Democrat introducing bill to abolish Electoral College

originally posted by: blueman12
People are stupid.. electoral college makes sense. Every average joe moe trump voter was voting for silly reasons, or really had no idea how trump was.

I actually dont mean to call trump supporters stupid.. Because they are not. They are just not educated in politics and what election entails. They vote emotionally and stupidly.

WTF? If you are going to say all this you should also, in keeping with thread topic, the same about the libs who are now crying about it. And Boxer has been in politics for years and STILL cant seem to understand what the EC is. Which make it look like dems are REAL bad sorta special stupid like watch them around heavy equipment.

I'm going to help everyone out. This image was published by the New York Times. It shows a graphical representation of the how the country voted with Hillary areas converted into extra bodies of water and Trump areas as land mass.

Those tiny, tiny lakes and extra bays managed to win the popular vote, but the vast majority of people in all areas voted for Trump.

You tell me what a majority of the country ought to constitute, and then consider this is why we have the EC.

originally posted by: Logarock

And Boxer has been in politics for years and STILL cant seem to understand what the EC is. Which make it look like dems are REAL bad sorta special stupid like watch them around heavy equipment.

Sometimes its hard to tell, too, if she doesn't understand it, or is being willfully ignorant just to forward her agenda. Either way, she still looks stupid IMO.

a reply to: ketsuko

It kinda does put it all into perspective, doesn't it?

a reply to: Logarock

It takes a special sort of stupid, re Barbara Boxer, to think anything good could come of abolishing the EC.

Not that it'll happen, 2/3 of the country would have to agree to that, and 2/3 of the country can't agree the sky is blue most days...

a reply to: seagull


As Ralph Kramden would say, "She's a nut alright"

originally posted by: ketsuko

I'm going to help everyone out. This image was published by the New York Times. It shows a graphical representation of the how the country voted with Hillary areas converted into extra bodies of water and Trump areas as land mass.

Those tiny, tiny lakes and extra bays managed to win the popular vote, but the vast majority of people in all areas voted for Trump.

You tell me what a majority of the country ought to constitute, and then consider this is why we have the EC.

I'm conflicted over this one. Is it "We the people..." or "We the land..." ?

a reply to: alphabetaone

As far as I know the worst president in US history won with 39.9% of the popular vote, Abraham Lincoln. Any other president and there would still be no slavery, but there would be hundreds of thousands more Americans not murdered in self defense of their state sovereignty.

a reply to: alphabetaone

Whats the bill called?

Butthurtus Maximus?

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: alphabetaone

Whats the bill called?

Butthurtus Maximus?

It's starting to feel that way, yea lol

Source.

That looks fair.

a reply to: alphabetaone

its funny to me. I was for the EC being done away with for a while now. All I heard was the benefits of it. Now that Trump won because of it, all I hear is how outdated it is.

Makes me laugh.

I am down, but its a double edged sword.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: alphabetaone

its funny to me. I was for the EC being done away with for a while now. All I heard was the benefits of it. Now that Trump won because of it, all I hear is how outdated it is.

Makes me laugh.

I am down, but its a double edged sword.

Whether youre for it or against it, it IS funny to watch how wishy washy can be on topics in general...like no one has the cajones to be resolute in their convictions.

a reply to: loam

Yep. That definitely shows the problem we're faced with. Likely pretty accurately too.


It still leaves me on the fence though about my personal views on the EC. I'm not really on board with abolishing it for a popular vote election, but there's always something in the back of my mind that says to me "but it IS what more people want than those that don't"...I think it's because I never lose sight of the fact that what I know to be MY plight or issue is completely independent of what other people's plights and issues may possibly be.


ETA: And that regional concerns (while not having as great a population) could be far more devastating if not weighing in with as much relevance as a high population area. Farmers are always a good example of that.

a reply to: alphabetaone

Fair enough.

In my view, a key component to real freedom is choice. In this country, we have 50 choices...50 experiments in democracy. Moreover, one state can try something and the rest can learn from it. Diminish the relevance of the states and we destroy what makes our Republic so special.

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: alphabetaone

Fair enough.

In my view, a key component to real freedom is choice. In this country, we have 50 choices...50 experiments in democracy. Moreover, one state can try something and the rest can learn from it. Diminish the relevance of the states and we destroy what makes our Republic so special.

It's like everything else, we will learn when it's too late. When people have their forefingers on their chins and say "hmmmm...maybe that wasn't such a great idea".