Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.
Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.
I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.
Interesting. One of the biggest problems with the electoral college is that it's rigged against highly populated states such as California. Wyoming has a population of about 580,000 and is worth 3 electoral college votes. That is 1 electoral college vote for every 193,000 people.
California has a population of 39.5 million, which is 68 times more than Wyoming. This means that California should have around 200 electoral college votes, if using the same ratio as Wyoming: 68 x 3 electoral votes = 204. Instead, California only has 55 electoral college votes.
This is completely unfair and the game is rigged to give Repubs a fighting chance in every Presidential election. If California was worth 200 electoral college votes like it should be, then Repubs would never have a chance in hell of winning a Presidential election ever again.
One of the biggest problems with the electoral college is that it's rigged against highly populated states such as California.
That's a feature, not a bug.
This is completely unfair
To amend the Constitution, you need a 2/3rds vote of the House and Senate.
And then you only need to get 3/4 of the states (38) to agree.
You'd better get to work.
If she got the most electoral votes, she wouldn't have lost.I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.
Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.
I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.
Interesting. One of the biggest problems with the electoral college is that it's rigged against highly populated states such as California. Wyoming has a population of about 580,000 and is worth 3 electoral college votes. That is 1 electoral college vote for every 193,000 people.
California has a population of 39.5 million, which is 68 times more than Wyoming. This means that California should have around 200 electoral college votes, if using the same ratio as Wyoming: 68 x 3 electoral votes = 204. Instead, California only has 55 electoral college votes.
This is completely unfair and the game is rigged to give Repubs a fighting chance in every Presidential election. If California was worth 200 electoral college votes like it should be, then Repubs would never have a chance in hell of winning a Presidential election ever again.
One of the biggest problems with the electoral college is that it's rigged against highly populated states such as California.
That's a feature, not a bug.
This is completely unfair
To amend the Constitution, you need a 2/3rds vote of the House and Senate.
And then you only need to get 3/4 of the states (38) to agree.
You'd better get to work.
That has nothing to do with the Constitution, genius. There is nothing in the Constitution that says a citizen in a small state like Wyoming has 3 times the voting power as a citizen in a large state like California. Absolutely nothing.
The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.
Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.
I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.
Interesting. One of the biggest problems with the electoral college is that it's rigged against highly populated states such as California. Wyoming has a population of about 580,000 and is worth 3 electoral college votes. That is 1 electoral college vote for every 193,000 people.
California has a population of 39.5 million, which is 68 times more than Wyoming. This means that California should have around 200 electoral college votes, if using the same ratio as Wyoming: 68 x 3 electoral votes = 204. Instead, California only has 55 electoral college votes.
This is completely unfair and the game is rigged to give Repubs a fighting chance in every Presidential election. If California was worth 200 electoral college votes like it should be, then Repubs would never have a chance in hell of winning a Presidential election ever again.
One of the biggest problems with the electoral college is that it's rigged against highly populated states such as California.
That's a feature, not a bug.
This is completely unfair
To amend the Constitution, you need a 2/3rds vote of the House and Senate.
And then you only need to get 3/4 of the states (38) to agree.
You'd better get to work.
That has nothing to do with the Constitution, genius. There is nothing in the Constitution that says a citizen in a small state like Wyoming has 3 times the voting power as a citizen in a large state like California. Absolutely nothing.
I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.
Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.
I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.
Interesting. One of the biggest problems with the electoral college is that it's rigged against highly populated states such as California. Wyoming has a population of about 580,000 and is worth 3 electoral college votes. That is 1 electoral college vote for every 193,000 people.
California has a population of 39.5 million, which is 68 times more than Wyoming. This means that California should have around 200 electoral college votes, if using the same ratio as Wyoming: 68 x 3 electoral votes = 204. Instead, California only has 55 electoral college votes.
This is completely unfair and the game is rigged to give Repubs a fighting chance in every Presidential election. If California was worth 200 electoral college votes like it should be, then Repubs would never have a chance in hell of winning a Presidential election ever again.
One of the biggest problems with the electoral college is that it's rigged against highly populated states such as California.
That's a feature, not a bug.
This is completely unfair
To amend the Constitution, you need a 2/3rds vote of the House and Senate.
And then you only need to get 3/4 of the states (38) to agree.
You'd better get to work.
That has nothing to do with the Constitution, genius. There is nothing in the Constitution that says a citizen in a small state like Wyoming has 3 times the voting power as a citizen in a large state like California. Absolutely nothing.
I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
Really? And what makes you "quite sure"? Because YOU are a selfish, tunnel-visioned clod who thinks right and wrong only apply when they suit you, and you assume everyone else is just like you?
