Hillary Validates Electoral College Approach

[Spare_change]

I was just reviewing the stats for the recent election. I noticed this:

1) Hillary Clinton had 2.7 million more popular votes than Donald Trump

2) Hillary's margin of victory in California was over 4 million votes.

3) Ergo, excluding California, Donald Trump won 1.3 million more popular votes.

This is exactly why the Electoral College is required. California would have determined the president, and overridden the rest of the country (who overwhelmingly supported Trump).

Mobilize California and the rest of the country become irrelevant.

 

[waltky]

Granny says shove a stick up dey's butts...

... an' call `em Popsicles..

 

[imawhosure]

I was just reviewing the stats for the recent election. I noticed this:

1) Hillary Clinton had 2.7 million more popular votes than Donald Trump

2) Hillary's margin of victory in California was over 4 million votes.

3) Ergo, excluding California, Donald Trump won 1.3 million more popular votes.

This is exactly why the Electoral College is required. California would have determined the president, and overridden the rest of the country (who overwhelmingly supported Trump).

Mobilize California and the rest of the country become irrelevant.

Want to know the compromise that Trump should push to shut them up!

No STATE can have more than 25 electoral college votes. If it does, then it must be divided into smaller amounts, basically cut in 1/2 or 1/3. There, that solves the problem, and retains the electoral college, and gives larger swaths of the population to have more of a say in the election. Perfect, yes!

Well no--------->The Democrats know they can NEVER win without California giving all their votes to them. Take away even a 1/3rd of those votes, and the left is DOA every election. And then you have New York with 29. Imagine for a second, that New York is only heavily liberal in New York City and the rural areas vote GOP. Guess what, the left is DONE FOR THE NEXT 35 years, and then some. New York city gives the Dems 18, rest of the state gives the GOP 11. California gives the Dems 35, and the rest goes to the GOP.

So then what would you have? What you would have is no super states being able to carry the vote, period. Problem for the Dems is---------> all the GOP states but Texas have less electoral votes than needed to break the threshold of splitting, unless you consider Florida a GOP state.

You want to see a sea of red, lolol. Do it that way, and watch the liberals scream, but it is the logical choice if you do not want direct Presidential elections.

 

[ptbw forever]

I was just reviewing the stats for the recent election. I noticed this:

1) Hillary Clinton had 2.7 million more popular votes than Donald Trump

2) Hillary's margin of victory in California was over 4 million votes.

3) Ergo, excluding California, Donald Trump won 1.3 million more popular votes.

This is exactly why the Electoral College is required. California would have determined the president, and overridden the rest of the country (who overwhelmingly supported Trump).

Mobilize California and the rest of the country become irrelevant.

Want to know the compromise that Trump should push to shut them up!

No STATE can have more than 25 electoral college votes. If it does, then it must be divided into smaller amounts, basically cut in 1/2 or 1/3. There, that solves the problem, and retains the electoral college, and gives larger swaths of the population to have more of a say in the election. Perfect, yes!

Well no--------->The Democrats know they can NEVER win without California giving all their votes to them. Take away even a 1/3rd of those votes, and the left is DOA every election. And then you have New York with 29. Imagine for a second, that New York is only heavily liberal in New York City and the rural areas vote GOP. Guess what, the left is DONE FOR THE NEXT 35 years, and then some. New York city gives the Dems 18, rest of the state gives the GOP 11. California gives the Dems 35, and the rest goes to the GOP.

So then what would you have? What you would have is no super states being able to carry the vote, period. Problem for the Dems is---------> all the GOP states but Texas have less electoral votes than needed to break the threshold of splitting, unless you consider Florida a GOP state.

You want to see a sea of red, lolol. Do it that way, and watch the liberals scream, but it is the logical choice if you do not want direct Presidential elections.

It is actually far closer to a democracy that way.

Every community would be represented in every election.