I know! Let's defy the will of the people!

[M14 Shooter]

" it is more accurate to say the electoral college is defying the will of the people." <<< this

No, they are HONORING the will of the people, in the states that chose them to do this task.

So, in a state where trump got only 40% of the primary vote...

The vote count in the primaries is irrelevant; the vote count on Nov 8 is what matters.
Feel free to try again.

 

[Auld Phart]

" it is more accurate to say the electoral college is defying the will of the people." <<< this

No, they are HONORING the will of the people, in the states that chose them to do this task.

So, in a state where trump got only 40% of the primary vote, and because of the arbitrary state rules, he gets 100% of the electoral votes, winner take all, we should look at that scenario as promoting the "will of the people". What about the will of the majority 60% who voted against trump in that state?

Which state was that?

 

[M14 Shooter]

" it is more accurate to say the electoral college is defying the will of the people." <<< this

No, they are HONORING the will of the people, in the states that chose them to do this task.

So, in a state where trump got only 40% of the primary vote, and because of the arbitrary state rules, he gets 100% of the electoral votes, winner take all, we should look at that scenario as promoting the "will of the people". What about the will of the majority 60% who voted against trump in that state?

Which state was that?

He know he doesn't have a leg to stand on, so he's trying to conflate primary elections to the general election.
He knows this line of argument is BS.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The EV does not reflect the 'will of the people.'

 

[OldLady]

Some people aren't worth spending a lot of attention on, like the dreamers who want the Electoral College to pull Hillary out of the bag.

Oh good - honesty. Rare from you. Well done.

You just don't listen to me enough.

 

[OldLady]

" it is more accurate to say the electoral college is defying the will of the people." <<< this

No, they are HONORING the will of the people, in the states that chose them to do this task.

So, in a state where trump got only 40% of the primary vote, and because of the arbitrary state rules, he gets 100% of the electoral votes, winner take all, we should look at that scenario as promoting the "will of the people". What about the will of the majority 60% who voted against trump in that state?

Look into the rules in your state and if you don't like them, work to change them. Now is not the time to bitch about it--that should have happened WAY before the election.

 

[Auld Phart]

The EV does not reflect the 'will of the people.'

it reflects the will of the people more than the popular vote.


Or would you prefer 10-15 states, because of their high population counts, decide the presidency every 4 years?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The EV does not reflect the 'will of the people.'

it reflects the will of the people more than the popular vote. Or would you prefer 10-15 states, because of their high population counts, decide the presidency every 4 years?

I would prefer a majority in the EV and the PV. If not, send the election to the House.

 

[Auld Phart]

The EV does not reflect the 'will of the people.'

it reflects the will of the people more than the popular vote. Or would you prefer 10-15 states, because of their high population counts, decide the presidency every 4 years?

I would prefer a majority in the EV and the PV. If not, send the election to the House.

If not, send the election to the House.

Which gives the decision to the party in charge

 

[JakeStarkey]

The EV does not reflect the 'will of the people.'

it reflects the will of the people more than the popular vote. Or would you prefer 10-15 states, because of their high population counts, decide the presidency every 4 years?

I would prefer a majority in the EV and the PV. If not, send the election to the House.

If not, send the election to the House.

Which gives the decision to the party in charge

That's fine. In this case, thirty states would vote for Trump, and then sometime next year, have Congress impeach him and replace him with Pence.

 

[Manonthestreet]

It is SOP for dem party.....obamacare....the border.....importing terrorists.......climate deals......Iran deal.....it is why they are disappearing

 

[Camp]

" it is more accurate to say the electoral college is defying the will of the people." <<< this

No, they are HONORING the will of the people, in the states that chose them to do this task.

So, in a state where trump got only 40% of the primary vote, and because of the arbitrary state rules, he gets 100% of the electoral votes, winner take all, we should look at that scenario as promoting the "will of the people". What about the will of the majority 60% who voted against trump in that state?

Look into the rules in your state and if you don't like them, work to change them. Now is not the time to bitch about it--that should have happened WAY before the election.

I am not bitching about it and I accept the system used as legitimate even if I feel it is unfair. What I am expressing is an example of our "era of babble", referencing our current era of misdefining words and terms or phrases to fit particular agendas, a result of the dumbing down of America. The biblical story about the Tower of Babble led to people being unable to communicate with each other. People is the plural of persons. It does not mean a parliamentary institution of an authoritarian group, entity, or organization

 

[Auld Phart]

The EV does not reflect the 'will of the people.'

it reflects the will of the people more than the popular vote. Or would you prefer 10-15 states, because of their high population counts, decide the presidency every 4 years?

I would prefer a majority in the EV and the PV. If not, send the election to the House.

If not, send the election to the House.

Which gives the decision to the party in charge

That's fine. In this case, thirty states would vote for Trump, and then sometime next year, have Congress impeach him and replace him with Pence.

impeach him?

for.....?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Which gives the decision to the party in charge

Until the constitution is amended, it doesn't matter.
The "national" election for President takes place December 19; this is the only vote count that matters.

 

[Camp]

It is SOP for dem party.....obamacare....the border.....importing terrorists.......climate deals......Iran deal.....it is why they are disappearing

Delusional thinking when you consider that side got more votes than the trump side.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Let's get him in office first, WillHafta, and then see what comes up. We can count on Da Boy of providing something right quick.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I am not bitching about it and I accept the system used as legitimate even if I feel it is unfair. What I am expressing is an example of our "era of babble", referencing our current era of misdefining words and terms or phrases to fit particular agendas, a result of the dumbing down of America

If true, why do you cling to the idea that the national aggregate of the state vote totals matters in any way when establishing the will of the people?

 

[Camp]

The EV does not reflect the 'will of the people.'

it reflects the will of the people more than the popular vote. Or would you prefer 10-15 states, because of their high population counts, decide the presidency every 4 years?

I would prefer a majority in the EV and the PV. If not, send the election to the House.

If not, send the election to the House.

Which gives the decision to the party in charge

That's fine. In this case, thirty states would vote for Trump, and then sometime next year, have Congress impeach him and replace him with Pence.

impeach him?

for.....?

Begin with conflict of interest.

 

[Auld Phart]

it reflects the will of the people more than the popular vote. Or would you prefer 10-15 states, because of their high population counts, decide the presidency every 4 years?

I would prefer a majority in the EV and the PV. If not, send the election to the House.

If not, send the election to the House.

Which gives the decision to the party in charge

That's fine. In this case, thirty states would vote for Trump, and then sometime next year, have Congress impeach him and replace him with Pence.

impeach him?

for.....?

Begin with conflict of interest.

Really wish they would put a 'yawn' button on here

 

[Manonthestreet]

It is SOP for dem party.....obamacare....the border.....importing terrorists.......climate deals......Iran deal.....it is why they are disappearing

Delusional thinking when you consider that side got more votes than the trump side.

And that got them what.......lib comedians even know it's wander in the wilderness time...and it will accelerate as they remain iin denial