Elizabeth Warren: 'End Electoral College'

[Wry Catcher]

at my tender age, in my short lifetime the popular vote has been nullified TWICE by the electoral college!

/——-/ No it hasn’t. The popular vote has never been a factor in electing the president.

You don't understand, sad.

I understand that the Democrats' solution to losing is to change the rules instead of thinking maybe there was something wrong with their message.

What rules did they change when they won the H. or Rep. majority last November?

 

[Cellblock2429]

at my tender age, in my short lifetime the popular vote has been nullified TWICE by the electoral college!

/——-/ No it hasn’t. The popular vote has never been a factor in electing the president.

You don't understand, sad.

I understand that the Democrats' solution to losing is to change the rules instead of thinking maybe there was something wrong with their message.

What rules did they change when they won the H. or Rep. majority last November?

/——/ He’s talking about the presidential election and changing the rules of the EC. Sorry you got confused—- again.

 

[Wry Catcher]

a guy like Trump wouldn't come within a cheating chance of winning the presidency had it not been for big economic anxieties and even bigger immigration anxieties!

that's what Dems should focus on!

How would you solve the economic and Immigration anxieties? Trade wars and fear mongering?

 

[Cellblock2429]

at my tender age, in my short lifetime the popular vote has been nullified TWICE by the electoral college!

/——-/ No it hasn’t. The popular vote has never been a factor in electing the president.

You don't understand, sad.

/——/ I understand you need to change the EC rules so you clowns can win,

 

[Wry Catcher]

at my tender age, in my short lifetime the popular vote has been nullified TWICE by the electoral college!

/——-/ No it hasn’t. The popular vote has never been a factor in electing the president.

You don't understand, sad.

I understand that the Democrats' solution to losing is to change the rules instead of thinking maybe there was something wrong with their message.

What rules did they change when they won the H. or Rep. majority last November?

/——/ He’s talking about the presidential election and changing the rules of the EC. Sorry you got confused—- again.

Don't be smug, you were wrong. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000; Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 - it did not factor into who won the election, all it showed is the people have more common sense.

 

[22lcidw]

/——-/ No it hasn’t. The popular vote has never been a factor in electing the president.

You don't understand, sad.

I understand that the Democrats' solution to losing is to change the rules instead of thinking maybe there was something wrong with their message.

What rules did they change when they won the H. or Rep. majority last November?

/——/ He’s talking about the presidential election and changing the rules of the EC. Sorry you got confused—- again.

Don't be smug, you were wrong. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000; Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 - it did not factor into who won the election, all it showed is the people have more common sense.

The people who live off the system in greater numbers you mean.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You don't understand, sad.

I understand that the Democrats' solution to losing is to change the rules instead of thinking maybe there was something wrong with their message.

What rules did they change when they won the H. or Rep. majority last November?

/——/ He’s talking about the presidential election and changing the rules of the EC. Sorry you got confused—- again.

Don't be smug, you were wrong. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000; Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 - it did not factor into who won the election, all it showed is the people have more common sense.

The people who live off the system in greater numbers you mean.

The people who live off the system are called brokers, stock, real estate, insurance, pawn, commodity, etc. etc.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

at my tender age, in my short lifetime the popular vote has been nullified TWICE by the electoral college!

/——-/ No it hasn’t. The popular vote has never been a factor in electing the president.

You don't understand, sad.

I understand that the Democrats' solution to losing is to change the rules instead of thinking maybe there was something wrong with their message.

What rules did they change when they won the H. or Rep. majority last November?

/——/ He’s talking about the presidential election and changing the rules of the EC. Sorry you got confused—- again.

He knew what I meant; he just had no valid response.

 

[Zorro!]

at my tender age, in my short lifetime the popular vote has been nullified TWICE by the electoral college!

The popular vote has NEVER been the Presidential electorate. You might as well compare the candidate's golf scores.

 

[Markle]

why do you hate democracy & freedom?

 

[Grumblenuts]

I hope you realize that story "is probably fictitious."

 

[Markle]

a guy like Trump wouldn't come within a cheating chance of winning the presidency had it not been for big economic anxieties and even bigger immigration anxieties!

that's what Dems should focus on!

