The electoral college and how it changes voting

[OKTexas]

A system that's worked as intended for over 220 years.

You're a fucking uneducated moron, as are most people on this subject. The intended purpose of the Electoral College was to provide influence for slave states, where the majority of people were disenfranchised. That's the fucking purpose. Essentially the same purpose as the 3/5s rule is what the Electoral College was intended to accomplish..

And that differs form counting non citizens for representation HOW? If you didn't count all the non citizens in CA, as example, they'd probably lose 3 congressional districts. BTW the 14th Amendment says they shouldn't be counted, along with other adults not eligible to vote.

 

[OKTexas]

Funny, it worked just fine when every Democrat was elected. Odd, very odd.

I recall that Gore got more than W. Bush as well.

I recall that Bush won that election.

Bush didn't win that election. He was given the election by the Supreme Court. Gore got more votes.

Liar, every independent recount showed Bush won FL.

 

[BULLDOG]

Funny, it worked just fine when every Democrat was elected. Odd, very odd.

I recall that Gore got more than W. Bush as well.

I recall that Bush won that election.

Bush didn't win that election. He was given the election by the Supreme Court. Gore got more votes.

Liar, every independent recount showed Bush won FL.

U. S. Electoral College
U. S. Electoral College
2000 Presidential Election
Popular Vote Totals


Bush / Cheney Gore / Lieberman

Totals 50,456,062 50,996,582

 

[frigidweirdo]

So, Hillary got 61.7 million votes and Trump got 60.7 million votes and Trump won.

We know the electoral college messes things up, but by how much?

A person in Wyoming has a vote worth 3.8 times that of a person in Texas, Florida and New York have even worse odds than that, Vermont has a vote 3 times Texas, Alaska and North Dakota 2.9. Seems pretty unfair for Florida, New York, Texas, California etc. Florida's only bright spot is that they can change an election, New York, Texas and California are forgotten places not worth much.

However if we take the states that Trump won, and we count the votes that went to both Republican and Democrat, Trump got 71.7 million votes and if we count the Rep and Dem votes of the states Hillary won we have 48.8 million votes.

If we take the equivalent votes (i.e., number of votes * worth of vote against Texas (Texas =1, Wyoming = 3.8) then Trump got 71.1 million votes and Hillary 69.8 million votes).

If we then take the states and their equivalents the Trump got 84.5 million and Hillary got 56.4 million votes.

So, depending on how you look at it, Hillary lost somewhere between 2.3 million votes and 28 million votes.

The system is clearly unfair.

The most unfair thing about it is that the main two parties get total domination of the political scene.

We know from German elections where people vote twice, once for constituency member in a FPTP system and once in PR for who they want to see as the majority party that people are more likely to vote the main parties for FPTP than for PR.

The CDU (right wing party) gained 16.2 million votes in FPTP and 14.9 million in PR
The SPD (Left wing party) gained 12.8 million in FPTP and 11.2 million in PR
The FDP (center party, considered a 3rd party) gained 1 million votes in FPTP and 2 million in PR.

Clearly, again, it isn't fair to have FPTP as people's wishes just aren't met.

View attachment 98690

How many haven't accepted the result of the election? People are just calling for a change in the system, for NEXT TIME.

 

[OKTexas]

Funny, it worked just fine when every Democrat was elected. Odd, very odd.

I recall that Gore got more than W. Bush as well.

I recall that Bush won that election.

Bush didn't win that election. He was given the election by the Supreme Court. Gore got more votes.

Liar, every independent recount showed Bush won FL.

U. S. Electoral College
U. S. Electoral College
2000 Presidential Election
Popular Vote Totals


Bush / Cheney Gore / Lieberman

Totals 50,456,062 50,996,582

No such thing, well except in the minds of the truly ignorant, as national popular vote. President are elected by State. You can bitch and whine all you want. If you don't fucking like the system, see Article 5. But stop with the cry baby shit already.

 

[Darkwind]

So, Hillary got 61.7 million votes and Trump got 60.7 million votes and Trump won.

We know the electoral college messes things up, but by how much?

A person in Wyoming has a vote worth 3.8 times that of a person in Texas, Florida and New York have even worse odds than that, Vermont has a vote 3 times Texas, Alaska and North Dakota 2.9. Seems pretty unfair for Florida, New York, Texas, California etc. Florida's only bright spot is that they can change an election, New York, Texas and California are forgotten places not worth much.

