The electoral college, the founders had it right

[Toddsterpatriot]

In their infinite wisdom, the United States ’ Founders created the Electoral College to ensure the STATES were fairly represented.
Why should one or two densely populated areas speak for the whole of the nation?
The following list of statistics has been making the rounds on the Internet.
It should finally put an end to the argument as to why the Electoral College makes sense.
These numbers are astonishing. Do share this. It needs to be widely known and understood.

There are 3,141 counties in the United States .
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

There are 62 counties in New York State .
Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16 .

Clinton won the popular vote by approx 1.5 million votes.
In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan , Richmond & Queens)
Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. ( Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond )
Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.

These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles.
The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.

When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.

Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago , LA , etc.) DO NOT and SHOULD NOT speak for the rest of our country!

And...it's been verified and documented that those aforementioned 319 square miles are where the majority of our nation’s problems foment.

They got it right, but they did not make it fair at all.

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

A vote in Wyoming doesn't count for more than three votes in Cali or Texas.

 

[saveliberty]

Counties do not vote, people do. Counting counties is just stupid.

I was thinking the same thing. What is really being pointed out is we as a nation have resisted tyranny by the majority. Mob rule.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

In their infinite wisdom, the United States ’ Founders created the Electoral College to ensure the STATES were fairly represented.
Why should one or two densely populated areas speak for the whole of the nation?
The following list of statistics has been making the rounds on the Internet.
It should finally put an end to the argument as to why the Electoral College makes sense.
These numbers are astonishing. Do share this. It needs to be widely known and understood.

There are 3,141 counties in the United States .
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

There are 62 counties in New York State .
Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16 .

Clinton won the popular vote by approx 1.5 million votes.
In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan , Richmond & Queens)
Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. ( Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond )
Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.

These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles.
The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.

When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.

Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago , LA , etc.) DO NOT and SHOULD NOT speak for the rest of our country!

And...it's been verified and documented that those aforementioned 319 square miles are where the majority of our nation’s problems foment.

There are 3,141 counties in the United States .
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

Yeah, those are bad numbers.

proof?

Hillary Clinton, in contrast, had an 8.2 million vote margin in a narrow band of 52 coastal counties and five “county equivalent” cities stretching from San Diego to Seattle on the West Coast and Northern Virginia to Boston on the East Coast. That narrow band included two major cities–Washington, D.C and Baltimore, Maryland–included in the five “county equivalent” cities, and three major cities–Philadelphia, New York, and Boston–which are included in the 52 counties.

Clinton received 70 percent of the 18.4 million votes cast in these 52 elite coastal counties. Donald Trump, in contrast, received only 25 percent of the vote in these counties. The remaining 5 percent went to other candidates.

Donald Trump Won 7.5 Million Popular Vote Landslide in Heartland | Breitbart

View attachment 226650

Illinois Election Results 2016: President Live Map by County, Real-Time Voting Updates

52 coastal counties and 11 counties in Illinois alone.

Without even looking at Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, or Minnesota.

Counties do not vote, people do. Counting counties is just stupid.

Counties don't vote, but an accurate tally of counties would be interesting.

Why?

Think about this, King county Texas has less than 300 residents in the whole county. Who cares how that county voted?

Niobrara County Wyoming has less than 1 person per square mile. Who cares how that county voted?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

In their infinite wisdom, the United States ’ Founders created the Electoral College to ensure the STATES were fairly represented.
Why should one or two densely populated areas speak for the whole of the nation?
The following list of statistics has been making the rounds on the Internet.
It should finally put an end to the argument as to why the Electoral College makes sense.
These numbers are astonishing. Do share this. It needs to be widely known and understood.

There are 3,141 counties in the United States .
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

There are 62 counties in New York State .
Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16 .

Clinton won the popular vote by approx 1.5 million votes.
In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan , Richmond & Queens)
Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. ( Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond )
Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.

These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles.
The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.

When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.

Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago , LA , etc.) DO NOT and SHOULD NOT speak for the rest of our country!

