Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 128

Thread: Given that Trump lost the popular vote is it still time to do away with the Electoral College?

  1. #61
    Remember when Obama said "Of course I inhaled. That's the point!"

    Well, when the EC vote breaks differently than the popular vote, "That's the point!"

    That's why the EC exists. To prevent hyper-populated urban areas from hijacking the whole country.

    What you are seeing is not a bug, it is a feature.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #62
    I'm sure when he tweeted that he wasn't aware of the reasons that the EC exists. Few people are educated on the EC.

  4. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by misterx View Post
    I'm sure when he tweeted that he wasn't aware of the reasons that the EC exists. Few people are educated on the EC.
    I'd say there's a pretty good chance he still doesn't know.

  5. #64
    I've posted it a couple times now, but something curious to note is that even with the changing demographics, Hillary Clinton got 10 million - repeat 10 MILLION - fewer votes than Obama did in 2008! Trump got even fewer than that.

    Oh - and like Gunny said, this is why we have the electoral college - it's a feature, not a bug.
    Last edited by CaptUSA; 11-09-2016 at 08:00 PM.
    "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



  6. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  7. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by rpfocus View Post

    Should the Electoral College be removed, or should it only exist when your chosen candidate wins?
    we live in a constitutional republic. The president is elected by the state's not the people. If you don't understand the importance of the electoral college and who the president represents, you'll need to educate yourself better - it is possible to improve or replace but popular vote isn't the option.

    We don't live in a democracy (thank goodness!!), which would be the only case for a popular vote.

  8. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    VP used to go to the second place finisher. That was changed in 1804. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smiths...957199/?no-ist
    Did you read the 12th Amendment? It says we need to vote for a VP on his/her own, not a ticket. We can't even follow this amendment correctly.

  9. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott_in_PA View Post
    This thread is just WRONG.

    We are a collection of States that formed a Union.

    We are not a democracy.


    Exactly!!!

  10. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Makes Interesting Points View Post
    The more times that a candidate wins the popular vote but loses the election, the more likely we are to get rid of the electoral college.

    Everybody's vote should have an impact on the election. A conservative in California shouldn't have to live their whole life without their vote ever mattering.

    These candidates ran a race to target electoral votes. These exact same people running again for the popular vote would have targeted different groups so it's unfair to go back and ask 'what if'.

    If person A scores 80 in golf and person B scores 90 in golf, person A wins. It's not fair to then say, if they were playing basketball Person B would have won.

    Popular vote vs Electoral College are campaigned for very differently so it's unfair to look back and change a rule and pretend the outcome score would offer an opposite result.

  11. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by TommyJeff View Post
    These candidates ran a race to target electoral votes. These exact same people running again for the popular vote would have targeted different groups so it's unfair to go back and ask 'what if'.

    If person A scores 80 in golf and person B scores 90 in golf, person A wins. It's not fair to then say, if they were playing basketball Person B would have won.

    Popular vote vs Electoral College are campaigned for very differently so it's unfair to look back and change a rule and pretend the outcome score would offer an opposite result.
    And how many Republicans just stayed home in CA because CA was already decided? I bet it's enough to put Trump over the top in the popular vote.

  12. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    Would you get around to answering the question?
    Why are you wasting time debating a troll?
    I am the spoon.

  13. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by GunnyFreedom View Post
    Yes. 1000x all day every day YES. The electoral college is the only reason America is not already a smoking crater.
    Yep. Just look at the map by counties. The electoral college saved 90% of the country from losing to 10% of it.
    I am the spoon.

  14. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by misterx View Post
    And how many Republicans just stayed home in CA because CA was already decided? I bet it's enough to put Trump over the top in the popular vote.
    Agreed.
    I am the spoon.



  15. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  16. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by misterx View Post
    And how many Republicans just stayed home in CA because CA was already decided? I bet it's enough to put Trump over the top in the popular vote.

    Good point

  17. #74
    You can take muh Electoral College from my cold dead hands!