However if we take the states that Trump won, and we count the votes that went to both Republican and Democrat, Trump got 71.7 million votes and if we count the Rep and Dem votes of the states Hillary won we have 48.8 million votes.

If we take the equivalent votes (i.e., number of votes * worth of vote against Texas (Texas =1, Wyoming = 3.8) then Trump got 71.1 million votes and Hillary 69.8 million votes).

If we then take the states and their equivalents the Trump got 84.5 million and Hillary got 56.4 million votes.

So, depending on how you look at it, Hillary lost somewhere between 2.3 million votes and 28 million votes.

The system is clearly unfair.

The most unfair thing about it is that the main two parties get total domination of the political scene.

We know from German elections where people vote twice, once for constituency member in a FPTP system and once in PR for who they want to see as the majority party that people are more likely to vote the main parties for FPTP than for PR.

The CDU (right wing party) gained 16.2 million votes in FPTP and 14.9 million in PR
The SPD (Left wing party) gained 12.8 million in FPTP and 11.2 million in PR
The FDP (center party, considered a 3rd party) gained 1 million votes in FPTP and 2 million in PR.

Clearly, again, it isn't fair to have FPTP as people's wishes just aren't met.

View attachment 98690

How many haven't accepted the result of the election? People are just calling for a change in the system, for NEXT TIME.

Do you see the mobs in all the cities, burning and killing?

That is what you are advocating for.

The EC works, it works as intended.

The NEXT TIME will be an EC election like this time. You want to know why?

The MOB has to get an Amendment passed to change it. Since the GOP owns two-thirds of the State legislatures and Governorships, and control of the Congress.....it isn't going to happen.

You people were up and arms and foaming at the mouth when Trump said he may not accept the outcome of the election.

Now you're doing what you accused him of.

Get a fucking grip on yourselves.

 

[BULLDOG]

I recall that Gore got more than W. Bush as well.

I recall that Bush won that election.

Bush didn't win that election. He was given the election by the Supreme Court. Gore got more votes.

Liar, every independent recount showed Bush won FL.

U. S. Electoral College
U. S. Electoral College
2000 Presidential Election
Popular Vote Totals


Bush / Cheney Gore / Lieberman

Totals 50,456,062 50,996,582

No such thing, well except in the minds of the truly ignorant, as national popular vote. President are elected by State. You can bitch and whine all you want. If you don't fucking like the system, see Article 5. But stop with the cry baby shit already.

I know how elections work. In Bush's case he was appointed the presidency by the Supreme court, and the national archives say he did have fewer votes.

 

[Darkwind]

I recall that Bush won that election.

Bush didn't win that election. He was given the election by the Supreme Court. Gore got more votes.

Liar, every independent recount showed Bush won FL.

U. S. Electoral College
U. S. Electoral College
2000 Presidential Election
Popular Vote Totals


Bush / Cheney Gore / Lieberman

Totals 50,456,062 50,996,582

No such thing, well except in the minds of the truly ignorant, as national popular vote. President are elected by State. You can bitch and whine all you want. If you don't fucking like the system, see Article 5. But stop with the cry baby shit already.

I know how elections work. In Bush's case he was appointed the presidency by the Supreme court, and the national archives say he did have fewer votes.

Bush won the election. The Supreme Court simply stopped Gore from counting until he managed to get the result he wanted. Bush was NOT appointed, he was elected by 271 electors and needed only 270.

You people are approaching the literal definition of insane.

 

[OKTexas]

I recall that Bush won that election.

Bush didn't win that election. He was given the election by the Supreme Court. Gore got more votes.

Liar, every independent recount showed Bush won FL.

U. S. Electoral College
U. S. Electoral College
2000 Presidential Election
Popular Vote Totals


Bush / Cheney Gore / Lieberman

Totals 50,456,062 50,996,582

No such thing, well except in the minds of the truly ignorant, as national popular vote. President are elected by State. You can bitch and whine all you want. If you don't fucking like the system, see Article 5. But stop with the cry baby shit already.

I know how elections work. In Bush's case he was appointed the presidency by the Supreme court, and the national archives say he did have fewer votes.

The supreme court had nothing to do with your fantasy popular vote dumb ass. Bush won fair and square just like Trump did.

 

[Spare_change]

So, Hillary got 61.7 million votes and Trump got 60.7 million votes and Trump won.

We know the electoral college messes things up, but by how much?

