Hillary Clinton says the Electoral College 'needs to be eliminated'

[Русский агент]

Except I have never read either.

According to yourself, right, Sir Rantsalot?

Where did you get this interesting idea?

asign a black the value of 2/3 for apportionment?

Tell me again how "litterate" (sic) you are, Sir Rantsalot.

 

[Irish]

So Cali and NY can decide every pres election. No thanks cunt.

 

[christiefan915]

Hillary Clinton made an argument for dissolving the Electoral College in an interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper on Wednesday night.

"I think it needs to be eliminated. I'd like to see us move beyond it, yes," Clinton said.

Clinton made the assertion while discussing her book, "What Happened," which recounts the turbulent 2016 US presidential election. Clinton lost the Electoral College to Donald Trump, who pulled in 306 votes to Clinton's 236 last November.

The Electoral College has 538 members who select the US president based on the popular vote in every state, as opposed to the national popular-vote tally, which is why a candidate who loses the popular vote can still win an election.

Clinton won the popular vote by nearly three million ballots, an achievement her supporters have frequently called up in protests during the first half-year of Trump's presidency. Clinton herself has touted it — most recently when she promoted the news website, Verrit, an outlet that calls itself "Media for the 65.8 million," a tagline that references Clinton's popular vote total.

The former Democratic candidate is not the first to suggest the Electoral College should be abolished. Al Gore, who won the popular vote in 2000, but still lost the election to George W. Bush, continued to support the current system, until Trump won in 2016.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/hillary-clinton-says-electoral-college-035524117.html

trump wanted it eliminated also. He hated it before he loved it.

"First, let’s look at Trump’s position in 2012, when it appeared that Mitt Romney might win the popular vote but lose the electoral college.

Interestingly, Trump has deleted a number of tweets he sent in 2012, including:

“He [Obama] lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!” (Nov. 6)
“The phoney [sic] electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. The loser one!” (Nov. 6)
“More votes equals a loss…revolution!” (Nov. 7)


​

But other tweets from that period remain, including:

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!
8:29 PM - 6 Nov 2012

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Lets fight like hell and stop this great and disgusting injustice! The world is laughing at us.

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
This election is a total sham and a travesty. We are not a democracy!
8:33 PM - 6 Nov 2012

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.
8:45 PM - 6 Nov 2012

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...om-disaster-to-genius/?utm_term=.8a6580e3d38c

 

[canceled.2021.1]

trump wanted it eliminated also. He hated it before he loved it.

"First, let’s look at Trump’s position in 2012, when it appeared that Mitt Romney might win the popular vote but lose the electoral college.

Interestingly, Trump has deleted a number of tweets he sent in 2012, including:

“He [Obama] lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!” (Nov. 6)
“The phoney [sic] electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. The loser one!” (Nov. 6)
“More votes equals a loss…revolution!” (Nov. 7)


​

But other tweets from that period remain, including:

Donald J. Trump [emoji818] @realDonaldTrump
We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!
8:29 PM - 6 Nov 2012

Donald J. Trump [emoji818] @realDonaldTrump
Lets fight like hell and stop this great and disgusting injustice! The world is laughing at us.

Donald J. Trump [emoji818] @realDonaldTrump
This election is a total sham and a travesty. We are not a democracy!
8:33 PM - 6 Nov 2012

Donald J. Trump [emoji818] @realDonaldTrump
The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.
8:45 PM - 6 Nov 2012

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...om-disaster-to-genius/?utm_term=.8a6580e3d38c

Trump is full of shit on EC

Shut up you dumb twat

 

[Bill]

how many countries have the same biCameral Congress we have with Staes getting 2 senators and the people getting proportional representation?

The Senate is not a proportional representation - because of co-sovereignty each state gets 2 senators/electors.
The House is purely proportional. Taken together both the states representation and people representation are the make up of Congress.
The same formula is used to assign electors to the EC

& the reason is to twart the will of the ppl when they fail to vote correctly, that is in the interest of the elites, corporations & zillionares....