  18. #75
    Given the ever increasing march toward an imperial presidency, one might better argue whether we have one too many branches of government.
    There is only one success -- to be able to spend your life in your own way.
    -- Christopher Morley (1890 - 1957)

  19. #76
    The electoral college is not the problem, its the corrupt 2 party system and the primary process. To focus on the EC is to overlook the real issues.

    Having said that, there are some interesting ideas on how to augment the election process so as to combat influence by party leaders and the manipulation of the electorate by media propaganda/lies.

    Ranked choice voting:


    Gulag Chief:
    "Article 58-1a, twenty five years... What did you get it for?"
    Gulag Prisoner: "For nothing at all."
    Gulag Chief: "You're lying... The sentence for nothing at all is 10 years"



  20. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by brushfire View Post
    The electoral college is not the problem, its the corrupt 2 party system and the primary process.
    Exactly. Ron Paul was robbed via a crooked Primary as was Bernie Sanders. If it weren't for primarily wanting the GOP to break up and create a viable 3rd party, I wouldn't have a dog in the fight. Trump's win probably killed that dream, giving credibility to the theory that membership one of the two major parties is still required to win. While Donald Trump would have lost running as an Independent or LP, I believe critical mass was building, and that his loss would have caused a lot more Republicans to start thinking outside of the box during future elections. The GOP has no cause to change now, the MIC and Wall St running it can now continue the status quo. That wouldn't have been the case with half their votes going to a 3rd party Trump.

  21. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by seapilot View Post
    It is a disaster for democracy but great for a Constitutional Republic. It protects the minority.
    Exactly.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  22. #79
    I didn't read all the comments here so forgive me if this was already stated but Trump won his campaign with half the money of hilliary and no help from his Party or the media. If Trump had the support she had, he would've dusted her into smithereens and you know what, he did anyways

    Something else no one's probably mentioning but Kellyanne Conway is the first woman in the history of the GOP to run a presidential campaign ...and she won it.

  23. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by Dangergirl View Post
    I didn't read all the comments here so forgive me if this was already stated but Trump won his campaign with half the money of hilliary and no help from his Party or the media. If Trump had the support she had, he would've dusted her into smithereens and you know what, he did anyways

    Something else no one's probably mentioning but Kellyanne Conway is the first woman in the history of the GOP to run a presidential campaign ...and she won it.
    He had RNC help, they redirected Trump Victory funds from TV ads to field offices.
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul



  24. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  25. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by rpfocus View Post
    For only the 5th time in our election history, a candidate has won the presidency while losing the popular vote.

    Trump's statement when he thought Romney would lose the election but win the popular vote:


    N
    Should the Electoral College be removed, or should it only exist when your chosen candidate wins?
    No , just time to do away with California .
    Do something Danke

  26. #82
    Interesting note- some states had a ballot measure on Tuesday to bind the state's electoral votes to the national popular vote. None of them passed.

    Check this for legislation moving through the state houses:
    http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/3...ular-vote-bill
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul

  27. #83
    What do you guys think of this idea?

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/11/t...long-term.html

    We are told that demographic realities facing America mean the Right will soon find it impossible to compete with the left on the national stage. We are told it is decided. We are told it is inevitable.

    Today I want to explain how, with just a few easy changes, we can ensure that the Left loses every presidential election for the next 50 years.

    How could that be possible? Its easier than you think. For the answer… look to Maine.

    What if Florida appointed its electoral votes by district, the way Maine does rather than winner take all? What if Illinois and California did too? The Florida panhandle is as red as Alabama. Rather than having their voices silenced in a winner take all election, they would be heard. The same goes for the many red counties and districts in California. Why should their voices be silenced by the shouting from the cities?

    Let every voice truly count.

    Why should the red districts of central Pennsylvania be relegated to non-existence just because the state has two large blue cities?

