Hillary won the popular vote by over 150,000 votes.
185 replies, posted
[QUOTE=wystan;51341342]I think I was unclear when I said minorities. I'm talking about just groups of people located across the country, not demographics, the founders were Federalists, they stressed state rights over everything.[/QUOTE]
The electoral college has it's good intentions but it's not working when someone who is hated by the majority of the country is representing the US military and country on an international level.
[QUOTE=mooman1080;51345860]It's quite peculiar seeing people talk about whether trump will accept his loss or not then when he wins we get people calling to drastically change how we do elections.[/QUOTE]
People have been calling for that forever, the electoral college has always had plenty of critics. It's sad to see that legitimate complaints are getting brushed off as whining
[QUOTE=Adrian Veidt;51347913]The United States is a federal republic. How is this news?
Of course the merits of the current system can be discussed but stop acting like it's automatically invalid just because the losing candidate can win the popular vote. That isn't the only aspect to consider.
Interestingly and less discussed, the European Parliament doesn't count every vote equal either. Instead seats are applied with degressive proportionality.
The EU does however enforce that MEPs must be elected on the basis of proportional representation for each member state.
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degressive_proportionality[/url][/QUOTE]
The EU has way less influence over individual nations than the US federal government has over the states, though.
[QUOTE=plunger435;51347732]That's exactly what you're doing, because no one here would be complaining if it was the other way around.
Not to mention it wasn't a massive skew. Gore beat Bush by 500,000 in 2000 too.[/QUOTE]
Yeah they would be. If Clinton defeated Trump, there would still be people complaining-- myself included. I've been complaining about the electoral college since I was a kid and saw Bush steal the 2000 election from Gore. A skew is a skew; whether it's 543,000+ votes (how much Gore beat Bush by) or almost 220,000 votes (Clinton), it doesn't matter-- they had more votes, they won according to the will of the American people who exercised their right to vote.
It's like 3000% more ironic because Trump himself in 2012 just before Obama's re-election called the electoral college "a disaster for democracy".
[media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/266038556504494082[/media]
What a fuckwit. But that's nothing new.
[editline]10th November 2016[/editline]
Add that Tweet of his to the OP would you please, Zoey.
He talked shit about tons of systems and even pointed out he uses them because they let it work that way, I don't see how it's relevant. He can disagree with electoral college and still use it, infact, it's impossible not to
[QUOTE=notlabbet;51342124]Writing your representative won't do shit when we lost house and senate![/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;51348196]He talked shit about tons of systems and even pointed out he uses them because they let it work that way, I don't see how it's relevant. He can disagree with electoral college and still use it, infact, it's impossible not to[/QUOTE]
Disagreeing with something and then using it to your advantage makes you a hypocrite, however, and means you're willing to use whatever you want to get power, even if you disagree with it.
That's not a great sign for Trump's presidency.
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;51348196]He talked shit about tons of systems and even pointed out he uses them because they let it work that way, I don't see how it's relevant. He can disagree with electoral college and still use it, infact, it's impossible not to[/QUOTE]
If he uses what he criticizes, then that makes him a hypocrite. Again, that's nothing new; he's your typical criminal who lies continuously to defend himself all while he's enriching himself. He called the electoral college system a disaster for democracy, he lost the popular vote this election, but now he's acting like it's no big deal and is being extremely quiet about that Tweet because the electoral college is the only thing that saved his ass here. He lost the election-- the majority of the American people do not want him and demonstrated this when they voted. They're physically demonstrating against him now as well. He is not wanted, it's that simple.
If you don't see how this is relevant, I'd be curious to find out what kind of mental gymnastics you're putting yourself through right now.
Also, I expect him to hold true to that 2012 sentiment and to use his newfound power as president to attempt to abolish the electoral college system. But watch as that doesn't happen. When it was 2012 and Obama was beating Romney, why then it was just terrible. But now since it's allowed him to steal the election, suddenly there's not a problem with it.
[editline]10th November 2016[/editline]
Did you vote for him? How do you not see an issue here? Again, explain how it is that you don't think any of this is "relevant" to what's going on. It's completely fucking relevant.
[QUOTE=mooman1080;51345860]It's quite peculiar seeing people talk about whether trump will accept his loss or not then when he wins we get people calling to drastically change how we do elections.[/QUOTE]
The hypocracy from random people is funny to look at, but more importantly the problem with this election system was that trump and clinton were our only valid two choices when it came down to it. Our election system right now tends towards two parties in extreme opposition from eachother, there is no question we would be better off with several reforms from electoral college to the first past the post voting system itself.
You know what sucks, it doesnt matter who won for this issue, either way one group would have been laughing at the other group who now wants to reform the college. This should be a bipartisen issue everyone agrees with, but it isn't.
[QUOTE=Govna;51348109]It's like 3000% more ironic because Trump himself in 2012 just before Obama's re-election called the electoral college "a disaster for democracy".
[media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/266038556504494082[/media]
What a fuckwit. But that's nothing new.
[editline]10th November 2016[/editline]
Add that Tweet of his to the OP would you please, Zoey.[/QUOTE]
Donald trump recognizing the electoral college sucks makes him a fuckwit? I mean, he is, but he's still right. What did you expect him to do, hand clinton the victory because he only won the electoral college? What guarantee would there be she would fix the college afterwards.
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;51348196]He talked shit about tons of systems and even pointed out he uses them because they let it work that way, I don't see how it's relevant. He can disagree with electoral college and still use it, infact, it's impossible not to[/QUOTE]
I thought he was all about change in politics but I guess I was wrong. Even his supporters can't stop flip flopping, apparently
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51348371]I thought he was all about change in politics but I guess I was wrong. Even his supporters can't stop flip flopping, apparently[/QUOTE]
What are you talking about
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;51348376]What are you talking about[/QUOTE]
Slimy politics and slimy politicians is what he's been on about for his whole campaign. His entire rhetoric is about changing the system - unless he can use it to his advantage, it seems
[QUOTE=Mattk50;51348293]Donald trump recognizing the electoral college sucks makes him a fuckwit? I mean, he is, but he's still right. What did you expect him to do, hand clinton the victory because he only won the electoral college? What guarantee would there be she would fix the college afterwards.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51348261]Disagreeing with something and then using it to your advantage makes you a hypocrite, however, and means you're willing to use whatever you want to get power, even if you disagree with it.
That's not a great sign for Trump's presidency.[/QUOTE]
Again, we shall expect him to make reforms to the electoral college system/attempt to abolish it since he was apparently such a big critic of it. To not do so is hypocritical and continues to prove how dishonest of a person he is after making a statement like that. When Obama was beating Romney, then it was a huge issue. But when he beats Clinton only in the electoral college but loses the popular vote and still manages to become president-- which is clearly an affront to the democratic principles he claims to care so much about and want to defend so badly... silence.
It's like when the polls showed he was probably going to lose and he came out swinging and crying about how "THE SYSTEM IS RIGGED AGAINST ME, CROOKED HILLARY blah blah blah". Haven't heard any further rhetoric about that now that he's been declared the winner.
It's extremely suspicious that you don't recognize what's going on here and call it out for what it is: hypocritical and dishonest. Like Mage said, that doesn't inspire hope in what his presidency will be-- it makes us justifiably concerned. That and plenty of other things make us concerned I mean, whether it's the fact that the guy heading his EPA transition team is a huge climate change denialist or that all those jobs he promised to "bring back" to the United States don't even exist now because of technological advances and changes over the last few decades lol.
Clinton also never made any remarks about the electoral college system. She's not relevant here, Trump is. People need to quit changing the subject when this discussion is brought up.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51348387]Slimy politics and slimy politicians is what he's been on about for his whole campaign. His entire rhetoric is about changing the system - unless he can use it to his advantage, it seems[/QUOTE]
He's not even sworn in how is he gonna kick the electoral college out mid election? He literally has to go with it.
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;51348399]He's not even sworn in how is he gonna kick the electoral college out mid election? He literally has to go with it.[/QUOTE]
is he tweeting about how this election was a sham because he lost the popular vote?
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51348406]is he tweeting about how this election was a sham because he lost the popular vote?[/QUOTE]
Hint: [sp]NO[/sp]
There's still more votes to count in
[editline]10th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=windwakr;51345611]I wonder why CNN, of all places, is projecting Trump to win the popular vote:
[url]http://www.cnn.com/election/results[/url] (click the popular vote tab)
[img]https://i.imgur.com/xQs8vQ3.png[/img]
I wonder where those last 8% of uncounted votes are from.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;51348424]There's still more votes to count in
[/QUOTE]
so he's just making sure? why didn't he make sure mitt romney won the popular vote (he didn't) before calling the 2012 election a sham, then?
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;51348424]There's still more votes to count in
[editline]10th November 2016[/editline][/QUOTE]
99.7% of the national popular vote is accounted for.
[url]https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=popular+vote&eob=enn/p//0/1///////////[/url]
Clinton has 59,938,290 votes.
Trump has 59,704,886 votes.
Clinton is leading Trump by 233,404 votes. She is on track to winning the popular vote in spite of the electoral college handing Trump the election.
[editline]10th November 2016[/editline]
That margin has been growing BTW. Yesterday when I checked, she was beating him by over 204,000 votes. It was originally 150,000 in the OP.