 

[Bill]

Pretty much.

This is only an issue because the left is pissy they can't roll over the Red States with their leftist agenda. As I say every time the topic comes up, democrats only need to tailor their message so they can get votes in places besides CA and NYC.

But that means having to compromise.

To hell with that. If they want to do away with the electoral college there's a constitutional remedy. But humorously lol, it's not a one man one vote, process.

Failing that, they can all move to CA and *democratically* vote for succession in Cal Exit. Then the rest of us can watch CA turn into Venezuela North.

Yes, so shithole states populations have much more representation than the highly prized & higher populated ones..... Such is dumbocracy in the land of the free & the freebies............

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

I'm amazed this has come up again.

For the galacticly retarded, the EC is never going away because it will essentially mean only a half dozen states votes matter.

Anyone who is not for the EC are retards of the lowest order.

 

[Cancel 2020.1]

I'm amazed this has come up again.

For the galacticly retarded, the EC is never going away because it will essentially mean only a half dozen states votes matter.

Anyone who is not for the EC are retards of the lowest order.

Every state has representation. Everyone has Congresspeople & Senators.

Why should some dude in Kansas have his vote count more than someone in a more populous state? Why does dirt matter?

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

Every state has representation. Everyone has Congresspeople & Senators.

Why should some dude in Kansas have his vote count more than someone in a more populous state? Why does dirt matter?

First off, your comment about dirt is absurd. No one counts square acres of land in terms of EC votes. Dirt doesn't matter, the people that live in those states matter. And if you're saying that states are just dirt, well then, the entire US is just dirt. Such concrete and simplistic thinking.

Representation is about more than the legislative branch, is it not? Seems to me you want over 40 states to have no say who is President of the United STATES. See that last part, what does it say?

 

[Cancel 2020.1]

First off, your comment about dirt is absurd. No one counts square acres of land in terms of EC votes. Dirt doesn't matter, the people that live in those states matter. And if you're saying that states are just dirt, well then, the entire US is just dirt. Such concrete and simplistic thinking.

Representation is about more than the legislative branch, is it not? Seems to me you want over 40 states to have no say who is President of the United STATES. See that last part, what does it say?

Why would they have "no say"? That's absurd. In a popular vote system, everyone would still have a vote - the only difference would be that the votes would be equal.

Honestly, I'm torn on it - the electoral is a sort of weird, outdated system, but it's also American tradition. I don't really buy that it was the "vision" of the founders, or that the purposes we espouse about it now have anything to do w/ why it was instituted (which was allegedly just a concession to the slave states to bring them on board).

But you've got it backwards, imo. Those "states" would still have their votes in a popular election. You're the one who wants to make the votes of those in less populous states count for more.

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

Why would they have "no say"? That's absurd. In a popular vote system, everyone would still have a vote - the only difference would be that the votes would be equal.

Honestly, I'm torn on it - the electoral is a sort of weird, outdated system, but it's also American tradition. I don't really buy that it was the "vision" of the founders, or that the purposes we espouse about it now have anything to do w/ why it was instituted (which was allegedly just a concession to the slave states to bring them on board).

But you've got it backwards, imo. Those "states" would still have their votes in a popular election. You're the one who wants to make the votes of those in less populous states count for more.

The votes would not be equal, at all. We aren't talking about local or state elections, we are talking about voting for a President who represents all the states. We are not a direct democracy Thing.

The slavery issue was apart of it, however, it was also to protect the smaller states. That simply cannot be denied. Imagine founding a country and you know that (let's say you have 20 states) 5 states have the most population of all 20 combined. You're sitting down figuring out how votes should count to the President and you realize, if you're one of the 15, you basically have no say if it is a popular vote. You claim it is equal, but it is not. The President represents the entire country, not just the most populous states. If we go with the popular vote route, I believe (though I read tonight it is 10 states) that only a half dozen states will decide the Presidential election.

How is the representative of our Republic? How is that fair to our individual states?

