(1) All voters can write in an alternative vote
(2) Most STATES rig their electoral votes to go to the majority/popular vote.

So in California despite the fact that 32.7% voted republican... democrats still got all 55 electoral votes. 55/270 I'd say the electoral college is working to your advantage. But fuck it #calexit amirite? Genius!

Because besides two states, all states are winner-takes-all.

[Rhlor]

When all else fails, ignore logic, and fall back on rhetoric.

Points 1 and 2 address that.

I'm game for whatever our system evolves into. Providing it makes sense. Currently the electoral college makes sense. Dissolving the electoral college just because you think it gives you a win otherwise is not a good reason.

Furthermore I think that more stringent requirement would be necessary to even cast a ballot. Because if I am going to allow myself to subjected to the "will of the majority" I certainly hope that majority is at least moderately educated, and able to participate in all acts that qualify them as an adult.

Meaning that if you society and the laws created deem you unfit to make decisions about your life like consume alcohol, you're probably unfit to be making decisions for the entire nation.

Tax paying citizens would probably be another must have on my list of requirements to vote. If I (the government) am paying for all of your expenses, food, housing, phone, etc. you (the person receiving those benefits) doesn't really have the power to tell me how I should operate. That doesn't work for any of us in our personal lives, family lives, or professional lives, why should that work on governmental level?

Criminal record, felony or misdemeanor. Only upstanding members of the community should be allowed to vote. Mr. Fuck up over there doesn't have a problem with killing, stealing, or raping... but he gets a say in the direction this country goes... I fucking think not.

Lastly, the constitution. You don't get to pick and choose which parts of the constitution you want to follow to suit your current attitude/needs. You either revere its importance entirely, or you throw it out. Careful though, because that same constitution you are about throw out is actually what has afforded you the rights you have fought for, the same rights you think Trump is going to take away. You erase the constitution and claim it has no relevance then you will find yourself losing more by instating Clinton... after all you are the minorities right? Lets not forget that.

You think the electoral college has failed you, which is just laughable. So you want to make everything about the popular vote... but seem to forget you are still minorities. What happens if in the absence of a constitution which protect your rights as an individual, the majority votes for the systematic extermination of this "plague" that is homosexuality? You still with the majority? (I don't view it that way... but I am trying to reach out to someone rational from the liberal side of this)

California has a high economic and intellectual development, pay more taxes than receive from the federal government. And the votes of Californians are worth less than those of parasitic states that only live depending on federal government money.