The Electoral College is not fair!

[Toddsterpatriot]

Below is a list of states along with their populations, number of electoral votes, and a percentage that demonstrates the relative value of a vote cast in that state compared to the national average For example, in 2008, on average a state is awarded one electoral vote for every 565,166 people.

However, Wyoming has three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens (as of 2008 estimates). As a result each of Wyoming's three electoral votes corresponds to 177,556 people. Understood in one way, these people have 3.18 times as much clout in the Electoral College as an average American, or 318% (as listed in the pdf chart, downloadable below).

Population vs. Electoral Votes - Fairvote
---------------------------------------

Maj. rule happens in the Federal and State House and Senate and the Supreme Court. Yet the maj vote does not count in the elections for Potus. WHY?

While there is evidence that the founders assumed the electors would be independent actors,
https://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/electoral-college

There are 2 Senators from every state and they have their representatives in the house to bring their voices to the congress. We do not need the EC any more. The population of the US in 1800 was about 5 million and only 13 states, people were uneducated and the workers did not vote, or the women or blacks, only the rich white men aka the founders.

Most workers did not even know who was running when the EC was invented.

However, Wyoming has three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens (as of 2008 estimates). As a result each of Wyoming's three electoral votes corresponds to 177,556 people.

You're wrong.
One of their electoral votes corresponds to their 532,668 citizens.

The other two are because they're a state.

Most states have about 700,000 for one representative and electoral college, why should Wyoming vote count more than mine.

Today the pop of Wyoming is 579300 , as of 2017.

why should Wyoming vote count more than mine.

In 1929, the number of representatives was capped at 435 and the minimum is one.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Below is a list of states along with their populations, number of electoral votes, and a percentage that demonstrates the relative value of a vote cast in that state compared to the national average For example, in 2008, on average a state is awarded one electoral vote for every 565,166 people.

However, Wyoming has three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens (as of 2008 estimates). As a result each of Wyoming's three electoral votes corresponds to 177,556 people. Understood in one way, these people have 3.18 times as much clout in the Electoral College as an average American, or 318% (as listed in the pdf chart, downloadable below).

Population vs. Electoral Votes - Fairvote
---------------------------------------

Maj. rule happens in the Federal and State House and Senate and the Supreme Court. Yet the maj vote does not count in the elections for Potus. WHY?

While there is evidence that the founders assumed the electors would be independent actors,
https://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/electoral-college

There are 2 Senators from every state and they have their representatives in the house to bring their voices to the congress. We do not need the EC any more. The population of the US in 1800 was about 5 million and only 13 states, people were uneducated and the workers did not vote, or the women or blacks, only the rich white men aka the founders.

Most workers did not even know who was running when the EC was invented.

However, Wyoming has three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens (as of 2008 estimates). As a result each of Wyoming's three electoral votes corresponds to 177,556 people.

You're wrong.
One of their electoral votes corresponds to their 532,668 citizens.

The other two are because they're a state.

Most states have about 700,000 for one representative and electoral college, why should Wyoming vote count more than mine.

Today the pop of Wyoming is 579300 , as of 2017.

Because people in Wyoming are 1000 times smarter than a dumbass like you, so your state should be penalized for creating such stupid people.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Below is a list of states along with their populations, number of electoral votes, and a percentage that demonstrates the relative value of a vote cast in that state compared to the national average For example, in 2008, on average a state is awarded one electoral vote for every 565,166 people.

However, Wyoming has three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens (as of 2008 estimates). As a result each of Wyoming's three electoral votes corresponds to 177,556 people. Understood in one way, these people have 3.18 times as much clout in the Electoral College as an average American, or 318% (as listed in the pdf chart, downloadable below).

Population vs. Electoral Votes - Fairvote
---------------------------------------

Maj. rule happens in the Federal and State House and Senate and the Supreme Court. Yet the maj vote does not count in the elections for Potus. WHY?

While there is evidence that the founders assumed the electors would be independent actors,
https://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/electoral-college

There are 2 Senators from every state and they have their representatives in the house to bring their voices to the congress. We do not need the EC any more. The population of the US in 1800 was about 5 million and only 13 states, people were uneducated and the workers did not vote, or the women or blacks, only the rich white men aka the founders.

Most workers did not even know who was running when the EC was invented.

However, Wyoming has three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens (as of 2008 estimates). As a result each of Wyoming's three electoral votes corresponds to 177,556 people.

You're wrong.
One of their electoral votes corresponds to their 532,668 citizens.

The other two are because they're a state.

Most states have about 700,000 for one representative and electoral college, why should Wyoming vote count more than mine.

Today the pop of Wyoming is 579300 , as of 2017.

So you want the people of Wyoming to have zero representative's in the house?


You do know we started a war because of it right?


.

 

[peach174]

The EC is an anachronism, created at a time when the geographic size of a state was the same as the size of its population: big states had large populations, small states had small populations.

Clearly that’s no longer the case.

And as an anachronism it’s indeed time to do away with the EC.

The EC is an anachronism, created at a time when the geographic size of a state was the same as the size of its population: big states had large populations, small states had small populations.

Clearly that’s no longer the case.

And as an anachronism it’s indeed time to do away with the EC.

The EC is an anachronism, created at a time when the geographic size of a state was the same as the size of its population: big states had large populations, small states had small populations.

Clearly that’s no longer the case.

And as an anachronism it’s indeed time to do away with the EC.

The EC is an anachronism, created at a time when the geographic size of a state was the same as the size of its population: big states had large populations, small states had small populations.

Clearly that’s no longer the case.

And as an anachronism it’s indeed time to do away with the EC.

The EC is an anachronism, created at a time when the geographic size of a state was the same as the size of its population: big states had large populations, small states had small populations.

Clearly that’s no longer the case.

And as an anachronism it’s indeed time to do away with the EC.

News flash !
There still are States who have larger populations vs States who have smaller populations.

List of U.S. states by population - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[hunarcy]

If you are so anti-constitution that you think the "National Popular Vote Compact" is a good idea, you are unworthy of having your opinion considered.

Do tell everyone how it violates the Constitution. Be specific.

First, I never said it violates the Constitution. That is your assumption, and if you want it defend it, defend it yourself. But, let me point out that pursuant to Article II, Section 1, Clause 2, the legislature of each state determines the manner by which its electors are chosen. Each state's number of electors is equal to the combined total of the state's membership in the Senate and House of Representatives; currently there are 100 senators and 435 representatives. Additionally, the Twenty-third Amendment provides that the District of Columbia (D.C.) is entitled to a number of electors no greater than that of the least populous state (3) Following the national presidential election day in the first week of November, each state counts its popular votes pursuant to that state's laws to designate presidential electors. If you look at the Constitution, no where does it allow States to base their votes on the results of other states, thus invalidating the determination of the voters in their own state.

 

[JoeB131]

The EC is perfectly fair. The U.S. is a Republic of STATEs. The EC is designed to prevent Tyranny of the Majority, which is what would happen is the whinging crybully Dem-Progs ever destroyed it.

I'll note that the Dem-Progs keep screeching that Trump is going to destroy our institutions because he is Literally Hitler, yet they are the ones trying to get rid of the EC, expand the SCOTUS so they can pack it, void the 1st and 2nd Amendments...and now some are even saying we should get rid of the Senate.

Yes, Trump is literally Hitler. Even kept a copy of Mein Kampf on his bed side table, according to his Ex-wife.

But the notion that the EC allowing and the Senate allowing smaller states more representation is absurd on its face. No other country does it this way. Because it's stupid.

Trump will end up being such a bad president we will end up modifying the constitution so something like this never happens again.

 

[Wyatt earp]

The EC is perfectly fair. The U.S. is a Republic of STATEs. The EC is designed to prevent Tyranny of the Majority, which is what would happen is the whinging crybully Dem-Progs ever destroyed it.

I'll note that the Dem-Progs keep screeching that Trump is going to destroy our institutions because he is Literally Hitler, yet they are the ones trying to get rid of the EC, expand the SCOTUS so they can pack it, void the 1st and 2nd Amendments...and now some are even saying we should get rid of the Senate.

Yes, Trump is literally Hitler. Even kept a copy of Mein Kampf on his bed side table, according to his Ex-wife.

But the notion that the EC allowing and the Senate allowing smaller states more representation is absurd on its face. No other country does it this way. Because it's stupid.

Trump will end up being such a bad president we will end up modifying the constitution so something like this never happens again.

Why is it stupid?


The EC is the only reason we have the country we have now, if it wasn't for the EC we would of looked like Europe. A bunch of little countries... Denmark in Minnesota, Ireland in New York....

 

[boedicca]

The EC is perfectly fair. The U.S. is a Republic of STATEs. The EC is designed to prevent Tyranny of the Majority, which is what would happen is the whinging crybully Dem-Progs ever destroyed it.

I'll note that the Dem-Progs keep screeching that Trump is going to destroy our institutions because he is Literally Hitler, yet they are the ones trying to get rid of the EC, expand the SCOTUS so they can pack it, void the 1st and 2nd Amendments...and now some are even saying we should get rid of the Senate.

Yes, Trump is literally Hitler. Even kept a copy of Mein Kampf on his bed side table, according to his Ex-wife.

But the notion that the EC allowing and the Senate allowing smaller states more representation is absurd on its face. No other country does it this way. Because it's stupid.

Trump will end up being such a bad president we will end up modifying the constitution so something like this never happens again.

No other large country has had the historically smooth transitions of power that we do - at least until the Prog SoreLose Xyr Fascists started their Crybulling.

 

[Polishprince]

Below is a list of states along with their populations, number of electoral votes, and a percentage that demonstrates the relative value of a vote cast in that state compared to the national average For example, in 2008, on average a state is awarded one electoral vote for every 565,166 people.

However, Wyoming has three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens (as of 2008 estimates). As a result each of Wyoming's three electoral votes corresponds to 177,556 people. Understood in one way, these people have 3.18 times as much clout in the Electoral College as an average American, or 318% (as listed in the pdf chart, downloadable below).

Population vs. Electoral Votes - Fairvote
---------------------------------------

Maj. rule happens in the Federal and State House and Senate and the Supreme Court. Yet the maj vote does not count in the elections for Potus. WHY?