Anonymous sources, once again.Let me get this straight: you think it was treason for Sessions to shake Kislyak's hand?
That's not all Sessions did. Plus, he lied about it.
What treasonous actions did Sessions engage in?
Furthermore, he didn't lie about it. Any rational person would reasonably conclude that "contact" does not mean shaking someone's hand in a greeting line. Only anal retentive snowflake douchebags would think that.
No, he just lied to Congress about meeting with Russians. That's all Sessions did (that we currently know of, anyway). Which is A OK for an immoral, worthless Repug like you.
Franken asked Sessions if anyone in the Trump campaign had "communicated with the Russian government." Shaking the ambassador's hand in a greeting line does not constitute "communicating with the Russian government" by any stretch of the imagination. Only delusional brain damaged snowflakes believe it does.
If Sessions like, then why didn't Herr Mewler indict him for perjury?
Wrong, Repug goober. You never get tired of your bullshit lies. And Sessions very well may get indicted. However, he was smart enough to admit that he already lied to Congress, so Mueller may cut him some slack. --
One U.S. official said that Sessions — who testified that he had no recollection of an April encounter — has provided “misleading” statements that are “contradicted by other evidence.” A former official said that the intelligence indicates that Sessions and Kislyak had “substantive” discussions on matters including Trump’s positions on Russia-related issues and prospects for U.S.-Russia relations in a Trump administration.
Sessions discussed Trump campaign-related matters with Russian ambassador, U.S. intelligence intercepts show
I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
Really? And what makes you "quite sure"? Because YOU are a selfish, tunnel-visioned clod who thinks right and wrong only apply when they suit you, and you assume everyone else is just like you?
No, the behavior of conservatives makes me quite sure had things been reversed the things I said would happen..
If she got the most electoral votes, she wouldn't have lost.I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
Really? And what makes you "quite sure"? Because YOU are a selfish, tunnel-visioned clod who thinks right and wrong only apply when they suit you, and you assume everyone else is just like you?
No, the behavior of conservatives makes me quite sure had things been reversed the things I said would happen..
Really? What conservative "behavior" have you observed that makes you "quite sure" that we don't respect the Constitution? The REAL Constitution, that is, not the invented shit the left keeps trying to graft onto it.
No we wouldn't.If she got the most electoral votes, she wouldn't have lost.I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
Yeah and had she got the most electoral votes, the fewest popular votes, we'd still be investigating the election, no president would be in office and you conservatives a would be crying abut how the Clintons stole the election.
The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.
Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.
I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.
Nope- frankly it is impossible- because under our Constitution, when the Electoral College votes- the election is official.
Suppose however we did find out that some American President was 'installed' by a foreign power through voter fraud- say the election system was hacked.
Then Congress could impeach the President if they thought it was warranted.
No we wouldn't.If she got the most electoral votes, she wouldn't have lost.I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
Yeah and had she got the most electoral votes, the fewest popular votes, we'd still be investigating the election, no president would be in office and you conservatives a would be crying abut how the Clintons stole the election.
I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.
Much More: What Happens If The Election Was A Fraud? The Constitution Doesn’t Say.
I have only quoted the last paragraph. All the details are in the previous eleven paragraphs. The bottom line appears to be that our Constitution is not equipped to deal with such an event. Hence, a constitutional crisis.
Nope- frankly it is impossible- because under our Constitution, when the Electoral College votes- the election is official.
Suppose however we did find out that some American President was 'installed' by a foreign power through voter fraud- say the election system was hacked.
Then Congress could impeach the President if they thought it was warranted.
If it was found out that anyone colluded with any foreign nation, there should be no partisan BS, they should be removed from office as soon as possible.
I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
WTF!?
I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
WTF!?
I was being sarcastic. Had Hillary won like Trump did, there would be a different song being sang around here.
No we wouldn't.If she got the most electoral votes, she wouldn't have lost.I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
Yeah and had she got the most electoral votes, the fewest popular votes, we'd still be investigating the election, no president would be in office and you conservatives a would be crying abut how the Clintons stole the election.
That's a damn lie. You punks are still yelling lock her up.
No we wouldn't.If she got the most electoral votes, she wouldn't have lost.I'm quite sure we'd be hearing the same thing from you conservatives had Hillary lost but got the most electoral votes.
Yeah and had she got the most electoral votes, the fewest popular votes, we'd still be investigating the election, no president would be in office and you conservatives a would be crying abut how the Clintons stole the election.
That's a damn lie. You punks are still yelling lock her up.
She's a proven criminal.