A person in Wyoming has a vote worth 3.8 times that of a person in Texas, Florida and New York have even worse odds than that, Vermont has a vote 3 times Texas, Alaska and North Dakota 2.9. Seems pretty unfair for Florida, New York, Texas, California etc. Florida's only bright spot is that they can change an election, New York, Texas and California are forgotten places not worth much.

However if we take the states that Trump won, and we count the votes that went to both Republican and Democrat, Trump got 71.7 million votes and if we count the Rep and Dem votes of the states Hillary won we have 48.8 million votes.

If we take the equivalent votes (i.e., number of votes * worth of vote against Texas (Texas =1, Wyoming = 3.8) then Trump got 71.1 million votes and Hillary 69.8 million votes).

If we then take the states and their equivalents the Trump got 84.5 million and Hillary got 56.4 million votes.

So, depending on how you look at it, Hillary lost somewhere between 2.3 million votes and 28 million votes.

The system is clearly unfair.

The most unfair thing about it is that the main two parties get total domination of the political scene.

We know from German elections where people vote twice, once for constituency member in a FPTP system and once in PR for who they want to see as the majority party that people are more likely to vote the main parties for FPTP than for PR.

The CDU (right wing party) gained 16.2 million votes in FPTP and 14.9 million in PR
The SPD (Left wing party) gained 12.8 million in FPTP and 11.2 million in PR
The FDP (center party, considered a 3rd party) gained 1 million votes in FPTP and 2 million in PR.

Clearly, again, it isn't fair to have FPTP as people's wishes just aren't met.

Your argument is logically flawed.

Take it back, review it, make the appropriate corrections.

Start with a simple question ---- Where does a vote in Wyoming compete with a vote in Texas?

When you can answer that, everything will fall in place.

 

[Spare_change]

More whining from the Left. A system that's worked as intended for over 220 years. I don't New York, California & Texas deciding each election.

"Worked well for over 220 years"?

Worked so well it kept slavery around, kept women down, nullifies the votes of tens of millions who don't happen to vote the way their state does, creates artificial barriers of "red" and "blue" states, discourages voting in those states at all, perpetuates the Duopoly, biases voting to the eastern time zones, and makes us dependent on polls to determine whether we may as well not even bother to vote because it's already decided regardless what we do.

That sure is "working well" ain't it.

You seriously going to try to make some convoluted argument that supports this nonsense?

Let me get some popcorn --- this shit is going to be good.

 

[Spare_change]

So, Hillary got 61.7 million votes and Trump got 60.7 million votes and Trump won.

We know the electoral college messes things up, but by how much?

A person in Wyoming has a vote worth 3.8 times that of a person in Texas, Florida and New York have even worse odds than that, Vermont has a vote 3 times Texas, Alaska and North Dakota 2.9. Seems pretty unfair for Florida, New York, Texas, California etc. Florida's only bright spot is that they can change an election, New York, Texas and California are forgotten places not worth much.

However if we take the states that Trump won, and we count the votes that went to both Republican and Democrat, Trump got 71.7 million votes and if we count the Rep and Dem votes of the states Hillary won we have 48.8 million votes.

If we take the equivalent votes (i.e., number of votes * worth of vote against Texas (Texas =1, Wyoming = 3.8) then Trump got 71.1 million votes and Hillary 69.8 million votes).

If we then take the states and their equivalents the Trump got 84.5 million and Hillary got 56.4 million votes.

So, depending on how you look at it, Hillary lost somewhere between 2.3 million votes and 28 million votes.

The system is clearly unfair.

The most unfair thing about it is that the main two parties get total domination of the political scene.

We know from German elections where people vote twice, once for constituency member in a FPTP system and once in PR for who they want to see as the majority party that people are more likely to vote the main parties for FPTP than for PR.

The CDU (right wing party) gained 16.2 million votes in FPTP and 14.9 million in PR
The SPD (Left wing party) gained 12.8 million in FPTP and 11.2 million in PR
The FDP (center party, considered a 3rd party) gained 1 million votes in FPTP and 2 million in PR.

Clearly, again, it isn't fair to have FPTP as people's wishes just aren't met.

Were you paying attention in school when the teachers explained the large state / small state issue and debate ?! The bicameral Congress with a Senate and a House Of Reps deals with that issue at the legislative level.

At the Presidential level, the electoral college deals with this issue perfectly as well.

I understand the system. I just don't like how a vote in Wyoming is worth more than a vote anywhere else.

It is not really worth "more".

