Page 5 of 37 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
6
7
15
... LastLast
  1. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by ranzino View Post
    Hard to swallow: majority trumps minority and done and as the president is not the CEO of a commitee of states but pres of the whole population, state level is utter nonsense here. Now lesser states dictate cali the president, but that's fair because what ?
    That explains how the internet suddenly fixes things how again?

    The guy made the claim that the internet makes the EC moot.

  2. #82
    Legendary! TirielWoW's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    6,616
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoranon View Post
    That is the theory yes, but it certainly has not happened in California this election.
    That's what happens in Louisiana on a routine basis. It's why we have a Democratic governor, for instance.
    Tiriél US-Stormrage

    Signature by Shyama

  3. #83
    I am Murloc!
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Baden-Wuerttemberg
    Posts
    5,367
    Quote Originally Posted by Listrata View Post
    ...

    Also California votes the way it does because of its cultural identity. And so does every state. States are countries in there own right and there sonviernty is protected. One state should not out way the many.
    If the President is voted in by the people, states mean nothing...or should mean nothing.
    If the recount would find more votes for Hillary to tip the EC, the lesser states are also screwed, their precious sovereignty in this case is for shit and giggles too.

  4. #84
    The Insane Underverse's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Underverse
    Posts
    16,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Toppy View Post
    Also bare in mind that with the electoral college system, in particularly blue states (like Massachusetts) or really red states (like Louisianna) people will often choose to not vote, knowing that their state will always go red or blue.

    This is why, currently, caring about the popular vote is stupid. If we were using a popular vote system people would have more incentive to vote. One person having more popular vote than another right now means absolutely nothing due to the tendency for people to choose to not vote due to the EC.
    How exactly is your logic working here? That some people aren't voting does not relegate a popular vote system into irrelevance. It might have changed outcomes, but people aren't talking about outcomes here; they're talking about the process.

  5. #85
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeta333 View Post
    go google the electoral college and why it was implemented instead of popular vote. People dont need to explain it to people to lazy to look up such a simple question. Its been asked many times and its been explained many times. If you dont like it? go to another country then, or become a politician and try to change it. Its not going anywhere anytime soon.
    As far as I know, the electoral colleges and the electors were implemented to prevent the election of a populist character that might not be good for the country. Like Trump. So, it is a failed system.

    Overall, it was made as an undemocratic system, as electors could swing the vote of the people differently if they thought the vote was populist. What's funny is that in this election they also swung the vote differently because of how the electoral colleges were drawn.

    Romania also tried electoral colleges for the Parliament. It resulted in the worst Parliament ever that my country had as it had to be bloated to fit more people according to the votes and people that had a handful of votes in a college got in by tricking those few people. Fortunately after those failed elections, we're now changing it back.

    Also, if you think the OP is such a lazy person, why do you even come to this forum and comment? In the end, that's why forums exist: to discuss things. If your only argument is saying the OP and people like him/her are lazy, you're not discussing anything, you're just avoiding the point. But it's cool to be edgy nowadays, isn't it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Anna pls View Post
    blaming the system is bullshit, people who are mad over the voting system needs to shut the hell up . it is not first time this is implanted. it has been like that for a very freaky long time. both hillary and trump knew this to begin with, so i really do not see the actual issue. yes it might look like a joke, but who cares? as they knew from the beginning this is how it would be. It is like you join a casual guild and then wonder why they dont raid hardcore.
    You're right, in a democracy if something isn't working correctly, people need to "shut the hell up"
    Great thinking! Nothing should ever be changed! I don't even know why we moved from feudal times or why the USA made a move for independence? In the end, they should just have accepted that "blaming the system is bullshit" and should just have "shut the hell up" because "it has been like that for a very freaky long time". In the end "it might look like a joke, but who cares?" It's not like the president of the USA is important in any... oh... wait.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalis View Post
    US Presidential system is not on a popular vote basis, so we don't know who would have won the popular vote had it been under that system.
    But... we do.
    http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-trump...ct-way-2451745
    Hillary had 2,235,663 more votes than Trump.
    In a popular vote, Hillary would have won.