And...it's been verified and documented that those aforementioned 319 square miles are where the majority of our nation’s problems foment.

They got it right, but they did not make it fair at all.

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

A vote in Wyoming doesn't count for more than three votes in Cali or Texas.

Yes it does based upon the number of EC votes each state has.

 

[Wyatt earp]

In their infinite wisdom, the United States ’ Founders created the Electoral College to ensure the STATES were fairly represented.

No, they established the electoral college to satisfy slave states who wanted to disenfranchise large parts of their populations without risking voters in free states overwhelming them to abolish slavery democratically. Also, to establish greater autonomy of the President from Congress. The plan had almost been to have Congress elect the President, but the general feeling was that this could turn the Presidency into Congress' puppet, diminishing the checks and balances between the two branches.

Next time, get educated instead of indoctrinated.

There would of been no United States as we know today with out it, so what's the point of arguing?


.

 

[Wyatt earp]

In their infinite wisdom, the United States ’ Founders created the Electoral College to ensure the STATES were fairly represented.
Why should one or two densely populated areas speak for the whole of the nation?
The following list of statistics has been making the rounds on the Internet.
It should finally put an end to the argument as to why the Electoral College makes sense.
These numbers are astonishing. Do share this. It needs to be widely known and understood.

There are 3,141 counties in the United States .
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

There are 62 counties in New York State .
Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16 .

Clinton won the popular vote by approx 1.5 million votes.
In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan , Richmond & Queens)
Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. ( Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond )
Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.

These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles.
The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.

When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.

Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago , LA , etc.) DO NOT and SHOULD NOT speak for the rest of our country!

And...it's been verified and documented that those aforementioned 319 square miles are where the majority of our nation’s problems foment.

They got it right, but they did not make it fair at all.

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

A vote in Wyoming doesn't count for more than three votes in Cali or Texas.

Yes it does based upon the number of EC votes each state has.

Stop with the god damn propaganda talking point. No it's not, the senate and house are two different things


Wyoming has one rep per roughly 600,000 people and California has one rep per 700,000 people
.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There are 3,141 counties in the United States .
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

Yeah, those are bad numbers.

proof?

Hillary Clinton, in contrast, had an 8.2 million vote margin in a narrow band of 52 coastal counties and five “county equivalent” cities stretching from San Diego to Seattle on the West Coast and Northern Virginia to Boston on the East Coast. That narrow band included two major cities–Washington, D.C and Baltimore, Maryland–included in the five “county equivalent” cities, and three major cities–Philadelphia, New York, and Boston–which are included in the 52 counties.

Clinton received 70 percent of the 18.4 million votes cast in these 52 elite coastal counties. Donald Trump, in contrast, received only 25 percent of the vote in these counties. The remaining 5 percent went to other candidates.

Donald Trump Won 7.5 Million Popular Vote Landslide in Heartland | Breitbart

View attachment 226650

Illinois Election Results 2016: President Live Map by County, Real-Time Voting Updates

52 coastal counties and 11 counties in Illinois alone.

Without even looking at Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, or Minnesota.

Counties do not vote, people do. Counting counties is just stupid.

Counties don't vote, but an accurate tally of counties would be interesting.

Why?

Think about this, King county Texas has less than 300 residents in the whole county. Who cares how that county voted?

Niobrara County Wyoming has less than 1 person per square mile. Who cares how that county voted?

Some obscure facts are interesting.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In their infinite wisdom, the United States ’ Founders created the Electoral College to ensure the STATES were fairly represented.
Why should one or two densely populated areas speak for the whole of the nation?
The following list of statistics has been making the rounds on the Internet.
It should finally put an end to the argument as to why the Electoral College makes sense.
These numbers are astonishing. Do share this. It needs to be widely known and understood.

There are 3,141 counties in the United States .
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

There are 62 counties in New York State .
Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16 .

Clinton won the popular vote by approx 1.5 million votes.
In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan , Richmond & Queens)
Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. ( Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond )
Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.

These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles.
The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.

When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.

Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago , LA , etc.) DO NOT and SHOULD NOT speak for the rest of our country!

