The future of Electoral Voters

[martybegan]

Yeah, the smaller states would certainly fight this. And you're right, it wouldn't mean that we'd start over. But let's look at the current situation - the Democrats know the rules (or I assume they do), and they're willing to send it to the House? If I'm them, I'd be worried that the office would then go to a hardcore conservative.

Well, no, I think you miss the point. (But again, you always do.)

The problem with Trump isn't his ideology. The problem with Trump is that he's a racist, a misogynist, an authoritarian and possibly nuts.

A Hardcore Conservative, as you say, would still be someone who knew the rules, respected the institutions, and wouldn't do anything totally crazy. And if the GOP could elect that guy, they would. In a heartbeat.

The problem is, right now, their party is held hostage by the Populists who put Trump in charge. They aren't ready to challenge them now. When the economy flounders and Trump's approval rating is at 20%, they will. But by then it will be too late.

You see, you are the one who gets on here every day and whines we should put partisanship aside and do what is best for the country.

Well stopping the crazy guy from getting the nukes would really be best for the country.

Hell, I'll go one further. Everyone here knows how much I despise Mitt Romney. But if the Hamilton Electors backed Romney as the alternative and Congress confirmed him, I'd be all for it. Romney is going to do a lot things I won't like, but he won't do anything reckless like intentionally wreck the economy or get us into a war.

No one has proven that Trump is a racist, or a misogynist, or an authoritarian. Once again you fall for the media narrative because it suits you, and quite frankly, you are a moron.

That black outreach he is attempting must scare the shit out of you.

No one had to, he did it all by himself, with his life history and his campaign, and in his debates. He is also one of the biggest liars to boot. His arrogance is sickening, nothing humble about him. Vengeance is mine said the Lord (Trump) and he tweets to prove it.

Nothing but opinions from a dim-witted moron.

Regrets already hey.

No regrets. Trump wasn't my first, second or third choice, but seeing how he makes you progressive twats act is worth the uncertainty of his Presidency.

 

[Fang]

The EC is such that people in 3 main urban areas can't have more influence over coal minors in Ohio, steel workers (what's left if any) in PA, the middle class in Wisconsin and Michigan and retirees in Florida. All these groups have different needs than the 3 main urban areas. If enough of these states vote one way then the popular vote can be overridden. This form of government gives everybody a say, not just the cities with the most people.

That works on the assumption that everyone in those three cities votes the same way.

Okay- so let's look at that.

NYC- 8.5 Million
LA - 3.9 Million
Chicago 2.7 Million.

Sorry, dumbass- Those three cities together, total 15.1 million people. Only about a QUARTER of what a winning presidential candidate gets. And that's not even taking out the children who can't vote.

You see, the thing is, if Coal Miners in OH voted for Trumpenfuhrer, then the joke is on them. Coal is a dead technology the world is moving away from. Trump might as well have promised to keep the Buggy-Whip factory open.

The problem with Liberals is they can't see past today for the greater good of the country. For the past 8 years all we heard from Liberals was the Republican Party is dead. I always maintained that politics goes in cycles. Neither party will remain in power indefinitely. The Democrats may have won the popular vote today and lost the EC, but there will come a time when the reverse is true. Don't change the rules of a great system to fit your needs today, because the political environment will shift one day and you'll win with the current rules.

The problem isn't that the REpublican Party is dead. The problem is the Republican Party has lost it's fucking mind.

YOu see, the thing is, if we didn't have this ABORTION called an Electoral College in place, the GOP would not have won a presidential election since 1988. We could have avoided all these wars and recessions we didn't need.

I'm sure that Trump will remind us all why electing Republicans is a terrible idea..

The thing is, WE DON'T NEED AN ELECTORAL COLLEGE. The racist reason it was put into place failed a long time ago.

The electoral is racist? LOL! That's a new one. Please, I'm intrigued. Explain this. I'm going to sit back with my coffee and enjoy this one...

 

[OKTexas]

Actually the States are not constitutionally given the option to ignore the will of their respective States. Their electors are chosen by the State, democracy ends at the State line.

Which doesn't mean they still can't vote for whoever they want.

Look, the thing is, there probably won't be enough faithless electors to deny Trumpenfuhrer the presidency. It's a truly bad idea, even you have admitted as much, but you guys simply can't admit you fucked up.

Just like you could never admit what a fuckup George W. Stupid was.

Actually in most States the electors are bound by State laws to align their vote with the wishes of the State. They agree to that when they allow their name to be on the slate of electors, as electors they are representatives of the State, not themselves. Oh and you can take your deflections and fuck off.

 

[OKTexas]

NAZI!

Protect the voters from themselves?

The voters protected themselves by not voting for your candidate.

2.7 Million more voters voted for Hillary. The voters got this right.

Again, same challenge I put out to everyone else this morning.