  6. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowraven View Post
    As far as I know, the electoral colleges and the electors were implemented to prevent the election of a populist character that might not be good for the country. Like Trump. So, it is a failed system.
    calling someone not good for the country when they're not in office but have already made a positive impact

    yep.
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowraven View Post
    But... we do.
    http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-trump...ct-way-2451745
    Hillary had 2,235,663 more votes than Trump.
    In a popular vote, Hillary would have won.
    well no, because the campaigning was focussed towards a particular metric. the popular vote means nothing, other than more illegals voted for hillary than trump.
    Last edited by Floopa; 2016-12-04 at 01:23 PM.

  7. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by Floopa View Post
    well no, because the campaigning was focussed towards a particular metric. the popular vote means nothing, other than more illegals voted for hillary than trump.
    Except illegals can't vote and there is no evidence of them voting.

  8. #88
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Listrata View Post
    Imagine Europe was a country. If you then went by popular vote to elect a prime minister for all of Europe to lead you. Germany and turkey (if you consider turkey europian) would have the biggest leverage in the vote because they have the most people. Those people would vote according to their culture and economy within their own country(state). There are many small or even micro countries in Europe who would never have any say in an election against large populous countries. Hense the electoral college gives more voting power to less populous states so they can be heard. No California shouldn't feel it's bullied by the rest of the country but not enough states(and the people within them) feel the way Californians do to give them the president they want.
    You do realize that in the EU bigger countries have a bigger say, don't you?
    For example, in the EU parliament at the last elections, Germany had 99 members while Malta had 6.
    So, yes, I actually can imagine a prime minister being elected by popular vote in the EU since we already elect our EU parliament members like that.
    And I'd be ok with that, because while Malta is a great country, I couldn't put it on an equal footing to Germany or France when electing the Prime Minister.

  9. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowraven View Post
    But... we do.
    http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-trump...ct-way-2451745
    Hillary had 2,235,663 more votes than Trump.
    In a popular vote, Hillary would have won.
    We know who won the popular vote in an EC election, not in a popular vote election.

    It's very likely in a popular vote election, you'd have more people willing to vote, in particular in states that in the EC voting are generally locked to one party where it would embolden the minority side to vote as their vote would no longer by an exercise in futility.

    Would that tip a popular vote towards Trump? I couldn't tell you. It's sort of uncharted seas for the U.S.

  10. #90
    I am Murloc!
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Baden-Wuerttemberg
    Posts
    5,367
    Quote Originally Posted by Notchris View Post
    That explains how the internet suddenly fixes things how again?

    The guy made the claim that the internet makes the EC moot.
    Oh, EC is moot then. Internet vote ( or any other means of one individual = one valid vote) also counts minority. And minority of Cali could make a difference as soon the other states vote as the Cali minority did.
    As of now the reps of Cali could have easily stayed at home; their votes were for the thrash bin. But same situation for dems in Texas. Let their votes count is a good idea to get them off their asses and to polling station.

    You just have to forget the "but muh state should matter" nonsense in a presidential ballot.

  11. #91
    The Undying Kalis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Στην Κυπρο
    Posts
    32,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowraven View Post
    But... we do.
    http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-trump...ct-way-2451745
    Hillary had 2,235,663 more votes than Trump.
    In a popular vote, Hillary would have won.
    Except it wasn't run on a popular vote, so that doesn't tell you what the count would have been under a popular vote.

    Do you come from a country that uses FPTP voting? If you do, then you have no excuse, but if not then I can explain to you why you are mistaken.

  12. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Creamy Flames View Post
    Seeing as how the popular vote doesn't count for anything and electoral votes is what wins someone the presidency, what's the point of anyone voting? What's the point of trying to recount votes when it doesn't matter how many votes someone got?

    Why do you even need to go vote at all when it's already decided by others you have no control over? Am I missing something?
    Voting in the United States probably matters more than it matters anywhere in the world, when you factor in the full scope of what you get to vote about.

