Fenxis 99 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Why is the electoral college? In theory to force candidates to go to every state otherwise everyone would hit up just the Northeast and California and ignore the rest. Also remember that the US is a Republic so it represents the state's selection. Link to post Share on other sites
Fenxis 99 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-a-difference-2-percentage-points-makes/ So here’s another question. What would have happened if just 1 out of every 100 voters shifted from Trump to Clinton? That would have produced a net shift of 2 percentage points in Clinton’s direction. And instead of the map you see above, we’d have wound up with this result (Clinton winning with 307). I think saw somewhere else that Trump got the same # of votes that Romney did last election. It's the much vaulted Clinton infrastructure that could only get 55% voter turnout that killed them. Link to post Share on other sites
Untilted 158 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 And the most stomach churning moment from last night was Hannity talking to Meghan Kelly and telling her that, when Comey reopened the email investigation he said he told Donald 'we are going to win'. We. This is a journalist. WE?..... proper journalism is dead and gone. Nobody has ever mistaken Hannity as a journalist. So are many other agenda filled commentators and pundits. Just as bad or maybe even worse IMO is Donna Brazile 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Fenxis 99 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Before and after presidency: Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Why are people protesting? I'm all for protests, but what is their point? What do they hope to achieve? Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 https://twitter.com/ijaileene/status/796450089149595648 Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1350FY?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Social Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 A sports world take. http://www.sportsnet.ca/basketball/nba/donald-trump-presidency-complicates-intersection-sports-politics/ Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 One more: alarm bells should be ringing. http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1351RJ?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Social Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 I love Don Cherry Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Why are people protesting? I'm all for protests, but what is their point? What do they hope to achieve? it makes no sense. There is a process. It's a democracy. They lost. Live with the result. I would be curious to see how many of those people on the street actually voted. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Why is the electoral college? It's a great question. I think this election is the perfect example. The votes that Hillary got came from major urban centers like LA, Chicago , NYC,Miami and Detroit. While generally the suburbs, rust belt voted for Trump. This is a generalization however it's fairly accurate. A candidate has to have support from the state level and just not get votes from certain large States like California, New York, Florida and Texas. Even in California if you look at the map , the coast is all Blue but inland (farming) is all red. It's a very archaic yet accurate form of democracy IMO. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 It's a great question. I think this election is the perfect example. The votes that Hillary got came from major urban centers like LA, Chicago , NYC,Miami and Detroit. While generally the suburbs, rust belt voted for Trump. This is a generalization however it's fairly accurate. A candidate has to have support from the state level and just not get votes from certain large States like California, New York, Florida and Texas. Even in California if you look at the map , the coast is all Blue but inland (farming) is all red. It's a very archaic yet accurate form of democracy IMO. Serge, you are too much. What exactly makes it accurate? What makes it fair? How is it fair if the candidate that wins the Presidency didn't receive the most votes from the citizens he is charged to lead? Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 2 reasons they put in the EC 1. States rights. Meaning they want to have all States matter 2. The founders viewed it as a sober second chamber that would be able to override the election if the public voted in a demagogue or other totally unacceptable candidate. They didn't trust the "rabble" to make the right decisions. Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Don Cherry is an idiot. Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Also, can you imagine if Trump had won the popular vote and lost the electoral college? Serge would be singing a different tune. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Serge, you are too much. What exactly makes it accurate? What makes it fair? How is it fair if the candidate that wins the Presidency didn't receive the most votes from the citizens he is charged to lead? Because California has 36 million people. If you run on a platform that says all Californians will get $2000 when I'm President , you will win the election. This is an extremely simplified answer obviously. Link to post Share on other sites
Fenxis 99 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 it makes no sense. There is a process. It's a democracy. They lost. Live with the result. I would be curious to see how many of those people on the street actually voted. And if Clinton had won we would have the RWN promising rebellion because he's "going to take away our guns" and you had Trump said repeatedly that he wouldn't accept the result so **** off. Are you so twisted and senile you can't even remember back two months? Though to be fair most of these lefties would have protested against Clinton at some point to make sure she upheld her side of the deal with Sanders. Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Because California is a blue state is what you meant. Link to post Share on other sites
Fenxis 99 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 How is it fair if the candidate that wins the Presidency didn't receive the most votes from the citizens he is charged to lead? They could keep the EC but allocate those votes proportionally; best of both worlds. You keep state power blocks but every vote maters. Note that under this system there's no guarantee that Trump wouldn't have won... the democrats control California pretty much at every level so a lot of Republicans don't even bother to vote. But I guess that's true of Texas and the rest of Jesusland. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Also, can you imagine if Trump had won the popular vote and lost the electoral college? Serge would be singing a different tune. Lol. Take it up with the founding fathers. I didn't make the rules Link to post Share on other sites
Dubey 1,035 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Serge, it's baffling to me how quickly you have adopted pretty much every republican ideal. And don't tell me you've always felt this way, because you certainly didn't learn them growing up in Toronto. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Because California has 36 million people. If you run on a platform that says all Californians will get $2000 when I'm President , you will win the election. This is an extremely simplified answer obviously. So? They still count as humans and each of their votes should be worth the same as each other's vote regardless of their motivations for voting. And how is that any different than the pandering all politicians do to any other group of 36 million people? Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 And if Clinton had won we would have the RWN promising rebellion because he's "going to take away our guns" and you had Trump said repeatedly that he wouldn't accept the result so **** off. Are you so twisted and senile you can't even remember back two months? Though to be fair most of these leftist would have protested against Clinton to make sure she upheld her side of the deal with Sanders. Hmm. Thanks for telling me to **** off. I will Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 The electoral college was in part to ensure that all states got attention from presidential candidates and prevented them from campaigning only in populous states. This allowed voter in small and remote states to hear the platforms and policies of each candidate. In this age of information it's a moot point. Every word a candidate utters is instantly available. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now