While there is evidence that the founders assumed the electors would be independent actors,
https://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/electoral-college

There are 2 Senators from every state and they have their representatives in the house to bring their voices to the congress. We do not need the EC any more. The population of the US in 1800 was about 5 million and only 13 states, people were uneducated and the workers did not vote, or the women or blacks, only the rich white men aka the founders.

Most workers did not even know who was running when the EC was invented.

I didn't attend Government School system, so I was taught civics.

If you had been, you would know that when the country was formed, the less populated states were concerned that they would be at the mercy of the highly populated ones and they would have no say. So they came up with the electoral college as part of the solution to even the playing field between the states.

Without the EC, we don't have a USA.

Personally, I think its fine.

 

[Weatherman2020]

 

[peach174]

The Democratic Party who claims to be for minorities ,is now trying to get rid of the EC.
The EC is what protects minorities in the election of our Nation's President.
Talk about insane!

 

[MarathonMike]

This is yet another Liberal deception. They claim to be "fighting for every vote" by pushing for the end of the EC. Nothing could be further from the truth. We have one state out of fifty that contains nearly 10% of the entire population of the country. Within that state, the population is concentrated in a few densely populated cities and those cities are of course predominantly Democrat.

We can't expect honesty out of the Democrats, so it is up to you to analyze their message and what they are really fighting for. It is NOT to make every vote count. It is to use the dominant DEM population of California to hand every Presidential election to a Democrat.

 

[mamooth]

First, I never said it violates the Constitution. That is your assumption, and if you want it defend it, defend it yourself. But, let me point out that pursuant to Article II, Section 1, Clause 2, the legislature of each state determines the manner by which its electors are chosen. Each state's number of electors is equal to the combined total of the state's membership in the Senate and House of Representatives; currently there are 100 senators and 435 representatives. Additionally, the Twenty-third Amendment provides that the District of Columbia (D.C.) is entitled to a number of electors no greater than that of the least populous state (3) Following the national presidential election day in the first week of November, each state counts its popular votes pursuant to that state's laws to designate presidential electors. If you look at the Constitution, no where does it allow States to base their votes on the results of other states, thus invalidating the determination of the voters in their own state.

So you're saying it doesn't violate the Constitution, but it does violate the Constitution. Very convincing.

I note the Constitution doesn't place any standards on how states choose their electors. If they'd like, the states can flip coins, or base it all on the opinion of a single reindeer herder in northern Finland.

 

[mamooth]

Fact is, if people like you were so sure of that, you'd not be trying to get rid of the EC.

That's a retarded statement.

The reason we're trying to get rid of the EC is that we're very sure Democrats will keep winning the popular vote.

The reason Republicans are trying to keep the EC is that they're very sure Democrats will keep winning the popular vote.

Most of the Republicans aren't trying to deny it. They're just claiming that Republicans are special snowflakes whose votes should count more than Democratic votes.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Fact is, if people like you were so sure of that, you'd not be trying to get rid of the EC.

That's a retarded statement.

The reason we're trying to get rid of the EC is that we're very sure Democrats will keep winning the popular vote.

The reason Republicans are trying to keep the EC is that they're very sure Democrats will keep winning the popular vote.

Most of the Republicans aren't trying to deny it. They're just claiming that Republicans are special snowflakes whose votes should count more than Democratic votes.

Pathetic post.

 

[peach174]

Fact is, if people like you were so sure of that, you'd not be trying to get rid of the EC.

That's a retarded statement.

The reason we're trying to get rid of the EC is that we're very sure Democrats will keep winning the popular vote.

The reason Republicans are trying to keep the EC is that they're very sure Democrats will keep winning the popular vote.

Most of the Republicans aren't trying to deny it. They're just claiming that Republicans are special snowflakes whose votes should count more than Democratic votes.

There was no Democratic or Republican party when the constitution was written.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Fact is, if people like you were so sure of that, you'd not be trying to get rid of the EC.

The reason we're trying to get rid of the EC is that we're very sure Democrats will keep winning the popular vote.

Oh,. look at that.
You don't care about all votes mattering, one person one vote or any of the other platitudes you put up to sway the listless
You just want to win, and you know you can;t unless you change the rules.

Thanks for the admission.

 

[JoeB131]

Why is it stupid?


The EC is the only reason we have the country we have now, if it wasn't for the EC we would of looked like Europe. A bunch of little countries... Denmark in Minnesota, Ireland in New York....

That's actually... retarded. direct election of the president. It works just fine. It's how we elect every other office in the country.

 

[JoeB131]

View attachment 251550

Okay, Population of Los Angeles County.

10.16 Million.

Population of those states might be lower, but they have more votes combined.

One person, one vote... done! this isn't complicated.

You wingnuts also need to look at the future. When HIspanic Population growth turns Texas and Arizona blue, you guys will never be able to win in the EC.

 

[JoeB131]

The Democratic Party who claims to be for minorities ,is now trying to get rid of the EC.
The EC is what protects minorities in the election of our Nation's President.
Talk about insane!

No, it doesn't. It gives undue influence to states populated by white people.