    The limited understanding of those who mistakenly think this country is supposed to have a singular nation-wide popular vote for the President is their problem, not a flaw in our system.

  13. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowraven View Post
    As far as I know, the electoral colleges and the electors were implemented to prevent the election of a populist character that might not be good for the country. Like Trump. So, it is a failed system.
    This may or may not be true can't say a system that hasn't even taken place yet failed, the electors have yet to place a vote, that said I expect it to not change a thing.

  14. #94
    The Electoral College wasn't prevented as a ward against this kind of President or that kind of President -- it was invented so that Congress would still be the template for the body that elected the President, without letting the actual Congress do it. That's it. Nothing more complicated than that. The Framers would have preferred a joint session of Congress elect the President but realized that would obviously be a major checks and balances issue, so they set up a proxy Congress that gets put together every four years for that single purpose.

  15. #95
    Deleted
    Before you people freak out how "undemocratic" EC is, see how "democratic" votes are distributed on the other side of the ocean: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apport...ean_Parliament

  16. #96
    The Patient
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jacksonville FL
    Posts
    212
    Quote Originally Posted by ranzino View Post
    If the President is voted in by the people, states mean nothing...or should mean nothing.
    If the recount would find more votes for Hillary to tip the EC, the lesser states are also screwed, their precious sovereignty in this case is for shit and giggles too.
    Thats the reason why brexit happened. The EU showed that they are caring less and less about sovereignty and they voted to leave. EC represents the people of the state. Youve fallin for a narrative that you don't matter and that is unfortunate. Your vote (if you voted) is represented in the rules your state made to guide your electors. Get involved in your state and make changes there. Or have a campaign to spread your beliefs. Doing so doesn't mean you'll win a majority over and it also doesn't mean they have to agree with you.

  17. #97
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalis View Post
    Except it wasn't run on a popular vote, so that doesn't tell you what the count would have been under a popular vote.

    Do you come from a country that uses FPTP voting? If you do, then you have no excuse, but if not then I can explain to you why you are mistaken.
    Are we talking about presidency? Actually we do a 2-round voting. So, if someone doesn't get 50%+1 of the votes from first voting round(in which case he or she is elected president directly), a second round with the 2 most voted people takes place.

    Also, we do the voting based on population. That means that one city, the capital, Bucharest, has 1/10 of the entire voting power of the country in the presidential elections. And everyone is ok with that.

  18. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by ranzino View Post
    Oh, EC is moot then. Internet vote ( or any other means of one individual = one valid vote) also counts minority. And minority of Cali could make a difference as soon the other states vote as the Cali minority did.
    As of now the reps of Cali could have easily stayed at home; their votes were for the thrash bin. But same situation for dems in Texas. Let their votes count is a good idea to get them off their asses and to polling station.

    You just have to forget the "but muh state should matter" nonsense in a presidential ballot.
    Alright. All your doing is arguing a popular vote. That's it. Welcome to the party, it's been going on for seemingly decades, but it's still lively and there's plenty of punch.

    You've not remotely explained why the INTERNET suddenly levels the field for smaller states in a popular election. Thus making the EC moot.

    You're not the original poster I quoted, so I'm not surprised you can't answer where his logic lies, because I'm pretty sure it's somewhere out in orbit. Not sure why you even bothered to reply to be quite honest.

  19. #99
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Notchris View Post
    We know who won the popular vote in an EC election, not in a popular vote election.

    It's very likely in a popular vote election, you'd have more people willing to vote, in particular in states that in the EC voting are generally locked to one party where it would embolden the minority side to vote as their vote would no longer by an exercise in futility.

    Would that tip a popular vote towards Trump? I couldn't tell you. It's sort of uncharted seas for the U.S.
    Ah, I understand the point now, my bad.

  20. #100
    Understand, those who are so convinced that the states don't matter, that the states don't even have to let citizens participate directly in choosing the state's electors. Any state that wished could change its law before 2020 and just have the state legislature, for instance, choose the electors, or give the Governor the power to appoint them, for example.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •