electoral college and fairness...

PostmodernProphet

PostmodernProphet

fully immersed in faith..
so someone please tell me....since every state can determine for itself how to elect their electoral college delegates......and since liberals feel the only fair way to apportion them is by considering the popular vote.....why is it that the two most liberal states, California and New York, give all their votes to one candidate instead of dividing them based on the popular vote?.....
 
Yea, I was wondering the same thing. The EC is a great thing until it doesn't work for your side. Sour grapes on the liberals this year.
 
I think we need to go back to September posts on JPP when Trump was leading in the polls. Every JPP liberal squealed that it was the Electoral College that mattered. In fact I even remember one leftardiot (Thingy or GayRod) saying "Trump could win the popular vote and lose the Electoral College".

They were all about the Electoral College until of course they aren't about the Electoral College. This is why they should all be lynched for treason. Starting with blackasshole
 
Hillary Destroyer said:
I think we need to go back to September posts on JPP when Trump was leading in the polls. Every JPP liberal squealed that it was the Electoral College that mattered. In fact I even remember one leftardiot (Thingy or GayRod) saying "Trump could win the popular vote and lose the Electoral College".

They were all about the Electoral College until of course they aren't about the Electoral College. This is why they should all be lynched for treason. Starting with blackasshole
Click to expand...
Liar... give a cite or it didn't happen.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
so someone please tell me....since every state can determine for itself how to elect their electoral college delegates......and since liberals feel the only fair way to apportion them is by considering the popular vote.....why is it that the two most liberal states, California and New York, give all their votes to one candidate instead of dividing them based on the popular vote?.....
Click to expand...

Because of you went by the popular vote, the candidate that actually gets the most votes, there wouldn't be any electoral votes to proportion out, straight vote

Point your missing is that Clinton didn't just win the popular vote as Gore did, but won it substantially, close to three million more Americans voted for her, regardless of where they live, the are Americans

And before you start deflecting with the "stop crying," I don't favor doing away with it, but I'd recommend a close examination if the same disproportionate situation occurs again
 
Hillary Destroyer said:
I think we need to go back to September posts on JPP when Trump was leading in the polls. Every JPP liberal squealed that it was the Electoral College that mattered. In fact I even remember one leftardiot (Thingy or GayRod) saying "Trump could win the popular vote and lose the Electoral College".

They were all about the Electoral College until of course they aren't about the Electoral College. This is why they should all be lynched for treason. Starting with blackasshole
Click to expand...

So, for what, one week back in September, you recall all this electoral college talk? Okie Dokie, they probably still say that when you live
 
It's set up to give weight to the states just for being states ( 2 votes like the Senate) and for proportional representation like the House.
just like Congress. looks good to me
 
No, because Congressmen and Senators by design represent the interests and concerns of their own geographical area, the President is national in scope and represents the Nation as a whole not one specific area
 
archives said:
No, because Congressmen and Senators by design represent the interests and concerns of their own geographical area, the President is national in scope and represents the Nation as a whole not one specific area
Click to expand...
Congress is a national body. the bicameral set up reflects the will of both the states and the people
 
archives said:
Because of you went by the popular vote, the candidate that actually gets the most votes, there wouldn't be any electoral votes to proportion out, straight vote

Point your missing is that Clinton didn't just win the popular vote as Gore did, but won it substantially, close to three million more Americans voted for her, regardless of where they live, the are Americans

And before you start deflecting with the "stop crying," I don't favor doing away with it, but I'd recommend a close examination if the same disproportionate situation occurs again
Click to expand...

I don't believe she did. Election fraud is a problem we need to deal with.
 
archives said:
Because of you went by the popular vote, the candidate that actually gets the most votes, there wouldn't be any electoral votes to proportion out, straight vote

Point your missing is that Clinton didn't just win the popular vote as Gore did, but won it substantially, close to three million more Americans voted for her, regardless of where they live, the are Americans

And before you start deflecting with the "stop crying," I don't favor doing away with it, but I'd recommend a close examination if the same disproportionate situation occurs again
Click to expand...

she crushed it in California; that's where her popular vote victory came from; and it's possible we may only be Americans a short time longer as we are looking to secede.
 
cawacko said:
she crushed it in California; that's where her popular vote victory came from; and it's possible we may only be Americans a short time longer as we are looking to secede.
Click to expand...

You don't have any curiosity at all as to how that popular vote tally occurred?
 
Guille said:
You don't have any curiosity at all as to how that popular vote tally occurred?
Click to expand...

It's California. Consider that the Top Two system yielded two opposing Democrats for US Senate. Even in WA, that didn't happen, although, we did have executive races consisting of R-R (Treasurer) and L-D (Auditor).
 
Threedee said:
It's California. Consider that the Top Two system yielded two opposing Democrats for US Senate. Even in WA, that didn't happen, although, we did have executive races consisting of R-R (Treasurer) and L-D (Auditor).
Click to expand...

I saw the map for California. How did Killery get that kind of pop vote advantage there?
 
It's the only way to counterbalance the inherent unfairness of the electoral college. If New York and California divided their vote and everyone else went winner take all, they may as well not even vote.

As well, if every state voted proportionally, it would hugely bias things towards smaller states.
 
Simon Bolivar said:
It's the only way to counterbalance the inherent unfairness of the electoral college. If New York and California divided their vote and everyone else went winner take all, they may as well not even vote.

As well, if every state voted proportionally, it would hugely bias things towards smaller states.
Click to expand...

You say this like it's a bad thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top