Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 157

Thread: Michael Moore Talks Why Trump Won, Abolishing Electoral College, What Democrats Must Do

  1. #1

    Default Michael Moore Talks Why Trump Won, Abolishing Electoral College, What Democrats Must Do

    The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Fat f*ck.


    Edit: Okay, so I actually watched. He and that other cow said (first two minutes) that the "archaic" electoral college must be done away with. It is actually much easier for them to make a convincing case for their own populism than making an electoral college case. I wonder how many people could actually articulate the electoral college purpose and why the founders supported it. If people are not educated on the electoral college, then it could be upended just as easily as the 17th amendment (US senate popular vote) was implemented.
    Last edited by NorthCarolinaLiberty; 08-11-2017 at 12:47 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    ...I believe that when the government is capable of doing a thing, it will.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    I do think that ID should be required for certain things like carrying a concealed weapon...




    Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members

  4. #3

    Default

    The country would be so much better had Hillary won. Her integrity would have put the world at peace. Her steadfast positions would elevate mankind to a level never dreamed of. If only Hillary had won.

  5. #4

    Default

    ....and yet Barack Obama won the electoral college. Twice. Now it's archaic.

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schifference View Post
    The country would be so much better had Hillary won. Her integrity would have put the world at peace. Her steadfast positions would elevate mankind to a level never dreamed of. If only Hillary had won.
    The only real difference I could see is that the left media would be singing her praises while the alt media would be up in arms. Other than that, not much else would change. Maybe worse SC judges. But Obamacare would still be the law. We'd still be intervening all over the globe. Spending would still be increasing at alarming rates. The police state would still be growing. The refreshing thing, though, is that if Hillary won, we wouldn't have RPF people trying to defend this crap.

    As far a Michael Moore goes, I read a book of his back in the 90's in which he talked about how much he LOOOVED Hillary. She was his ideal woman. Would you expect anything different from a left cheerleader?
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  7. #6

    Default

    If Hillary were in office right now, a known criminal who is "careless" and has memory deficit would be praised by most all. If she gets convicted of crimes, the left will still support her.

    When considering HRC, Obama was a great president.

    The country had opportunities to elect a true patriot, Ron Paul.

    I cannot stand the hypocrisy. If she does it oh it doesn't matter. If they do it they belong in jail.

    I am glad the media is being exposed for their extreme bias. It is crazy how you can watch a person give a speech and come away feeling pretty confident that when they pointed to the grass and said look at how green that grass is, you knew they were talking about the grass. Once the commentators get on they begin to explain the meaning of the green grass or they edit the piece up to mean something totally different. It is amazing how something simple can be misconstrued.

  8. #7

    Default Obama ALSO won the national popular vote twice

    Quote Originally Posted by goldenequity View Post
    ....and yet Barack Obama won the electoral college. Twice. Now it's archaic.
    Obama ALSO won the national popular vote twice.

    In Gallup polls since they started asking in 1944 until this election, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states) (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

    Support for a national popular vote for President has been strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in every state surveyed. In the 41 red, blue, and purple states surveyed, overall support has been in the 67-81% range - in rural states, in small states, in Southern and border states, in big states, and in other states polled.

    Most Americans don't ultimately care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state or district. Voters want to know, that no matter where they live, even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it is wrong that the candidate with the most popular votes can lose. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.

  9. #8

    Default

    The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country. It does not abolish the Electoral College.

    The bill would replace state winner-take-all laws that award all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who get the most popular votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), in the enacting states, to a system guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes for, and the Presidency to, the candidate getting the most popular votes in the entire United States.

    The bill retains the constitutionally mandated Electoral College and state control of elections, and uses the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes. It ensures that every voter is equal, every voter will matter, in every state, in every presidential election, and the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

    Under National Popular Vote, every voter, everywhere, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would matter equally in the state counts and national count.

    The bill would take effect when enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—270 of 538.
    All of the presidential electors from the enacting states will be supporters of the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes among all 50 states (and DC)—thereby guaranteeing that candidate with an Electoral College majority.