People talk about direct democracy, but they never mention how those countries do not have states like we do.

I don't have it backwards, I have it exactly how the founders agreed. The only way to ensure a fair shake to all states, is through the EC. Without the EC, you would have at best, 40 states completely ignored. How is that fair or American?

EDIT: you're thinking in terms of dirt, when I believe you should be thinking of that "dirt" as states. States can almost be called miniature countries voting for a central leader, so take away the EC and you just took away the states. IMO.

 

[Darth Omar]

I'm amazed this has come up again.

For the galacticly retarded, the EC is never going away because it will essentially mean only a half dozen states votes matter.

Anyone who is not for the EC are retards of the lowest order.

'Never' is a strong word but since getting rid of the EC would require a constitutional amendment---never is pretty close.

Getting two thirds of both the Senate and House to pass it would be tough. Especially in the Senate where it would require a lot of votes from 'dirt' states. Never happen. It's an academic debate.

The politics aren't academic though. There's a bigger cultural divide, than ever, between the Red States and Blue States, with voters in the Blue States lurching ever-leftward.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

trump wanted it eliminated also. He hated it before he loved it.

doesn't matter......it isn't going to change for you and it isn't going to change for him......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

& the reason is to twart the will of the ppl when they fail to vote correctly, that is in the interest of the elites, corporations & zillionares....

or you could balance the concerns of both urban and rural America and get elected.......like Republicans do......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Yes, so shithole states populations have much more representation than the highly prized & higher populated ones.....

this is why we need an electoral college and simultaneously why the demmycrats can't win under it.......disdain for the overfly-able deplorables who don't live in the "highly-prized" demmycratvilles......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Every state has representation. Everyone has Congresspeople & Senators.

Why should some dude in Kansas have his vote count more than someone in a more populous state? Why does dirt matter?

quite simply because the people who live on it believe it does.......

 

[Darth Omar]

or you could balance the concerns of both urban and rural America and get elected.......like Republicans do......

That's it.

They want it their way, dammit lol.

 

[ocean515]

Pretty much.

This is only an issue because the left is pissy they can't roll over the Red States with their leftist agenda. As I say every time the topic comes up, democrats only need to tailor their message so they can get votes in places besides CA and NYC.

But that means having to compromise.

To hell with that. If they want to do away with the electoral college there's a constitutional remedy. But humorously lol, it's not a one man one vote, process.

Failing that, they can all move to CA and *democratically* vote for succession in Cal Exit. Then the rest of us can watch CA turn into Venezuela North.

Agreed. As a 5th Generation Southern Californian, I can report California is well on it's way to becoming Venezuela North. In fact, it's doomed.

That's why I've sold my businesses and I will be moving out of the state in the next couple of years. Kids and Grandkids are keeping us here a little bit longer.

What the Progressives have done is hand out money and promises in order to get control and power. It's exactly what the Founding Fathers created the EC for. To protect the country from the tyranny of the majority.

 

[Micawber]

Underpopulated areas too much say? Without the bought and paid for voters in California, Hillary would have lost the popular vote by over 1 million.

The EC keeps the big population states like New York and California from deciding who the President of the United States is to be.

This is only an issue because the losers can't get their act together and move on.

California and all the other winner take all states suck on this issue, as its many Republican voters have zero say because of the winner take all system within the state. That said, the college sucks for the simple reason that it directs the attention to the wrong locus, the states qua states and not individual people of which they are composed. Your argument says it all. "states like New York and California" deciding. States should not be deciding anything anymore than a company should have human rights. It's a legal fiction, and the fiction can only be justified to the extent it reflects reality. That requires the elimination of winner take all and replacement of it with proportional representation of delegates to the popular vote within every state state. (as well as another issue we would have to fix- the district gerrymandering issue within the states as well)

Anything else is a scam, an agreed upon scam but a scam nonetheless.

 

[floridafan]

Oh yes, sweet pee, the Voters did not want Trump. I can just imagine your anger had the roles been reversed. I will agrees that your Russian comrades won this go around.