Author Topic: [NEWS] Clinton vote lead grows to 2 mil; Stein opens recount req. in WI, MI, PA  (Read 20742 times)

the best part is that in multiple of the 5 elections where the president elect didnt win the popular vote, the other candidate not only won the popular vote but also had more electoral votes...

It has failed every time the popular vote was different that the electoral vote. It should've been abolished the first time.

“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill

Electoral Vote > Popular vote

This is to keep things in check.

or due to the fact that the majority of Americans chose one candidate and the other was elected???
Iirc the majoriaty of the votes were only in the few most populated states and citites, whilst Annoying Orange's support was more wide-spread across the US. Again, people are being extremely butt-hurt about this.

would you mind giving us an explanation instead of just sitting there?
Google or actually listen in US Gov class could help.

The Electoral College was set in place so that the states with the lesser populations would have much more equal representation would have a larger say in elections. If it were popular vote only, then the few large states would Annoying Orange over the few-dozen lower populous states and basically make their votes worthless. If it were voted by the popular vote, some of the states in the east coast, florida, texas, and california would basically have votes so high due to their populations, which in turn, makes the smaller states less equal and far less represented than what they should be.

If it were popular vote, then California's population would completely snuff out about 10+ states due to it's massive population. Same with Texas and a few others. Popular vote only would just cause about 75% of the USA to be very under-represented.

Again if you want a better and more in-depth explanation, use google
« Last Edit: November 15, 2016, 09:47:37 PM by Insert Name Here² »

direct vote(mob rule) is for heathens
wtf are you gonna replace it with?

Iirc the majoriaty of the votes were only in the few most populated states and citites, whilst Annoying Orange's support was more wide-spread across the US. Again, people are being extremely butt-hurt about this.

what does that matter??? still more people voted for hillary than they did Annoying Orange

what if the US was composed of 2 cities, one 53 million who voted for hillary and one 52 million who voted for Annoying Orange then what...

a popular vote, in my opinion, makes your vote count much more


“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill

Electoral Vote > Popular vote

This is to keep things in check.
If you think people are too dumb to choose for themselves then you obviously don't believe in democracy at all

what does that matter??? still more people voted for hillary than they did Annoying Orange

what if the US was composed of 2 cities, one 53 million who voted for hillary and one 52 million who voted for Annoying Orange then what...

a popular vote, in my opinion, makes your vote count much more
The problem there is the problem in practice.
City A will always win because it has a larger population.

This is why electora votes even out this obvious means to corruption.

The problem there is the problem in practice.
City A will always win because it has a larger population.

This is why electora votes even out this obvious means to corruption.

If thats what the majority of people want, what the forget is the problem???

If thats what the majority of people want, what the forget is the problem???

Because then the majority will have a monopoly over to minority, that is the issue in poplarity votes. This also doesnt give fair representation for the wntire country, only a small part. Despite what the media tells them, its not all about them.

If thats what the majority of people want, what the forget is the problem???
it'd make voter fraud much easier. also, the electoral college has been very important for states rights and smaller states. it gives more people a say. if we just had direct vote, why would a candidate care about rural voters when you can win the election with the votes from the urban population? it forces candidates to give a stuff about smaller states. mob rule is not good.

ranked choice voting
i'll have to look into it.

what does that matter??? still more people voted for hillary than they did Annoying Orange
A few states on the east coast and one or two of the largest states of the US =/= equal representation across the entire country.

what if the US was composed of 2 cities, one 53 million who voted for hillary and one 52 million who voted for Annoying Orange then what...

a popular vote, in my opinion, makes your vote count much more
Except the US isn't 2 citites, it's 50 states with widely variation of population. The government and congress wants and wanted every state to have an equal part when it comes to elections, thus the electoral college was set in place so that not one state is too far under-represented.

A popular vote would only make the few most popular places in the us count. To over-come the massive population of the few put together would basically take damn near the entire country. Having a few states have that much representation in the government and congress is HIGHLY unequal. The US is supposed to be about equality, you know?

The electoral college is important so that places are not under-represented, which allows things to be more equal. If you don't like a president, just hibernate for 4 years, get over it, or kill yourself. Causing this much of a fuss is just ridiculous in my honest opinion.

Because then the majority will have a monopoly over to minority, that is the issue in poplarity votes. This also doesnt give fair representation for the wntire country, only a small part. Despite what the media tells them, its not all about them.
listen dude nearly 1 million more poeple voted for hillary over Annoying Orange as of right now
right now its the minority controlling the majority

Because then the majority will have a monopoly over to minority, that is the issue in poplarity votes. This also doesnt give fair representation for the wntire country, only a small part. Despite what the media tells them, its not all about them.
I don't see you complaining about the fact that one party will be in control of all three branches of government lmao

I guess she doesn't know why it exists in the first place