NY Times calls for end to Electoral College

blackascoal said:
YOU voted for Trump?

Shocker.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but One looked as bad as the other. The only reason I voted for Trump came down to possible SC appointees. I knew the type Hillary would appoint but at least with Trump there is a chance he may appoint someone who would uphold the 2nd amendment. And I realize that is another rural vs. urban issue.
 
blackascoal said:
Help me understand how the elimination of the EC disenfranchises people in rural states.

They get the same one vote that everybody else does, and the totality of those votes elects a president.
Click to expand...

I have a perfect example. Here in WV, a whole industry had war declared on it by the federal government. Thanks to the EC, the affected people at least had a chance to affect an electoral outcome in order to change things.

Are you suggesting the fate of their industry and livelihood should be determined only by people hundreds or thousands of miles away simply because there's more of them and their region is unaffected?

How is that in anyway fair?
 
Desh, you proclaim yourself a constitutionalist who loves the founders. Why did the founders not trust direct democracy?
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
I have a perfect example. Here in WV, a whole industry had war declared on it by the federal government. Thanks to the EC, the affected people at least had a chance to affect an electoral outcome in order to change things.

Are you suggesting the fate of their industry and livelihood should be determined only by people hundreds or thousands of miles away simply because there's more of them and their region is unaffected?

How is that in anyway fair?
Click to expand...

They have Congresspeople & Senators.

How is it fair that more people voted Dem this election, but Republicans control literally everything?
 
leaningright said:
I'm sorry but One looked as bad as the other. The only reason I voted for Trump came down to possible SC appointees. I knew the type Hillary would appoint but at least with Trump there is a chance he may appoint someone who would uphold the 2nd amendment. And I realize that is another rural vs. urban issue.
Click to expand...

The 2nd amendment hysteria is so overblown. Any Supreme Court is going to uphold the 2nd. It's the law of the land. The only way it wouldn't be is if there ever was an amendment to repeal it - which there never will be.
 
Thing1 said:
They have Congresspeople & Senators.

How is it fair that more people voted Dem this election, but Republicans control literally everything?
Click to expand...

So, they should have no say in who is president lol?

If Republicans control everything, whose fault is that? Maybe democrats should try something different instead of doing the same thing over and over.
 
leaningright said:
I'm sorry but One looked as bad as the other. The only reason I voted for Trump came down to possible SC appointees. I knew the type Hillary would appoint but at least with Trump there is a chance he may appoint someone who would uphold the 2nd amendment. And I realize that is another rural vs. urban issue.
Click to expand...

Unfortunate good brother.

That's a boat that good people should never want to be in.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
So, they should have no say in who is president lol?

If Republicans control everything, whose fault is that? Maybe democrats should try something different instead of doing the same thing over and over.
Click to expand...

Who said they have "no say"? They have a vote, just like those in the blue areas.

And the 2nd point is instant hypocrisy from you. Your double-standard really is something to behold. Dems won the majority of votes - but THEY need to do something different?
 
Thing1 said:
Who said they have "no say"? They have a vote, just like those in the blue areas.

And the 2nd point is instant hypocrisy from you. Your double-standard really is something to behold. Dems won the majority of votes - but THEY need to do something different?
Click to expand...

Would the candidates have campaigned the same way and would everyone have voted the same way had it been a direct vote?
 
Thing1 said:
The 2nd amendment hysteria is so overblown. Any Supreme Court is going to uphold the 2nd. It's the law of the land. The only way it wouldn't be is if there ever was an amendment to repeal it - which there never will be.
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court couldn't reduce the rights of gun owners?
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
I have a perfect example. Here in WV, a whole industry had war declared on it by the federal government. Thanks to the EC, the affected people at least had a chance to affect an electoral outcome in order to change things.

Are you suggesting the fate of their industry and livelihood should be determined only by people hundreds or thousands of miles away simply because there's more of them and their region is unaffected?

How is that in anyway fair?
Click to expand...

It appears that argument belongs on the state level. Every state has their own set of unique issues, but what goes on in a state should have no bearing on the will of the people.

WV 5 electoral votes don't really make much impact on the outcome. .. and land should never supercede the will of the American people.
 
Rune said:
Idiot, even the way senators are elected has changed to the popular vote. ASSHOLE
Click to expand...
moron.. the MANNER of the vote has changed but the PROPORTIONALITY remains the same...
Which is the SAME THING the way the EC counts votes . 3/5th compromise is gone, but the EC member count remains the same.

you are a perfect ex. of " a little knowledge is a dangerous thing"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top