And...it's been verified and documented that those aforementioned 319 square miles are where the majority of our nation’s problems foment.

They got it right, but they did not make it fair at all.

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

A vote in Wyoming doesn't count for more than three votes in Cali or Texas.

Yes it does based upon the number of EC votes each state has.

No it doesn't.
Look at the House seats in each state.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

In their infinite wisdom, the United States ’ Founders created the Electoral College to ensure the STATES were fairly represented.
Why should one or two densely populated areas speak for the whole of the nation?
The following list of statistics has been making the rounds on the Internet.
It should finally put an end to the argument as to why the Electoral College makes sense.
These numbers are astonishing. Do share this. It needs to be widely known and understood.

There are 3,141 counties in the United States .
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

There are 62 counties in New York State .
Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16 .

Clinton won the popular vote by approx 1.5 million votes.
In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan , Richmond & Queens)
Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. ( Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond )
Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.

These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles.
The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.

When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.

Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago , LA , etc.) DO NOT and SHOULD NOT speak for the rest of our country!

And...it's been verified and documented that those aforementioned 319 square miles are where the majority of our nation’s problems foment.

They got it right, but they did not make it fair at all.

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

A vote in Wyoming doesn't count for more than three votes in Cali or Texas.

Yes it does based upon the number of EC votes each state has.

No it doesn't.
Look at the House seats in each state.

The topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In their infinite wisdom, the United States ’ Founders created the Electoral College to ensure the STATES were fairly represented.
Why should one or two densely populated areas speak for the whole of the nation?
The following list of statistics has been making the rounds on the Internet.
It should finally put an end to the argument as to why the Electoral College makes sense.
These numbers are astonishing. Do share this. It needs to be widely known and understood.

There are 3,141 counties in the United States .
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

There are 62 counties in New York State .
Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16 .

Clinton won the popular vote by approx 1.5 million votes.
In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan , Richmond & Queens)
Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. ( Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond )
Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.

These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles.
The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.

When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.

Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago , LA , etc.) DO NOT and SHOULD NOT speak for the rest of our country!

And...it's been verified and documented that those aforementioned 319 square miles are where the majority of our nation’s problems foment.

They got it right, but they did not make it fair at all.

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

A vote in Wyoming doesn't count for more than three votes in Cali or Texas.

Yes it does based upon the number of EC votes each state has.

No it doesn't.
Look at the House seats in each state.

The topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS.

House seats are determined by population, Senate seats are not.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

They got it right, but they did not make it fair at all.

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

A vote in Wyoming doesn't count for more than three votes in Cali or Texas.

Yes it does based upon the number of EC votes each state has.

No it doesn't.
Look at the House seats in each state.

The topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS.

House seats are determined by population, Senate seats are not.

Once again, the topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

A vote in Wyoming doesn't count for more than three votes in Cali or Texas.

Yes it does based upon the number of EC votes each state has.

No it doesn't.
Look at the House seats in each state.

The topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS.

House seats are determined by population, Senate seats are not.

Once again, the topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS

Once again, you're whining about the votes of Wyoming having 3 times the influence of Texas or California.
You're wrong.

 

[Wyatt earp]

There is nothing fair about a vote in Wyoming counting for more than 3 votes in Cali or or Texas

A vote in Wyoming doesn't count for more than three votes in Cali or Texas.

Yes it does based upon the number of EC votes each state has.

No it doesn't.
Look at the House seats in each state.

The topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS.

House seats are determined by population, Senate seats are not.

Once again, the topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS

You are trying to push a narrative that's not true .


.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Yes it does based upon the number of EC votes each state has.

No it doesn't.
Look at the House seats in each state.

The topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS.

House seats are determined by population, Senate seats are not.

Once again, the topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS

Once again, you're whining about the votes of Wyoming having 3 times the influence of Texas or California.
You're wrong.

Not in the context of the Senate or the EC. The only place they are equal is the House.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No it doesn't.
Look at the House seats in each state.

The topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS.

House seats are determined by population, Senate seats are not.

