Elizabeth Warren: 'End Electoral College'

[struth]

U Tell Us.

How am i suppose to know what the F you are talking about? If I knew I wouldn’t of asked

 

[protectionist]

Oh, you're another leftist hack who wants NY, LA, SF and a few other left-leaning coastal cities to decide all our national elections. Well guess what?

Of course, and what an insult to our intelligence, for them to act like there is a legitimate reason other than just their own personal power grabs.

Thank you to the founding fathers for setting it up right.

 

[protectionist]

Wrong. Study up on your USA history.

See post # 1972.

 

[Curried Goats]

Oh, you're another leftist hack who wants NY, LA, SF and a few other left-leaning coastal cities to decide all our national elections. Well guess what?

I don't want to ask this question of MAGAts because they aren't capable of rational thoughts but you do know States don't vote right? In fact it's the Electoral college that gives people in some States supremacy over others, which if you know your history was sort of the point. Eliminating the electoral college eliminates the importance of States and focuses the power on the people. Simply put the person who wins the most votes from the people, wins. That's as it should be. The check States have on Federal power is the Senate, where minority populated States receive just as much representation as the most populated.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

A little “history” reminder that even Donald Trump — who tried to manipulate the Electoral College system in 2020 to declare himself re-elected — like most Americans opposes the Electoral College.

The problem is not that the “Electoral College” gives a small advantage to rural states (much less than our Senate does) but that the “winner takes all” evolution of the system on the state level has poisoned our politics and made partisan manipulation of the nation’s will much easier to pull off.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/26/trump-electoral-college-popular-vote-555148

President Trump Reaffirms His Long-Standing Opposition to Electoral College, and Favors A Nationwide Vote for President

Support For Abolishing Electoral College Hits Nearly 10-Year High: Poll

 

[protectionist]

I don't want to ask this question of MAGAts because they aren't capable of rational thoughts but you do know States don't vote right? In fact it's the Electoral college that gives people in some States supremacy over others, which if you know your history was sort of the point. Eliminating the electoral college eliminates the importance of States and focuses the power on the people. Simply put the person who wins the most votes from the people, wins. That's as it should be. The check States have on Federal power is the Senate, where minority populated States receive just as much representation as the most populated.

NO, that is NOT how it should be. Unkotare said it precisely right. A few left-leaning coastal cities trying to control the whole country, and we don't let them do it.

Thank you founding fathers. Good work. Long live the electoral college.

 

[Flash]

If the Electoral College benefited the filthy ass Democrats they would be all for it.

 

[protectionist]

The problem is not that the “Electoral College” gives a small advantage to rural states (much less than our Senate does) but that the “winner takes all” evolution of the system on the state level has poisoned our politics and made partisan manipulation of the nation’s will much easier to pull off.

Partisan (ie Democrats) manipulation of the nation’s will would be much easier to pull off if the electoral college was abandoned. The EC is what is keeping that from happening. Without it, pretty much the whole country would be under the control of the crazies of California and New York. Gag!

Post # 1965 explained it succinctly.

 

[Curried Goats]

NO, that is NOT how it should be. Unkotare said it precisely right. A few left-leaning coastal cities trying to control the whole country, and we don't let them do it.

Thank you founding fathers. Good work. Long live the electoral college.

What you're doing is called projection. Eliminating the electoral college takes away the power to weight elections towards certain States and instead gives the power to the people. Those are facts.

 

[struth]

I don't want to ask this question of MAGAts because they aren't capable of rational thoughts but you do know States don't vote right? In fact it's the Electoral college that gives people in some States supremacy over others, which if you know your history was sort of the point. Eliminating the electoral college eliminates the importance of States and focuses the power on the people. Simply put the person who wins the most votes from the people, wins. That's as it should be. The check States have on Federal power is the Senate, where minority populated States receive just as much representation as the most populated.

You realize States are made up of people…right? Wow

 

[merrill]

Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Monday that she fully supports abolishing the Electoral College and moving toward a national vote, the first time the 2020 presidential candidate has publicly taken the stance.

“My view is that every vote matters,” the Massachusetts Democrat said to roaring applause at her CNN presidential town hall at Jackson State University in Mississippi. “And the way we can make that happen is that we can have national voting, and that means get rid of the Electoral College.”

More: Elizabeth Warren Calls For Getting Rid Of The Electoral College

Amen! I couldn't agree more! Elections should be about people - not acreage! BTW, the rest of the link is worth reading.

The electoral college does not every vote to count therefore it is a fraud.......

And we must get rid of all 61 methods of voter suppression ALEC and AFP have designed and forced on all state legislators. Voter Suppression is against the law.

 

[Curried Goats]

You realize States are made up of people…right? Wow

I do but the popular vote doesn't give more weight to the vote of people from one State over the people of another. The electoral college does that. Those of you crying about the weight of California's votes are doing nothing but projection. If you eliminate the electoral college then sure, a large chunk of Democratic votes will come from California. 11 million according to the last election. However a large chunk of Republican votes would also came from California. Over 6 million votes. That's more Republican votes than any other State. There is no benefit to California specifically. Where there is benefit is to the person who wins the most votes.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I do but the popular vote doesn't give more weight to the vote of people from one State over the people of another. The electoral college does that. Those of you crying about the weight of California's votes are doing nothing but projection. If you eliminate the electoral college then sure, a large chunk of Democratic votes will come from California. 11 million according to the last election. However a large chunk of Republican votes would also came from California. Over 6 million votes. That's more Republican votes than any other State. There is no benefit to California specifically. Where there is benefit is to the person who wins the most votes.