    The National Popular Vote bill in 2017 passed the New Mexico Senate and Oregon House.
    It was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).
    Since 2006, the bill has passed 35 state legislative chambers in 23 rural, small, medium, large, Democratic, Republican and purple states with 261 electoral votes, including one house in Arizona (11), Arkansas (6), Maine (4), Michigan (16), Nevada (6), New Mexico (5), North Carolina (15), and Oklahoma (7), and both houses in Colorado (9) and New Mexico (5).
    The bill has been enacted by 11 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 165 electoral votes – 61% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes.

    NationalPopularVote

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvymvy View Post
    Obama ALSO won the national popular vote twice.

    In Gallup polls since they started asking in 1944 until this election, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states) (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

    Support for a national popular vote for President has been strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in every state surveyed. In the 41 red, blue, and purple states surveyed, overall support has been in the 67-81% range - in rural states, in small states, in Southern and border states, in big states, and in other states polled.

    Most Americans don't ultimately care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state or district. Voters want to know, that no matter where they live, even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it is wrong that the candidate with the most popular votes can lose. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.
    Ya, this is why Democracy is such a horrible system of government. Glad that is not what our country's form of government is.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    The only real difference I could see is that the left media would be singing her praises while the alt media would be up in arms.
    The alt-media would be in prison and banned from the interwebs.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  12. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvymvy View Post
    Obama ALSO won the national popular vote twice.

    In Gallup polls since they started asking in 1944 until this election, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state's electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states) (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided).

    Support for a national popular vote for President has been strong among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group in every state surveyed. In the 41 red, blue, and purple states surveyed, overall support has been in the 67-81% range - in rural states, in small states, in Southern and border states, in big states, and in other states polled.

    Most Americans don't ultimately care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state or district. Voters want to know, that no matter where they live, even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it is wrong that the candidate with the most popular votes can lose. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.
    The American Federation should not be dominated by one or two regions, if you don't like the Electoral College or the Senate secede.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvymvy View Post
    The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country. It does not abolish the Electoral College.

    The bill would replace state winner-take-all laws that award all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who get the most popular votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), in the enacting states, to a system guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes for, and the Presidency to, the candidate getting the most popular votes in the entire United States.

    The bill retains the constitutionally mandated Electoral College and state control of elections, and uses the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes. It ensures that every voter is equal, every voter will matter, in every state, in every presidential election, and the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

    Under National Popular Vote, every voter, everywhere, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would matter equally in the state counts and national count.

    The bill would take effect when enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—270 of 538.
    All of the presidential electors from the enacting states will be supporters of the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes among all 50 states (and DC)—thereby guaranteeing that candidate with an Electoral College majority.

    The National Popular Vote bill in 2017 passed the New Mexico Senate and Oregon House.
    It was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).
    Since 2006, the bill has passed 35 state legislative chambers in 23 rural, small, medium, large, Democratic, Republican and purple states with 261 electoral votes, including one house in Arizona (11), Arkansas (6), Maine (4), Michigan (16), Nevada (6), New Mexico (5), North Carolina (15), and Oklahoma (7), and both houses in Colorado (9) and New Mexico (5).
    The bill has been enacted by 11 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 165 electoral votes – 61% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes.

    NationalPopularVote
    A terrible Idea.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    A terrible Idea.
    How would the 2016 election look like if this rule was in place?
    The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    How would the 2016 election look like if this rule was in place?
    Thanks to the millions of votes from Illegals and other Dem vote fraud operations Hitlery would have been given 270.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    How would the 2016 election look like if this rule was in place?
    Retarded

    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Thanks to the millions of votes from Illegals and other Dem vote fraud operations Hitlery would have been given 270.
    I think it would have been decided by the sum of the rounding errors in each state. Say a state with 7 EV is split 50/50 - how do you allocate?
    The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    I think it would have been decided by the sum of the rounding errors in each state. Say a state with 7 EV is split 50/50 - how do you allocate?
    According to the stupid idea each state in the cartel would give all it's EC votes to the candidate with the most votes NATION WIDE.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    According to the stupid idea each state in the cartel would give all it's EC votes to the candidate with the most votes NATION WIDE.
    WTF is this crap?!
    The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.