Please name a time when the electoral college overruled the will of the people, and we got a good result.

Thanks.

He won 67% of the States, there is no popular vote outside a State, deal with it.

 

[OKTexas]

No, when you try to keep women in the kitchen you are a misogynist, actions mean more than words, and Trump has plenty of women in positions of authority in his businesses and campaign.

Isn't that like saying you are only a racist if you participate in a lynching? Trump's misogyny is well documented.

And his beef is with illegals, something you idiots need to gloss over. He has never been accused of actual racism until he ran for office.

Dude, Nixon took him to court for discriminating against black renters. Not to mention he called for the murder of five innocent minorities, even after they were exonerated.

When it comes to Hayes Reconstruction was lost first when Lincoln was killed, and second when Grant's presidency turned into a mire of corruption. The "redemption" of the South was a foregone conclusion after that. And Hayes has not been judged as bad as you say by historians, they put him toward the top of the bottom half of presidents, hardly the worst ever.

"His Fraudulency" (what they called him at the time) was the one who traded ending reconstruction for the presidency. That makes him a little worse than Grant's corruption. It's why Grant is on the $50 and Hayes isn't.

Harrison is also in the bottom half, but again not at the bottom.

That's daming with faint praise. My challenge was to name a GOOD president selected by the EC.

And as for Bush, your bias in this case makes you a worthless source on this.

Yes, my busted 401K and underwater mortgage in 2008 has biased me for some reason. But BUsh was pretty fucking worthless.

That's daming with faint praise. My challenge was to name a GOOD president selected by the EC.

Every president, good or bad, has been selected by EC with the exception of two, JQ Adams and Jefferson.

 

[g5000]

The popular vote should matter for obvious reasons. But a passionate people are not always right. (See quote by Charles MacKay in my sig.)

Thus the need for the EC and two Senators for each state.

NO, we don't need those things.

You see, I have no problem with the people getting it wrong. That's their perogative.

So if a majority of people decide you are too retarded to live, you'd be okay with that. I seeee...

But when the people GET IT RIGHT, and don't elect a racist Nazi with a mental disorder, and we still get him as President, because of some system set up by a bunch of slave rapists 200 years ago that has never produced a good result, then we really do have a problem.

I guess since Martin Luther King was a commie adulterer, then his civil rights record is null and void.

Ad hominem fallacies work both ways, retard.

 

[federalist50]

Since politics has devolved into little more than short term thinking, here's a question to ponder. Let's look down the road a bit.

First, let's assume that the EV system remains, so all those who to bring that up don't need to (although I'm sure they will).

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

And does anyone doubt that this "targeting" will include threats and intimidation and bribery?

The presidential election will only be prelude. The real battle would begin after that. A few dozen faceless EV's will have the power to control the destiny of 300+ million Americans.

Is this really what we want?
.

Doesn't work that way Mac. If the electors change votes on the 1st ballot and were to elect anyone else, the electoral college would then be challenged and the choice would then go to the house for President, and the Senate for Vice-President. It is the way it works.

As far as the EC, why would small(er) states go along with a change? They and their legislatures would be silly to do so. But, there is a movement from deep blue states to make it so no matter who wins their state, their electors vote en mass for the winner of the popular vote. The blue states can do this legally as they are in charge of their electors. I am of the opinion that if they do this, it will trigger the red states who have been balking about an article 5, to get on board; especially now that so many states are red. They are virtually at the threshold of being able to call, and execute anything they decide on, by themselves. (very close. very, very close) If that is what the far leftists want, then that is probably what they are going to get. They need be careful what they wish for. Just the simple clause they are fighting for most.....forced balanced budget......would put the Democrats in the trick bag.

The electoral college has worked as it was designed by the Founding Fathers for 232 years! They wanted a president to be elected by a majority of the states and not the population centers. Out of approximately 3,000 counties in the U.S., Hillary Clinton carried only 100! Her lead in the popular vote was racked up in just five states: New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Illinois and California! Those five states do not represent the majority of the country! Under the EC system, a vote cast in Wyoming counts as much as one cast in California! While the democrats do not take defeat well (2010; 2014 & 2016) they have none the less become unhinged and are showing their true colors! Does anybody seriously believe that if Trump had won the popular vote and Hillary the EC, that democrats wouldn't be clamoring abut the viryues of the EC?

 

[JoeB131]

How can a misogynist have a woman as a campaign manager, or let his daughter run parts of his business. You mistake crudeness for hatred, as progressives typically do when it suits them.

The only reason why he hired her is because the first guy beat up a woman and the second guy was owned by the Russians. Now, if she were his FIRST choice to run his campaign, you might have a point there.

sorry, a guy who talks about how he grabs women by the pussy and then apparently has done that a bunch of times, is really a misogynist.

