The insanity and stupidity of the undemocratic Electoral College explained

**Flash** · 09-05-2019, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by reagansghost

the last two R presidents too office after losing the popular vote

Bush won a majority of popular votes in 2004. He took office after winning that election.

**MAGA MAN** · 09-05-2019, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by reagansghost

the last two R presidents too office after losing the popular vote

The president is chosen by the Electoral College. It's been the law since the Constitution was ratified on June 21, 1788. Get over it.

**Granule** · 09-05-2019, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by Adolf_Twitler

It's because you Gay Republicans only vote for men!

Oh, i'm straight as an arrow, fuckface, but I'm a little surprised that you're bagging on homosexuals.

Aren't you supposed to be more enlightened than that?

**PostmodernProphet** · 09-05-2019, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by Flash

If Trump loses MI and WI (or PA and WI) he still wins but if he loses TX Hillary wins.

????......and you are expecting Hilliary to win Texas in 2020?......

**PostmodernProphet** · 09-05-2019, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by reagansghost

the last two R presidents took office after losing the popular vote

that's how its supposed to work.....

**PostmodernProphet** · 09-05-2019, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by Flash

There are no such laws. Nobody has won any actual electoral votes until December.

winner takes all laws may change that.....doesn't California law say that all their electoral votes go to whoever has gotten sufficient electoral votes to secure the presidency?.........

**Gonzomin** · 09-05-2019, 05:09 PM

If the EC cost Republicans an election, it would have been immediately eliminated. It stays because it puts the losing Repub in the WhiteHouse.

**Evmetro** · 09-05-2019, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Soul

The president is chosen by the Electoral College. It's been the law since the Constitution was ratified on June 21, 1788. Get over it.

Lefties seem to forget that the EC is nothing new, and that it was not just put in place to put Trump into office. Lefties are simply messed up in the head after being blindsided by the lefty media in 2016. The Trump train was coming in fast, air horns blowing, but all lefties could hear was the lefty media claiming that Hillary was sure to win. Lefties were blindsided, and it hurts them to this day. That is why they are whining about the EC.

**Into the Night** · 09-05-2019, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by Gonzomin

We have had 27 amendments fixing the constitution, This should be no, 28. get rid of the EC.
If the Dems were winning on it, it would been killed long ago and you would have backed it happening,

You really think the States are going to give up their representation to elect a President.

Riiiiiggghhht.

**Into the Night** · 09-05-2019, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by Adolf_Twitler

Are you saying Republican presidents couldn't be elected without the electoral college?

Well, I AM SAYING IT LOUD AND CLEAR!

That is the only reason why we've had the last two Republican presidents.

All of our Democrat presidents did it the real and honest way- By winning the POPULAR VOTE!

Nope. Presidents are not elected by popular vote.

**Flash** · 09-05-2019, 07:34 PM

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet

????......and you are expecting Hilliary to win Texas in 2020?......

No, I was referring to the 2016 election in response to the post about Montana v. TX & CA.

Some Dems are talking optimistically about TX in 2020 because of demographic changes, but they are several years too early.

**Flash** · 09-05-2019, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by Gonzomin

If the EC cost Republicans an election, it would have been immediately eliminated. It stays because it puts the losing Repub in the WhiteHouse.

Nobody can immediately eliminate the EC. Republicans have no better chance of eliminating it than Democrats and neither can get 3/4 of the states to ratify such a proposal.

**Flash** · 09-05-2019, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet

winner takes all laws may change that.....doesn't California law say that all their electoral votes go to whoever has gotten sufficient electoral votes to secure the presidency?.........

I'm not sure what you mean by "winner takes all laws." We essentially have that now since almost all electors vote for their party's presidential candidate.

You may be talking about the popular vote interstate compact. It says states will give all their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote. It will not take effect until enough states are part of the compact that have over 270 electoral votes. States not part of the compact do not have to do this, of course, but it won't matter if those states with 270+ electoral votes agree. Currently 15 states with 196 electoral votes are part of the pact.

**PostmodernProphet** · 09-06-2019, 05:24 AM

Originally Posted by Flash

I'm not sure what you mean by "winner takes all laws." We essentially have that now since almost all electors vote for their party's presidential candidate.

You may be talking about the popular vote interstate compact. It says states will give all their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote. It will not take effect until enough states are part of the compact that have over 270 electoral votes. States not part of the compact do not have to do this, of course, but it won't matter if those states with 270+ electoral votes agree. Currently 15 states with 196 electoral votes are part of the pact.

every state that has passed it are states who always cast their electoral votes for demmycrats already......the only way they could be impacted is if their votes go to a Republican.......then they will reverse the law..........