  20. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    According to the stupid idea each state in the cartel would give all it's EC votes to the candidate with the most votes NATION WIDE.
    Saul Anuzis lobbied hard to get that passed here in Michigan.
    * Enforce Border Security – America should be guarding her own borders and enforcing her own laws instead of policing the world and implementing UN mandates.

    * No Amnesty - The Obama Administration’s endorsement of so-called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, will only encourage more law-breaking.

    * Abolish the Welfare State – Taxpayers cannot continue to pay the high costs to sustain this powerful incentive for illegal immigration. As Milton Friedman famously said, you can’t have open borders and a welfare state.

    * End Birthright Citizenship – As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be granted U.S. citizenship, we’ll never be able to control our immigration problem.




    Reprinted from http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/immigration/ [Nov. 29, 2011]

  21. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    Saul Anuzis lobbied hard to get that passed here in Michigan.
    It needs to be undone in the states that have passed it.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  22. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It needs to be undone in the states that have passed it.
    Yup, a cluster$#@! in the making. It would change the country. This looks like a power grab by the states signing up for this.
    The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.

  23. #22

    Default


    From the website.
    Green states have enacted this.

    CALExit will help.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvymvy View Post

    Most Americans don't ultimately care whether their presidential candidate wins or loses in their state or district. Voters want to know, that no matter where they live, even if they were on the losing side, their vote actually was equally counted and mattered to their candidate. Most Americans think it is wrong that the candidate with the most popular votes can lose. We don't allow this in any other election in our representative republic.
    Most Americans are morons and belong in a zoo.

    This country needs much less democracy. The Framers very smartly didn't want one geographic region dominating. I don't want people from California, New York, and other failed states determining an outsized say on my life. If I could, I would give them a smaller voice because what the majority people in those states advocate is not only unconstitutional but outright immoral.

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvymvy View Post
    The National Popular Vote...

    NationalPopularVote

    I see that every one of your posts since 2008 is promoting this idea.

    Most everything you said would result in the opposite of what you said. If you eliminated the electoral college, then the following would result:


    1. It would be one more area where states don't count. If you tally every issue nationally, then why even have states?

    2. Politicians would only have to campaign in select, populous areas, such as the northeast corridor (Boston, NY, Philly, DC,), LA (southern Cal), Chicago, and a few others. They could ignore less populous states: Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Idaho, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Utah, Kansas, New Mexico, Alaska, Iowa, Mississippi, West Virginia, Nevada, and others.

    3. The above point ensures what the founding fathers attempted to avoid: a regionally divided nation where urban elites rule rural and even suburban people.

    4. Your claim about every vote counting is not demonstrated. All the votes in the less populous states (point 2 above) would be practically worthless.
    Last edited by NorthCarolinaLiberty; 08-11-2017 at 04:42 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    ...I believe that when the government is capable of doing a thing, it will.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    I do think that ID should be required for certain things like carrying a concealed weapon...




    Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members

  26. #25

    Default

    "The View is averaging 2.7 million viewers with 550,000 of them in the female 25-54 demographic."
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...lection-872080

    So close to 3 million people saw this promotion of the national popular vote on a progressive TV show.



    Does anybody know of any efforts to promote the electoral college? Anybody ever go on other websites (e.g., DU) and promote the pluses of the electoral college system? Any other education or similar efforts?

    We sit here and play defense when Democrats, progressives, etc. come on this forum and push an idea. We should actually be playing offense. Instead of defending against a national popular vote, we should be promoting the electoral college elsewhere.
    Last edited by NorthCarolinaLiberty; 08-11-2017 at 04:57 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    ...I believe that when the government is capable of doing a thing, it will.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    I do think that ID should be required for certain things like carrying a concealed weapon...




    Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members

  27. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NorthCarolinaLiberty View Post
    I see that every one of your posts since 2008 is promoting this idea.

    Most everything you said would result in the opposite of what you said. If you eliminated the electoral college, then the following would result:


    1. It would be one more area where states don't count. If you tally every issue nationally, then why even have states?

    2. Politicians would only have to campaign in select, populous areas, such as the northeast corridor (Boston, NY, Philly, DC,), LA (southern Cal), Chicago, and a few others. They could ignore less populous states: Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Idaho, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Utah, Kansas, New Mexico, Alaska, Iowa, Mississippi, West Virginia, Nevada, and others.

    3. The above point ensures what the founding fathers attempted to avoid: a regionally divided nation where urban elites rule rural and even suburban people.

    4. Your claim about every vote counting is not demonstrated. All the votes in the less populous states (point 2 above) would be practically worthless.
    You must not have read any of my posts well.

    All the votes in the less populous states would be equal to votes anywhere else in the country.
    The candidate with the most popular votes would win, as in virtually every other election in the country.

    The National Popular Vote bill does not eliminate the Electoral College.

    The National Popular Vote bill retains the Electoral College and state control of elections. It again changes the way electoral votes are awarded in the Electoral College.

    Because of state-by-state winner-take-all laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution. . .

    Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker in 2015 was correct when he said
    "The nation as a whole is not going to elect the next president,"
    “The presidential election will not be decided by all states, but rather just 12 of them.

    Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind.

    With the end of the primaries, without the National Popular Vote bill in effect, the political relevance of 70% of all Americans was finished for the presidential election.

    In the 2016 general election campaign

    Over half (57%) of the campaign events were held in just 4 states (Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Ohio).

    Virtually all (94%) of the campaign events were in just 12 states (containing only 30% of the country's population).

    The 12 smallest states are totally ignored in presidential general elections. These states are not ignored because they are small, but because they are not closely divided “battleground” states.

    Fourteen of the 15 smallest states by population are ignored like the big ones because they’re not swing states. Small states are safe states. Only New Hampshire gets significant attention.

    In 2012, 24 of the nation's 27 smallest states received no attention at all from presidential campaigns after the conventions. They were ignored despite their supposed numerical advantage in the Electoral College. In fact, the 8.6 million eligible voters in Ohio received more campaign ads and campaign visits from the major party campaigns than the 42 million eligible voters in those 27 smallest states combined.

    Support for a national popular vote has been strong in rural states

    Support for a national popular vote has been strong in every smallest state surveyed in polls among Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters, as well as every demographic group

    Among the 13 lowest population states, the National Popular Vote bill has passed in 9 state legislative chambers, and been enacted by 4 jurisdictions.

    None of the 10 most rural states (VT, ME, WV, MS, SD, AR, MT, ND, AL, and KY) is a battleground state.
    The current state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes does not enhance the influence of rural states, because the most rural states are not battleground states, and they are ignored. Their states’ votes were conceded months before by the minority parties in the states, taken for granted by the dominant party in the states, and ignored by all parties in presidential campaigns. When and where voters are ignored, then so are the issues they care about most.

    In the 25 smallest states in 2008, the Democratic and Republican popular vote was almost tied (9.9 million versus 9.8 million), as was the electoral vote (57 versus 58).

    Similarly, the 25 smallest states have been almost equally noncompetitive. They voted Republican or Democratic 12-13 in 2008 and 2012.

    Under National Popular Vote, every voter, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would matter equally in the state counts and national count.

    When states with a combined total of at least 270 electoral votes enact the bill, the candidate with the most popular votes among all 50 states and DC would get the needed majority of 270+ Electoral College votes from the enacting states. The bill would thus guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes and the majority of Electoral College votes.

    States have the responsibility and constitutional power to make all of their voters relevant in every presidential election and beyond. Now 38 states and their voters are politically irrelevant in presidential elections.