[i]Donald Trump is not wanted by the majority of the American people[/i]. It's that simple.
[QUOTE=Mattk50;51348293]The hypocracy from random people is funny to look at, but more importantly the problem with this election system was that trump and clinton were our only valid two choices when it came down to it. Our election system right now tends towards two parties in extreme opposition from eachother, there is no question we would be better off with several reforms from electoral college to the first past the post voting system itself.
You know what sucks, it doesnt matter who won for this issue, either way one group would have been laughing at the other group who now wants to reform the college. This should be a bipartisen issue everyone agrees with, but it isn't.
Donald trump recognizing the electoral college sucks makes him a fuckwit? I mean, he is, but he's still right. What did you expect him to do, hand clinton the victory because he only won the electoral college? What guarantee would there be she would fix the college afterwards.[/QUOTE]
Technically he could demand electors not vote for him in the interest of "fairness" on the promise that Clinton or Obama introduce an amendment to fix it
But he won't because that's pretty dumb and honestly it might not even work! Either the electors still vote for him, or the amendment fails.
[QUOTE=Govna;51348391]Again, we shall expect him to make reforms to the electoral college system/attempt to abolish it since he was apparently such a big critic of it. To not do so is hypocritical and continues to prove how dishonest of a person he is after making a statement like that. When Obama was beating Romney, then it was a huge issue. But when he beats Clinton only in the electoral college but loses the popular vote and still manages to become president-- which is clearly an affront to the democratic principles he claims to care so much about and want to defend so badly... silence.
It's like when the polls showed he was probably going to lose and he came out swinging and crying about how "THE SYSTEM IS RIGGED AGAINST ME, CROOKED HILLARY blah blah blah". Haven't heard any further rhetoric about that now that he's been declared the winner.
It's extremely suspicious that you don't recognize what's going on here and call it out for what it is: hypocritical and dishonest. Like Mage said, that doesn't inspire hope in what his presidency will be-- it makes us justifiably concerned. That and plenty of other things make us concerned I mean, whether it's the fact that the guy heading his EPA transition team is a huge climate change denialist or that all those jobs he promised to "bring back" to the United States don't even exist now because of technological advances and changes over the last few decades lol.
Clinton also never made any remarks about the electoral college system. She's not relevant here, Trump is. People need to quit changing the subject when this discussion is brought up.[/QUOTE]
Clinton not making any comments about it is somewhat relevant. if she had called out the system beforehand she'd have a point now, but she never did and now she doesn't.
You are allowed to criticize a system while still working within the system, if you criticize our democracy it doesnt mean you arent allowed to vote. Its a completely valid position.
Unrelated to your point, I think the single most important thing to recognize is that we should not try to change the rules after the game is over. It is completely absurd and unproductive to demand to change the college afterwards, because it divides it between the two parties. Obviously the winning party will be against undoing their win, but if you take it forward you have a much higher chance of changing something in the future. Never go "oh we should change the results" afterwards, change it beforehand if you care so much.
A lot of the protesters seem quite disingenuous for that reason, they only care because they lost and its an excuse to yell about how unfair it is. Change it before not after, and that means change it for the next election. petitions shouldnt be going "change the election results" they should be going "improve the system for next time"
I wonder how much of this lead is just the NYC-SoCal vote
Bet you a star its 80%
hello, welcome to first past the post
that is how this voting system works, as much as I don't like trump, he was fairly voted in, regardless of who got the most individual votes
[QUOTE=Instant Mix;51349576]hello, welcome to first past the post
that is how this voting system works, as much as I don't like trump, he was fairly voted in, regardless of who got the most individual votes[/QUOTE]
The argument isn't that he was unfairly voted in within our current system buddy
the argument is that the system itself is unfair
Can someone explain to me how and why electorals can place their votes before the citizen votes are even done counting?
Some states prohibit it
it's just a very old system
edit: wait, what do you mean? the electoral college hasn't voted yet
[QUOTE=Stroheim;51349167]I wonder how much of this lead is just the NYC-SoCal vote
Bet you a star its 80%[/QUOTE]
So? They don't count? Their vote should be worth less?
When there's one seat available in an election for the entire country, why should that seat not be representative of what the most (voting) Americans want?
Both parts of Congress, though the Senate especially, already give disproportionate weight to smaller states; why must the election of the President be weighted towards the smaller states as well.
[QUOTE=wystan;51341328]This is really just excess Californians. The founding fathers designed the electoral college to protect the minorities against the majority, giving low population states value to contend with giant population centers. This was a fair win.[/QUOTE]
Which no longer makes sense today as the US is far more homogeneous.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.