Once again, the topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS

Once again, you're whining about the votes of Wyoming having 3 times the influence of Texas or California.
You're wrong.

Not in the context of the Senate or the EC. The only place they are equal is the House.

Texas has 34 Electoral Votes based on 2010 population of 25.26 million. 1 per 743,000
California has 53 Electoral Votes based on 2010 population of 37.35 million. 1 per 705,000
Wyoming has 1 Electoral Vote based on 2010 population of 564 thousand. 1 per 564,000​

 

[Papageorgio]

Still obsessing about an election in which your 'choice' won is not healthy.

There is NOTHING like a 'sore winner.'

Maybe one day your illness will get better but prolly not.

And one day you will stop obsessing about an election in where your choice did not win.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

There are 3,141 counties in the United States .
Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

Yeah, those are bad numbers.

proof?

Hillary Clinton, in contrast, had an 8.2 million vote margin in a narrow band of 52 coastal counties and five “county equivalent” cities stretching from San Diego to Seattle on the West Coast and Northern Virginia to Boston on the East Coast. That narrow band included two major cities–Washington, D.C and Baltimore, Maryland–included in the five “county equivalent” cities, and three major cities–Philadelphia, New York, and Boston–which are included in the 52 counties.

Clinton received 70 percent of the 18.4 million votes cast in these 52 elite coastal counties. Donald Trump, in contrast, received only 25 percent of the vote in these counties. The remaining 5 percent went to other candidates.

Donald Trump Won 7.5 Million Popular Vote Landslide in Heartland | Breitbart

View attachment 226650

Illinois Election Results 2016: President Live Map by County, Real-Time Voting Updates

52 coastal counties and 11 counties in Illinois alone.

Without even looking at Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, or Minnesota.

Counties do not vote, people do. Counting counties is just stupid.

Counties don't vote, but an accurate tally of counties would be interesting.

Why?

Think about this, King county Texas has less than 300 residents in the whole county. Who cares how that county voted?

Niobrara County Wyoming has less than 1 person per square mile. Who cares how that county voted?

The 300 residents cared? If a bomb went off and killed 300 people would you say who cares it is only 300 people that died?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Yes it does based upon the number of EC votes each state has.

No it doesn't.
Look at the House seats in each state.

The topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS.

House seats are determined by population, Senate seats are not.

Once again, the topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS

You are trying to push a narrative that's not true .


.

Explain how it is not true?

Cali has just over 39,000,000 citizens. They have 55 EC votes. So, each EC vote is allotted to 709,000 people.
Wyoming has just over 579,000 citizens. They have 3 EC votes. So each EC vote is allotted to 193,000 people.

That gives the each citizen of Wyoming 3.6 times more say in who become POTUS than the people of Cali.

 

[Papageorgio]

The topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS.

House seats are determined by population, Senate seats are not.

Once again, the topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS

Once again, you're whining about the votes of Wyoming having 3 times the influence of Texas or California.
You're wrong.

Not in the context of the Senate or the EC. The only place they are equal is the House.

Texas has 34 Electoral Votes based on 2010 population of 25.26 million. 1 per 743,000
California has 53 Electoral Votes based on 2010 population of 37.35 million. 1 per 705,000
Wyoming has 1 Electoral Vote based on 2010 population of 564 thousand. 1 per 564,000​

It seems simple to me, I’m not sure why others don’t get it.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS.

House seats are determined by population, Senate seats are not.

Once again, the topic of the discussion is the Electoral College, the House seats are not determined by the EC, just the POTUS

Once again, you're whining about the votes of Wyoming having 3 times the influence of Texas or California.
You're wrong.

Not in the context of the Senate or the EC. The only place they are equal is the House.

Texas has 34 Electoral Votes based on 2010 population of 25.26 million. 1 per 743,000
California has 53 Electoral Votes based on 2010 population of 37.35 million. 1 per 705,000
Wyoming has 1 Electoral Vote based on 2010 population of 564 thousand. 1 per 564,000​

Wyoming has 3 EC votes, not one