Specifically how would you advise Democrats to run on how their economy would be superior to that of the Donald J. Trump?

 

[dblack]

a guy like Trump wouldn't come within a cheating chance of winning the presidency had it not been for big economic anxieties and even bigger immigration anxieties!

that's what Dems should focus on!

Specifically how would you advise Democrats to run on how their economy would be superior to that of the Donald J. Trump?

I wouldn't. Government shouldn't be manipulating the economy in the first place. I'm not about to vote for a party that brags about it.

 

[Cellblock2429]

a guy like Trump wouldn't come within a cheating chance of winning the presidency had it not been for big economic anxieties and even bigger immigration anxieties!

that's what Dems should focus on!

Specifically how would you advise Democrats to run on how their economy would be superior to that of the Donald J. Trump?

/——/ A challenging task since Obozo said Trumps accomplishments would require a magic wand.

 

[Cellblock2429]

a guy like Trump wouldn't come within a cheating chance of winning the presidency had it not been for big economic anxieties and even bigger immigration anxieties!

that's what Dems should focus on!

Specifically how would you advise Democrats to run on how their economy would be superior to that of the Donald J. Trump?

I wouldn't. Government shouldn't be manipulating the economy in the first place. I'm not about to vote for a party that brags about it.

/——/ Trump didn’t manipulate anything except remove regulations and cut taxes.

 

[Wry Catcher]

/——-/ No it hasn’t. The popular vote has never been a factor in electing the president.

You don't understand, sad.

I understand that the Democrats' solution to losing is to change the rules instead of thinking maybe there was something wrong with their message.

What rules did they change when they won the H. or Rep. majority last November?

/——/ He’s talking about the presidential election and changing the rules of the EC. Sorry you got confused—- again.

He knew what I meant; he just had no valid response.

LIAR ^^^

The comment

[ "I understand that the Democrats' solution to losing is to change the rules instead of thinking maybe there was something wrong with their message" ]

is a general statement, and if he meant the Democratic Party agenda was to amend the Constitution, he should have been clear. What is true, is some members of the Democratic Caucus in the H. or Rep. support its repeal.

Two points to consider: It will take an amendment to COTUS to do so; and, it has been proposed several times, with bipartisan support.

Past Attempts at Reform - FairVote

 

[Markle]

You don't understand, sad.

I understand that the Democrats' solution to losing is to change the rules instead of thinking maybe there was something wrong with their message.

What rules did they change when they won the H. or Rep. majority last November?

/——/ He’s talking about the presidential election and changing the rules of the EC. Sorry you got confused—- again.

He knew what I meant; he just had no valid response.

LIAR ^^^

The comment

[ "I understand that the Democrats' solution to losing is to change the rules instead of thinking maybe there was something wrong with their message" ]

is a general statement, and if he meant the Democratic Party agenda was to amend the Constitution, he should have been clear. What is true, is some members of the Democratic Caucus in the H. or Rep. support its repeal.

Two points to consider: It will take an amendment to COTUS to do so; and, it has been proposed several times, with bipartisan support.

Past Attempts at Reform - FairVote

Not a snowballs chance in heck. Look at the process.

 

[MAGAman]

at my tender age, in my short lifetime the popular vote has been nullified TWICE by the electoral college!

NO. It hasn't.

There has never been a "Popular Vote" Presidential Election to be nullified.

Only a moron would not understand that the campaigns on both sides would have been completely different if the election were to have been decided by a completely different criteria.

Only losers whine about the rules.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

at my tender age, in my short lifetime the popular vote has been nullified TWICE by the electoral college!

Good.

why do you hate democracy & freedom?

We are not a democracy simpleton. For the 5,000th time.
Get it in that thickly bias veiled head of yours.

 

[Cellblock2429]

at my tender age, in my short lifetime the popular vote has been nullified TWICE by the electoral college!

Good.

why do you hate democracy & freedom?

We are not a democracy simpleton. For the 5,000th time.
Get it in that thickly bias veiled head of yours.

/——/ I think I know why they’re so obtuse. Democracy sounds like democRATs, but if they say we’re a Republic, it sounds like Republicans. It looks like they are on the wrong side. (Which they are)