There is a proportionality issue involved related to the latest census.

Er... you're wrong, but anyway.

Florida has 699,000 people per electoral college vote.
Alaska has 246,000 people per electoral college vote. (I found a mistake in my chart, and it's changed a bit. Alaska has a vote being worth 3 times higher, Wyoming 2.9 times higher.

Psst --- means zero, zilch, nada, nothing. Your logic is flawed.

 

[Spare_change]

My biggest problem is the fact that it does discourage the development of a third party. It's hard to fix a system that is clearly weighed in favor of a certain party.

We can discuss the issue of a third or fourth or fifth or seventh party ... that's a different discussion.

But, I fail to see how the EC limits the number of parties.

 

[Lewdog]

My biggest problem is the fact that it does discourage the development of a third party. It's hard to fix a system that is clearly weighed in favor of a certain party.

We can discuss the issue of a third or fourth or fifth or seventh party ... that's a different discussion.

But, I fail to see how the EC limits the number of parties.

You don't? Here's a question, when the Electors of a state are chosen, do the other parties get a say?

 

[Spare_change]

My biggest problem is the fact that it does discourage the development of a third party. It's hard to fix a system that is clearly weighed in favor of a certain party.

We can discuss the issue of a third or fourth or fifth or seventh party ... that's a different discussion.

But, I fail to see how the EC limits the number of parties.

You don't? Here's a question, when the Electors of a state are chosen, do the other parties get a say?

Ok --- the party who wins the popular vote in THAT state gets to select the electors. In fact, each party submits a roster prior to the election. Once the vote is counted, the governor announces who will be the electors. That's how a winner-takes-all state works (48 out of the 50).

If you don't like that, then lobby for a change in your state.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So, Hillary got 61.7 million votes and Trump got 60.7 million votes and Trump won.

We know the electoral college messes things up, but by how much?

A person in Wyoming has a vote worth 3.8 times that of a person in Texas, Florida and New York have even worse odds than that, Vermont has a vote 3 times Texas, Alaska and North Dakota 2.9. Seems pretty unfair for Florida, New York, Texas, California etc. Florida's only bright spot is that they can change an election, New York, Texas and California are forgotten places not worth much.

However if we take the states that Trump won, and we count the votes that went to both Republican and Democrat, Trump got 71.7 million votes and if we count the Rep and Dem votes of the states Hillary won we have 48.8 million votes.

If we take the equivalent votes (i.e., number of votes * worth of vote against Texas (Texas =1, Wyoming = 3.8) then Trump got 71.1 million votes and Hillary 69.8 million votes).

If we then take the states and their equivalents the Trump got 84.5 million and Hillary got 56.4 million votes.

So, depending on how you look at it, Hillary lost somewhere between 2.3 million votes and 28 million votes.

The system is clearly unfair.

The most unfair thing about it is that the main two parties get total domination of the political scene.

We know from German elections where people vote twice, once for constituency member in a FPTP system and once in PR for who they want to see as the majority party that people are more likely to vote the main parties for FPTP than for PR.

The CDU (right wing party) gained 16.2 million votes in FPTP and 14.9 million in PR
The SPD (Left wing party) gained 12.8 million in FPTP and 11.2 million in PR
The FDP (center party, considered a 3rd party) gained 1 million votes in FPTP and 2 million in PR.

Clearly, again, it isn't fair to have FPTP as people's wishes just aren't met.

View attachment 98690

How many haven't accepted the result of the election? People are just calling for a change in the system, for NEXT TIME.

Do you see the mobs in all the cities, burning and killing?

That is what you are advocating for.

The EC works, it works as intended.

The NEXT TIME will be an EC election like this time. You want to know why?

The MOB has to get an Amendment passed to change it. Since the GOP owns two-thirds of the State legislatures and Governorships, and control of the Congress.....it isn't going to happen.

You people were up and arms and foaming at the mouth when Trump said he may not accept the outcome of the election.

Now you're doing what you accused him of.

Get a fucking grip on yourselves.

Again, I asked how many? I didn't say none were doing this, I was saying that it's a small percentage of people.

No, nowhere have I advocated going around burning things down.

The EC works as intended, again, so does the North Korean system, or the Chinese system. Doesn't mean it's what I want.

You want me to get a grip of myself after you just wrote a whole post based on assumptions.

 

[Rustic]

So, Hillary got 61.7 million votes and Trump got 60.7 million votes and Trump won.

We know the electoral college messes things up, but by how much?