Look, guy, I know you need to put lipstick on this pig. But you all screwed up letting this guy win because you just couldn't stand the thought of the Clintons winning.

and as for calling for the murder of 5 innocent minorities, link please.

Don't tell Donald Trump the Central Park 5 aren't guilty

Grant is on the 50 for his civil war service, not his presidency. It's amazing how you reconstruct history to suit your views, kind of like a Holocaust denier.

Hayes served in the Civil War, too. In fact, he was a General. Still not getting him on the currency for some reason. Oh, that' right, because he SUCKED as a president. At the time he was called "His Fraudulency" and "Rutherfraud". The people knew what was up.

No, you were implying they were "the worst", and now you move the goal post to say "well now prove they were good". What a fucking hack you are.

Go back and read what I actually said. It's on you to prove they were good, not me to prove they were worse than any other option. (Although, again, you'd have a hard time arguing that they weren't.)

My 401k survived just fine. Stop blaming someone else, and take accountability for your own poor financial decisions. If your 401k hasn't recovered by now, you are an idiot.

Well, mine did fine, too, UNDER OBAMA. Then I had to cash it out to pay off medical bills still left over from Bush's time because my company undercut me in the middle of treatment.

This year, I'll post the largest amount of money we ever made, and never before will I have so much set aside for retirement. I will be debt free by the end of the 2017, providing Trump can avoid fucking things up before then.

But all my planning from here on out is based on the premise that Trump IS going to fuck everything up.

 

[JoeB131]

So if a majority of people decide you are too retarded to live, you'd be okay with that. I seeee...

Wow, coming up with that kind of fallacy is hilarious. If millions of people wanted me dead, I don't think making that decision by an electoral college set up by dead Slave Rapists would work any better.

I guess since Martin Luther King was a commie adulterer, then his civil rights record is null and void.

Ad hominem fallacies work both ways, retard.

Except he wasn't a commie... and frankly, there's nothing wrong with adultery. That's between him and his spouse.

You see, that's the difference. The Founders were slave-owners. They created a system that was designed Specifically to preserver slavery while still claiming "all Men are created equal." So not suprisingly, bad and evil men came up with a bad and evil system.

Going back to my point. We've "selected" four presidents with the electoral college the people rejected.

Can you name a ONE of them that wasn't a complete fucking disaster?

 

[JoeB131]

The electoral is racist? LOL! That's a new one. Please, I'm intrigued. Explain this. I'm going to sit back with my coffee and enjoy this one...

You mean other than it was designed to give the slave states disproportionate votes to keep them in the union?

Were you asleep during history class?

As you say, the EC was designed to keep the places where people actually lived from deciding elections. In 1776 that was Philadelphia and New York, where no one owned slaves and they generally thought it was a bad idea to own them. The slave states insisted on provisions to protect their political influence. One was the EC. The other was the instance that the President and VP had to be from different states. Another was the Senate giving equal representation to all states.

(Again, look up Missouri Compromise and Bloody Kansas to see how the Slave States tried to maintain equilibrium in the Senate and EC by imposing slavery on territories that didn't want it.)

Meanwhile, the North, being almost as racist as the South, insisted that slaves only be counted as 3/5 of a free man for congressional and electoral representation.

So the EC really didn't even succeed in its primary goal, which was to keep the slave-rapists mollified enough to stay in the Union. Eventually, they tried to get out.

What it DID do was give us some of the worst presidents in our history.

 

[JoeB131]

The electoral college has worked as it was designed by the Founding Fathers for 232 years! They wanted a president to be elected by a majority of the states and not the population centers. Out of approximately 3,000 counties in the U.S., Hillary Clinton carried only 100!

Guy, that isn't true. ANd since most of those counties have NO PEOPLE LIVING IN THEM,

Frankly, I don't want my president being selected by some inbred in Hazard County who is fucking his cousin and votes for Trump when he isn't smoking meth.

Mostly because when he finds his health insurance has been cancelled, he's going to be too stupid to understand why.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

The electoral college has worked as it was designed by the Founding Fathers for 232 years! They wanted a president to be elected by a majority of the states and not the population centers. Out of approximately 3,000 counties in the U.S., Hillary Clinton carried only 100!

Guy, that isn't true. ANd since most of those counties have NO PEOPLE LIVING IN THEM,

Frankly, I don't want my president being selected by some inbred in Hazard County who is fucking his cousin and votes for Trump when he isn't smoking meth.

Mostly because when he finds his health insurance has been cancelled, he's going to be too stupid to understand why.

It's going to be hilarious when your bullshit is rubbed in your face when Trump does get the vote on Monday.

Your hatred of America is not amusing.

 

[owebo]

The electoral college has worked as it was designed by the Founding Fathers for 232 years! They wanted a president to be elected by a majority of the states and not the population centers. Out of approximately 3,000 counties in the U.S., Hillary Clinton carried only 100!