    Unable to agree on any particular method, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method for selecting presidential electors exclusively to the states by adopting the language contained in section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution-- "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . ." The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as "plenary" and "exclusive."

    Federalism concerns the allocation of power between state governments and the national government. The National Popular Vote bill concerns how votes are tallied, not how much power state governments possess relative to the national government. The powers of state governments are neither increased nor decreased based on whether presidential electors are selected along the state boundary lines, or national lines (as with the National Popular Vote).

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Most Americans are morons and belong in a zoo.

    This country needs much less democracy. The Framers very smartly didn't want one geographic region dominating. I don't want people from California, New York, and other failed states determining an outsized say on my life. If I could, I would give them a smaller voice because what the majority people in those states advocate is not only unconstitutional but outright immoral.
    Morons?

    Newt Gingrich summarized his support for the National Popular Vote bill by saying: “No one should become president of the United States without speaking to the needs and hopes of Americans in all 50 states. … America would be better served with a presidential election process that treated citizens across the country equally. The National Popular Vote bill accomplishes this in a manner consistent with the Constitution and with our fundamental democratic principles.”

    Trump, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”
    “ I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”

    In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.
    "The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy."

    Recent and past presidential candidates who supported direct election of the President in the form of a constitutional amendment, before the National Popular Vote bill was introduced: George H.W. Bush (R-TX-1969), Bob Dole (R-KS-1969), Gerald Ford (R-MI-1969), and Richard Nixon (R-CA-1969).

    Recent and past presidential candidates with a public record of support, before November 2016, for the National Popular Vote bill that would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate with the most national popular votes: U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA), Congressmen Bob Barr (Libertarian- GA), Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and Senator Fred Thompson (R–TN).

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvymvy View Post
    The National Popular Vote bill does not eliminate the Electoral College.
    LOL
    The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.

  30. #29

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    . . . I don't want people from California, New York, and other failed states determining an outsized say on my life . . .
    The 11 largest states, with a majority of the U.S. population and electoral votes, rarely agree on any political question. In terms of recent presidential elections, the 11 largest states have included 7 states have voted Republican(Texas, Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Georgia) and 4 states have voted Democratic (California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey). The fact is that the big states are just about as closely divided as the rest of the country. For example, among the four largest states, the two largest Republican states (Texas and Florida) generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Bush, while the two largest Democratic states generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Kerry.

    With National Popular Vote, it's not the size of any given state, it's the size of their "margin" that will matter.

    In 2004, among the 11 most populous states, in the seven non-battleground states, % of winning party, and margin of “wasted” popular votes, from among the total 122 Million votes cast nationally:
    * Texas (62% Republican), 1,691,267
    * New York (59% Democratic), 1,192,436
    * Georgia (58% Republican), 544,634
    * North Carolina (56% Republican), 426,778
    * California (55% Democratic), 1,023,560
    * Illinois (55% Democratic), 513,342
    * New Jersey (53% Democratic), 211,826

    To put these numbers in perspective,
    Oklahoma (7 electoral votes) generated a margin of 455,000 "wasted" votes for Bush in 2004 -- larger than the margin generated by the 9th and 10th largest states, namely New Jersey and North Carolina (each with 15 electoral votes).
    Utah (5 electoral votes) generated a margin of 385,000 "wasted" votes for Bush in 2004.
    8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast





Similar Threads

  1. Electoral College Elects Donald Trump As President
    By DamianTV in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-19-2016, 07:09 PM
  2. Michael Moore Explains Why TRUMP Will Win
    By ProBlue33 in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 10-28-2016, 01:28 PM
  3. Michael Moore: Sadly, Trump Will Win
    By AuH20 in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-21-2016, 04:01 PM
  4. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-22-2009, 11:11 PM
  5. Electoral College: Democrats 200 Republicans 189 Leaners 111 Toss-Up 38
    By Bradley in DC in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-20-2008, 11:25 AM

Posting Permissions

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