A person in Wyoming has a vote worth 3.8 times that of a person in Texas, Florida and New York have even worse odds than that, Vermont has a vote 3 times Texas, Alaska and North Dakota 2.9. Seems pretty unfair for Florida, New York, Texas, California etc. Florida's only bright spot is that they can change an election, New York, Texas and California are forgotten places not worth much.

However if we take the states that Trump won, and we count the votes that went to both Republican and Democrat, Trump got 71.7 million votes and if we count the Rep and Dem votes of the states Hillary won we have 48.8 million votes.

If we take the equivalent votes (i.e., number of votes * worth of vote against Texas (Texas =1, Wyoming = 3.8) then Trump got 71.1 million votes and Hillary 69.8 million votes).

If we then take the states and their equivalents the Trump got 84.5 million and Hillary got 56.4 million votes.

So, depending on how you look at it, Hillary lost somewhere between 2.3 million votes and 28 million votes.

The system is clearly unfair.

The most unfair thing about it is that the main two parties get total domination of the political scene.

We know from German elections where people vote twice, once for constituency member in a FPTP system and once in PR for who they want to see as the majority party that people are more likely to vote the main parties for FPTP than for PR.

The CDU (right wing party) gained 16.2 million votes in FPTP and 14.9 million in PR
The SPD (Left wing party) gained 12.8 million in FPTP and 11.2 million in PR
The FDP (center party, considered a 3rd party) gained 1 million votes in FPTP and 2 million in PR.

Clearly, again, it isn't fair to have FPTP as people's wishes just aren't met.

No, it's more than fair it's genius, still the fact remains more people in more states(31 as opposed to 19) voted for trump. Pure popular vote is mob rule...
The EC is going nowhere, rightly so. Because.... The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures.
The states are turning redder, and Congress agrees on nothing…
So good luck bedwetter

 

[candycorn]

Hillary and the Dems should be happy that she did so well in an election that has historically punished the party in control of the Oval.

They should be happy more people voted for them and they lost? Er.... yeah, I'll kick you in the balls and tell you that you should be happy you don't have testicular cancer.

I get you're not happy with the results. Neither am I. Trump simply ran a better campaign than Hillary and she never made the connection with the voter that Trump did. I feel that the way he made that connection was wholly dishonest but there is no penalty for that which is enforceable without another election.

 

[Unkotare]

Funny, it worked just fine when every Democrat was elected. Odd, very odd.

I recall that Gore got more than W. Bush as well.

I recall that Bush won that election.

Bush didn't win that election. .

Oh, yes he did.

 

[Unkotare]

So, Hillary got 61.7 million votes and Trump got 60.7 million votes and Trump won.

We know the electoral college messes things up, but by how much?

A person in Wyoming has a vote worth 3.8 times that of a person in Texas, Florida and New York have even worse odds than that, Vermont has a vote 3 times Texas, Alaska and North Dakota 2.9. Seems pretty unfair for Florida, New York, Texas, California etc. Florida's only bright spot is that they can change an election, New York, Texas and California are forgotten places not worth much.

However if we take the states that Trump won, and we count the votes that went to both Republican and Democrat, Trump got 71.7 million votes and if we count the Rep and Dem votes of the states Hillary won we have 48.8 million votes.

If we take the equivalent votes (i.e., number of votes * worth of vote against Texas (Texas =1, Wyoming = 3.8) then Trump got 71.1 million votes and Hillary 69.8 million votes).

If we then take the states and their equivalents the Trump got 84.5 million and Hillary got 56.4 million votes.

So, depending on how you look at it, Hillary lost somewhere between 2.3 million votes and 28 million votes.

The system is clearly unfair.

The most unfair thing about it is that the main two parties get total domination of the political scene.

We know from German elections where people vote twice, once for constituency member in a FPTP system and once in PR for who they want to see as the majority party that people are more likely to vote the main parties for FPTP than for PR.

The CDU (right wing party) gained 16.2 million votes in FPTP and 14.9 million in PR
The SPD (Left wing party) gained 12.8 million in FPTP and 11.2 million in PR
The FDP (center party, considered a 3rd party) gained 1 million votes in FPTP and 2 million in PR.

Clearly, again, it isn't fair to have FPTP as people's wishes just aren't met.

View attachment 98690

How many haven't accepted the result of the election? People are just calling for a change in the system, for NEXT TIME.

Whiny sore losers are just throwing a tantrum.