Founding fathers were genius. Electoral college is here to stay.

a reply to: Irishhaf

The same way those states you mentioned would be told.

a reply to: JAY1980

How about you stop with your idiotic baseless assumptions about my beliefs and biases? I don't blanket label people except while being sardonic. Red states are the biggest drains on entitlements. Maybe I wouldn't seem so mean by talking about facts if you would bother to learn to some.

*Not a liberal
**Not a democrat
***Didn't vote for Hillary

How many disclaimers do I need to have before you can come at me with a logical argument vs feelings?

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Krakatoa

The EC should remain, however something needs to be done to balance it out ( I don't know what). Trump won the EC by 77K votes whereas Hillary won the popular vote by 2.3M. Essentially one county in each of three states outweighed millions of people.

*Not a democrat
**Didn't vote for Hillary

And it appeared those 3m came from California, a state taxing itself into oblivion which will soon be following Illinois into insolvency. No thanks, that is not what our Country needs...to be run like one state, the reason for the EC in the first place. The reasons she lost is POTUS understood and played by EC rules. The Dems were a complete disaster in their campaign because they thought the coronation was a given. No need to change it, candidates and campaigns need to understand the rules.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: JAY1980

How about you stop with your idiotic baseless assumptions about my beliefs and biases? I don't blanket label people except while being sardonic. Red states are the biggest drains on entitlements. Maybe I wouldn't seem so mean by talking about facts if you would bother to learn to some.

*Not a liberal
**Not a democrat
***Didn't vote for Hillary

How many disclaimers do I need to have before you can come at me with a logical argument vs feelings?

You don't really believe what you stated on red states and entitlements? If so, please explain Illinois'' insolvency problem currently ongoing. I'm in Texas and while we do have entitlement issues, they are squarely located in the sanctuary cities (where the blue population lives).

a reply to: daskakik

There had to be a perfect storm for Trump to win... and he won by what 77k votes.. that is it.

If Hillary runs a good campaign... she wins... if Trump did not over ride his staff and focus on those swing states that hillary ignored... she wins.

This loss had nothing to do with the EC, and everything to do with incompetence around Hillary.



I certainly would not trust any Republican, or Democrat to change it.. they would just try to slide things to benefit their side... I am more interested in a change that benefits the people.

Also as noted earlier a pure democracy would not work... so how would you change the EC?

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: allsee4eye


When women weren't allowed to vote, there is no way i would call the EC an act of " Genius "

In fact far from it.

Because ... you know .... women not being allowed to vote had so much to do with the overall electoral system.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

There is a pretty easy way for a guy living in Florida or California or any other high population state to fix this -- simply move to tiny population state like Wyoming.

Of course, just because his one vote seems to take on an outsized power means nothing when you would need roughly 16 Wyomings on the EC scale to outweigh the contribution of EC votes just from California. So maybe you ought to rethink the whole feeling of powerlessness.

Maybe that one vote looks to be so much more powerful, but how powerful do you think that one guy in Wyoning felt in, say, 2012? My his big powerful vote meant precisely squat when all piddly 3 of Wyoming's EC votes were factored into the overall race.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Also as noted earlier a pure democracy would not work... so how would you change the EC?

Election by popular vote is not pure democracy so that is a strawman.

Who said anything about changing the EC? I just pointed out that either way people are being told that they don't matter so it is a baseless excuse.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Also as noted earlier a pure democracy would not work... so how would you change the EC?

Election by popular vote is not pure democracy so that is a strawman.

Who said anything about changing the EC? I just pointed out that either way people are being told that they don't matter so it is a baseless excuse.

IME, people feel like they don't matter when the candidate they wanted didn't win.

a reply to: ketsuko

Doesn't really change my point.

The EC takes into account both states and popular vote. Each state has 2 senators regardless of population. The more people in a state, the more representatives in that state.

The founding fathers placed great importance in the states. That's why each state has 2 senators regardless of population. Hillary won 20 states compared to Trump's 30. So why should should she win the election even though more people voted for her? EC is fair because it takes both states and popular vote into account.