    Push measures through that apply electoral votes by congressional district rather than for the entire state.. and you will change politics in America for ever. And states like Florida that are so equally split will be very easy to sell on this plan. Because every election half of their population is being silenced.
    This is, in a word, brilliant. The genius of the concept is that it can be pursued in a decentralized manner at the state level, it has the moral level of 4GW on its side as it more perfectly represents the democratic will of the people, and there is no effective rational or moral argument against it.
    Based on the idea of natural rights, government secures those rights to the individual by strictly negative intervention, making justice costless and easy of access; and beyond that it does not go. The State, on the other hand, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing.
    --Albert J. Nock

  28. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucille View Post
    What do you guys think of this idea?

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/11/t...long-term.html
    That would be up to each individual state.
    There is no spoon.

  29. #85
    Yes, thank you, @Ender. I suppose that bears repeating.
    Based on the idea of natural rights, government secures those rights to the individual by strictly negative intervention, making justice costless and easy of access; and beyond that it does not go. The State, on the other hand, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing.
    --Albert J. Nock

  30. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    If a majority choose one thing and are forced to accept a different thing, who is doing the imposing? We could have been saved the disasterous George W. Bush and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. (Don't know if Gore would have been that great either- another election with two bad options).
    The congress obviously was powerless and could not do anything to stop W's quest for WMDs.

  31. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    The congress obviously was powerless and could not do anything to stop W's quest for WMDs.
    Right..... like all the other unconstitutional wars since WWII.
    There is no spoon.

  32. #88
    Electoral college is great, but too bad there isn't a way to keep it and have a national campaign instead of just campaigns in battleground states.



  33. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  34. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucille View Post
    What do you guys think of this idea?

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/11/t...long-term.html
    Bump for more opinions.
    Based on the idea of natural rights, government secures those rights to the individual by strictly negative intervention, making justice costless and easy of access; and beyond that it does not go. The State, on the other hand, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing.
    --Albert J. Nock

  35. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by brushfire View Post
    The electoral college is not the problem, its the corrupt 2 party system and the primary process. To focus on the EC is to overlook the real issues.

    Having said that, there are some interesting ideas on how to augment the election process so as to combat influence by party leaders and the manipulation of the electorate by media propaganda/lies.

    Ranked choice voting:

    Ranked choice voting was just passed in Maine.

    It applies to elections for US congressmen, state senators/representatives, and governor (but not US president).

    Maine Ranked Choice Voting Initiative, Question 5 (2016)
    https://ballotpedia.org/Maine_Ranked...stion_5_(2016)

    [...]

    Ranked-choice voting (RCV) is also known as instant-runoff voting. Question 5 provided that ranked-choice voting be used to elect U.S. senators, U.S. representatives, the governor, state senators, and state representatives.

    Question 5 defined ranked-choice voting as "the method of casting and tabulating votes in which voters rank candidates in order of preference, tabulation proceeds in sequential rounds in which last-place candidates are defeated and the candidate with the most votes in the final round is elected."

    As of August 2016, there were no states that used ranked-choice voting for standard statewide elections. Currently all states use the method of voting that allows voters to choose one candidate, and the candidate with the most votes in a single round of voting is elected.

    [...]
    Last edited by Occam's Banana; 11-11-2016 at 03:41 PM.
    The Bastiat Collection ˇ FREE PDF ˇ FREE EPUB ˇ PAPER
    Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)

    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
      -- The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
      -- Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      -- Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      -- Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

    ˇ tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ˇ

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 11-19-2017, 05:15 PM
  2. Forget MSM Polls - Trump Leads Electoral College - UPI
    By openfire in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-06-2016, 02:22 PM
  3. Should we elect the President by popular vote or electoral college?
    By John F Kennedy III in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 11-12-2012, 05:58 PM
  4. Electoral v. popular vote - help me out here
    By susano in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-06-2012, 11:52 PM
  5. Electoral vs Popular Vote
    By Energy in forum Ron Paul: On the Issues
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-15-2007, 07:16 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
  •