Of course a Popular Vote system would also count the millions of Republicans in, for example, New York State, who are now essentially disenfranchised under the Electoral College system.

***

As for the “Founding Fathers,” even Madison already before his death saw the Electoral College system was being abused by regional parties and their “winner take all” electoral voting … and advised his fellow Americans to find a substitute system that would allow for less manipulation — and that was long before female suffrage, abolition of slavery, “one man one vote,” etc.

Nobody concerned about the abuses, disenfranchisement, disfunction and extremism that have developed in our present two-party system can ignore the increasing problems of our ancient “Electoral College” system. Nor should we ignore the need for many other arguably even more important electoral reforms.

See: www.fairvote.org

 

[struth]

I do but the popular vote doesn't give more weight to the vote of people from one State over the people of another. The electoral college does that. Those of you crying about the weight of California's votes are doing nothing but projection. If you eliminate the electoral college then sure, a large chunk of Democratic votes will come from California. 11 million according to the last election. However a large chunk of Republican votes would also came from California. Over 6 million votes. That's more Republican votes than any other State. There is no benefit to California specifically. Where there is benefit is to the person who wins the most votes.

No it doesn’t. Every states electors are based on the same metrics, and largely their population.

A pure popular vote would however give a state an advantage over citizens of another state. It could allow California, for example to decide who’s president and give no weight to say the people of virginia.

The federal govt is called the federal govt because we have a system called federalism. We are a nation of sovereign states, each state giving up some of its sovereignty to create a federal govt

 

[Curried Goats]

No it doesn’t. Every states electors are based on the same metrics, and largely their population.

Which isn't the part I take issue with. It's the winner take all nature of those electoral college votes that gives power to the candidate winning a majority of votes from States, rather than from people.

A pure popular vote would however give a state an advantage over citizens of another state. It could allow California, for example to decide who’s president and give no weight to say the people of virginia.

How would California decide the election? 11 million Democratic votes came from California out of 51 million in total. That's 13.5% of the total vote count. Just saying shit doesn't mean the shit you're saying makes any fucking sense.

The federal govt is called the federal govt because we have a system called federalism. We are a nation of sovereign states, each state giving up some of its sovereignty to create a federal govt

Ok... what the fuck does that have to do with whether winning the votes of more States should be more important than winning the votes of more people? You're the one going State here. Not us. Saying something something California at the end doesn't just change that.

 

[struth]

Which isn't the part I take issue with. It's the winner take all nature of those electoral college votes that gives power to the candidate winning a majority of votes from States, rather than from people.

How would California decide the election? 11 million Democratic votes came from California out of 51 million in total. That's 13.5% of the total vote count. Just saying shit doesn't mean the shit you're saying makes any fucking sense.

Ok... what the fuck does that have to do with whether winning the votes of more States should be more important than winning the votes of more people? You're the one going State here. Not us. Saying something something California at the end doesn't just change that.

The people of each state decide the winner take all notion. They elect representatives that make that the law of their state or not.

Not sure where you live but if you don’t like that your state does that, elect someone to change it

 

[Curried Goats]

The people of each state decide the winner take all notion. They elect representatives that make that the law of their state or not.

Not sure where you live but if you don’t like that your state does that, elect someone to change it

That's not an answer, that's just of a defense of the system that prioritizes States over people. It's fine if you want to simply agree to disagree what should be more important, my main point is that its simply projection when you say eliminating the E.C. would give power to California. It doesn't. At all. That's just shit you say but can't really qualify.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Of course a Popular Vote system would also count the millions of Republicans in, for example, New York State, who are now essentially disenfranchised under the Electoral College system.

***

As for the “Founding Fathers,” even Madison already before his death saw the Electoral College system was being abused by regional parties and their “winner take all” electoral voting … and advised his fellow Americans to find a substitute system that would allow for less manipulation — and that was long before female suffrage, abolition of slavery, “one man one vote,” etc.

Nobody concerned about the abuses, disenfranchisement, disfunction and extremism that have developed in our present two-party system can ignore the increasing problems of our ancient “Electoral College” system. Nor should we ignore the need for many other arguably even more important electoral reforms.

See: www.fairvote.org

well retard all it takes to ger rid of it is an amendment. I notice none of you retards ever wanna follow the Constitution.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

That's not an answer, that's just of a defense of the system that prioritizes States over people. It's fine if you want to simply agree to disagree what should be more important, my main point is that its simply projection when you say eliminating the E.C. would give power to California. It doesn't. At all. That's just shit you say but can't really qualify.

get an amendment passed and ratified retard. Or is following the Constitution to much trouble for you. By the way, a state can make it proportional as 2 states do. You want that in your state then get a law passed for it. Ohh I forgot you don't want to follow the law you just want what you want.

 

[struth]

That's not an answer, that's just of a defense of the system that prioritizes States over people. It's fine if you want to simply agree to disagree what should be more important, my main point is that its simply projection when you say eliminating the E.C. would give power to California. It doesn't. At all. That's just shit you say but can't really qualify.

Of course it’s an answer. You don’t like it, csuse it’s a defense of democracy. You know you can’t get what you want done because the people won’t support it