Given that Trump lost the popular vote is it still time to do away with the Electoral College?

Remember when Obama said "Of course I inhaled. That's the point!"

Well, when the EC vote breaks differently than the popular vote, "That's the point!"

That's why the EC exists. To prevent hyper-populated urban areas from hijacking the whole country.

What you are seeing is not a bug, it is a feature.
 
I'm sure when he tweeted that he wasn't aware of the reasons that the EC exists. Few people are educated on the EC.
 
I've posted it a couple times now, but something curious to note is that even with the changing demographics, Hillary Clinton got 10 million - repeat 10 MILLION - fewer votes than Obama did in 2008! Trump got even fewer than that.

Oh - and like Gunny said, this is why we have the electoral college - it's a feature, not a bug.
 
Last edited:
rpfocus said:
Should the Electoral College be removed, or should it only exist when your chosen candidate wins?
Click to expand...

we live in a constitutional republic. The president is elected by the state's not the people. If you don't understand the importance of the electoral college and who the president represents, you'll need to educate yourself better - it is possible to improve or replace but popular vote isn't the option.

We don't live in a democracy (thank goodness!!), which would be the only case for a popular vote.
 
Makes Interesting Points said:
The more times that a candidate wins the popular vote but loses the election, the more likely we are to get rid of the electoral college.

Everybody's vote should have an impact on the election. A conservative in California shouldn't have to live their whole life without their vote ever mattering.
Click to expand...


These candidates ran a race to target electoral votes. These exact same people running again for the popular vote would have targeted different groups so it's unfair to go back and ask 'what if'.

If person A scores 80 in golf and person B scores 90 in golf, person A wins. It's not fair to then say, if they were playing basketball Person B would have won.

Popular vote vs Electoral College are campaigned for very differently so it's unfair to look back and change a rule and pretend the outcome score would offer an opposite result.
 
TommyJeff said:
These candidates ran a race to target electoral votes. These exact same people running again for the popular vote would have targeted different groups so it's unfair to go back and ask 'what if'.

If person A scores 80 in golf and person B scores 90 in golf, person A wins. It's not fair to then say, if they were playing basketball Person B would have won.

Popular vote vs Electoral College are campaigned for very differently so it's unfair to look back and change a rule and pretend the outcome score would offer an opposite result.
Click to expand...

And how many Republicans just stayed home in CA because CA was already decided? I bet it's enough to put Trump over the top in the popular vote.
 
Given the ever increasing march toward an imperial presidency, one might better argue whether we have one too many branches of government. ;)
 
The electoral college is not the problem, its the corrupt 2 party system and the primary process. To focus on the EC is to overlook the real issues.

Having said that, there are some interesting ideas on how to augment the election process so as to combat influence by party leaders and the manipulation of the electorate by media propaganda/lies.

Ranked choice voting:

 
brushfire said:
The electoral college is not the problem, its the corrupt 2 party system and the primary process.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Ron Paul was robbed via a crooked Primary as was Bernie Sanders. If it weren't for primarily wanting the GOP to break up and create a viable 3rd party, I wouldn't have a dog in the fight. Trump's win probably killed that dream, giving credibility to the theory that membership one of the two major parties is still required to win. While Donald Trump would have lost running as an Independent or LP, I believe critical mass was building, and that his loss would have caused a lot more Republicans to start thinking outside of the box during future elections. The GOP has no cause to change now, the MIC and Wall St running it can now continue the status quo. That wouldn't have been the case with half their votes going to a 3rd party Trump.
 
I didn't read all the comments here so forgive me if this was already stated but Trump won his campaign with half the money of hilliary and no help from his Party or the media. If Trump had the support she had, he would've dusted her into smithereens and you know what, he did anyways ;)

Something else no one's probably mentioning but Kellyanne Conway is the first woman in the history of the GOP to run a presidential campaign ...and she won it.
 
Dangergirl said:
I didn't read all the comments here so forgive me if this was already stated but Trump won his campaign with half the money of hilliary and no help from his Party or the media. If Trump had the support she had, he would've dusted her into smithereens and you know what, he did anyways ;)

Something else no one's probably mentioning but Kellyanne Conway is the first woman in the history of the GOP to run a presidential campaign ...and she won it.
Click to expand...

He had RNC help, they redirected Trump Victory funds from TV ads to field offices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Anti Federalist
State law takes US a step closer to popular vote deciding presidential elections
Replies
6
Views
629
GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged
G
PAF
National Elections Expose the Sham that Is Centralized “Democracy”
Replies
0
Views
538
PAF
PAF
Anti Federalist
Congress has the power to block Trump from taking office, but lawmakers must act now
Replies
8
Views
4K
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Majority of Americans disfavor the Electoral College
Replies
16
Views
907
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Why Trump’s victory matters - and why it doesn't
Replies
0
Views
473
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Back
Top