Guy, that isn't true. ANd since most of those counties have NO PEOPLE LIVING IN THEM,

Frankly, I don't want my president being selected by some inbred in Hazard County who is fucking his cousin and votes for Trump when he isn't smoking meth.

Mostly because when he finds his health insurance has been cancelled, he's going to be too stupid to understand why.

A lot of democrats voted Trump.....

 

[NYcarbineer]

Since politics has devolved into little more than short term thinking, here's a question to ponder. Let's look down the road a bit.

First, let's assume that the EV system remains, so all those who to bring that up don't need to (although I'm sure they will).

Now that the idea of turning Electoral Voters from their obligation has been breached on the largest level to date, can we expect EV's to be targeted each and every presidential election from now on?

And does anyone doubt that this "targeting" will include threats and intimidation and bribery?

The presidential election will only be prelude. The real battle would begin after that. A few dozen faceless EV's will have the power to control the destiny of 300+ million Americans.

Is this really what we want?
.

Doesn't work that way Mac. If the electors change votes on the 1st ballot and were to elect anyone else, the electoral college would then be challenged and the choice would then go to the house for President, and the Senate for Vice-President. It is the way it works.

As far as the EC, why would small(er) states go along with a change? They and their legislatures would be silly to do so. But, there is a movement from deep blue states to make it so no matter who wins their state, their electors vote en mass for the winner of the popular vote. The blue states can do this legally as they are in charge of their electors. I am of the opinion that if they do this, it will trigger the red states who have been balking about an article 5, to get on board; especially now that so many states are red. They are virtually at the threshold of being able to call, and execute anything they decide on, by themselves. (very close. very, very close) If that is what the far leftists want, then that is probably what they are going to get. They need be careful what they wish for. Just the simple clause they are fighting for most.....forced balanced budget......would put the Democrats in the trick bag.

The electoral college has worked as it was designed by the Founding Fathers for 232 years! They wanted a president to be elected by a majority of the states and not the population centers. Out of approximately 3,000 counties in the U.S., Hillary Clinton carried only 100! Her lead in the popular vote was racked up in just five states: New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Illinois and California! Those five states do not represent the majority of the country! Under the EC system, a vote cast in Wyoming counts as much as one cast in California! While the democrats do not take defeat well (2010; 2014 & 2016) they have none the less become unhinged and are showing their true colors! Does anybody seriously believe that if Trump had won the popular vote and Hillary the EC, that democrats wouldn't be clamoring abut the viryues of the EC?

That is pure horseshit.

Under the popular vote, a vote cast in Wyoming counts the same as a vote cast in California.

The Founders fucked up lots of things, and the electoral college is just one example. No, they didn't implement it out of recognition of its wisdom,

they implemented it expediently to get all the states to sign on.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No good ever comes when you make the loser the winner.

 

[owebo]

No good ever comes when you make the loser the winner.

That why Trump is POTUS....

 

[JoeB131]

It's going to be hilarious when your bullshit is rubbed in your face when Trump does get the vote on Monday.

Your hatred of America is not amusing.

When did I say that i didn't think the Electors weren't going to elect Trump on Monday?

The problem is, they will. Even though they know he's going to be a disaster, they'll vote for him anyway because they are too afraid of the anger of his Brownshirts to not do it.

The GOP is waiting for Trump to fail to turn on him. That's politics, not patriotism.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

It's going to be hilarious when your bullshit is rubbed in your face when Trump does get the vote on Monday.

Your hatred of America is not amusing.

When did I say that i didn't think the Electors weren't going to elect Trump on Monday?

The problem is, they will. Even though they know he's going to be a disaster, they'll vote for him anyway because they are too afraid of the anger of his Brownshirts to not do it.

The GOP is waiting for Trump to fail to turn on him. That's politics, not patriotism.

Get over it and suck it up buttercup!

 

[JoeB131]

Get over it and suck it up buttercup!

Oh, not an issue. When Trump beclowns himself on a daily basis, I will be here saying, I TOLD YOU SO!!!

When the economy crashes due to the trade war he's going to start, I will be here saying "I told you so!"

When hundreds of American Soldiers come back from the War with Iran that his war cabinet wants, I will be here saying "I told you so!"

 

[owebo]

It's going to be hilarious when your bullshit is rubbed in your face when Trump does get the vote on Monday.

Your hatred of America is not amusing.

When did I say that i didn't think the Electors weren't going to elect Trump on Monday?

The problem is, they will. Even though they know he's going to be a disaster, they'll vote for him anyway because they are too afraid of the anger of his Brownshirts to not do it.

The GOP is waiting for Trump to fail to turn on him. That's politics, not patriotism.

I hope the next 8 years of Trump are terribly horrible for you.....