>>MOD WARNING<< Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dead

It started with both - and you can't do it.

There; no difference - the only people who vote for President are those in the electoral college.

And so, you agree:
The undeniable fact is that you do not have a right to vote for President.

 

The popular vote is irrelevant. They won the middle, who determine elections. These people are all over the country. I feel bad for you that Clinton lost, but me, and millions of others, were not buying what she was selling.

If California gets 30,000,000 votes for Biden in two weeks, they still can only have 55 votes in the election.

 

It does matter, though. The more votes the eventual winner loses by with respect to the popular vote, the less respect most people will have for the legitimacy of the election. To most people, a candidate who receives fewer votes should not actually win the election which is why polls show that a majority of people would like to see the electoral college repealed by an amendment to the federal Constitution.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/320744/americans-support-abolishing-electoral-college.aspx

 

I have given you a list. You just ignore it.

So long as the winner of the electoral college and the winner of the popular vote are different candidates, there is absolutely a difference, a BIG difference.

Wrong. You said I have no right to vote for president, and the ABSOLUTE FACT is I have an ABSOLUTE right to vote for president. There is no ability by my state to refuse my vote when I go to vote next week. This is completely undeniable. Now, if I were younger than 18, or a felon, or unregistered, I could be denied. I could even be denied if the state declared the legislature would decide the electors (something I doubt any state has done since the 1800s, but that has not happened (and I doubt will ever happen again). You continually make incorrect statements, then make smug comments (i.e. civic 101) even though you are completely incorrect, and then change the goal posts to try to salvage you incorrect statements. It is pretty sad, actually.

I have admitted to being wrong at times. It isn't a big deal. You should try it some day.

 

Ok, clearly you just want to beat a dead horse. No matter HOW many votes Biden gets in California, they get 55 votes. He could win with 100 votes, 1000 votes, 1000000 votes.... they get 55 votes. Period.

I get you only want to know who Cali wants for president, but most of us want to hear from the ENTIRE COUNTRY.

I'm done - you don't understand our system of government; you never will. In order to absorb knowledge, one has to actually WANT knowledge.

 

No fact I have provided is untrue. I understand our system of government perfectly. I just don't support our anti-democratic system of choosing the president, especially since the purpose of the system (i.e. for educated and informed electors to temper the will of the uninformed and uneducated electorate) no longer functions as intended. If the electors had fulfilled their original purpose, they would never have allowed an immoral, lying, fake business tycoon, reality star to become president.

 

No, the media will spin the election towards the democrats using whatever rationale they can muster, just the way they do with every other issue.

If the media thinks public opinion is on their side, they will use public opinion.

If the media thinks public opinion is not on their side, they will ignore public opinion and cite some other reason.

 

The requirements to amend the Constitution are a good bit higher than a simple majority, for good reasons

 

Well, start working on getting an amendment passed. You need 34 states to agree, so it will never happen. That's the reason it's so hard to change the constitution. The states need to agree.

Having 25 million people in California in favor of it is meaningless without a total of 34 states, also agreeing.

I'm sorry you don't like it, but we're done with this conversation. I think it's the best system, and nothing you can say about the butthurt Californians will convince me otherwise. All you need to do is convince 34 states. Good luck on your quest.

 

I ignore it because it is not a list of western democracies that popularly elect their head of government.
That is, your list does nothing to address the point.

There's none, as the "popular vote" does not elect the President, and is thus irrelevant to the issue.

Wrong.
Your state grants you that privilege.
It need not do so, and if it chooses to not do so, you can do nothing about it.
Thus your claim to a right to vote for President - especially an absolute right - is demonstrably false.

You may now admit you are wrong.

 

Of course its true. You just cant stand not winning. Every time lately the Democrats lose they want to change the rules.

 

It's the Republicans changing the rules (e.g. no SCOTUS replacement in an election year). And, it is not just me losing. You and all Americans lost when Trump became president because having an incompetent idiot as our president harms the whole country. The only difference is people like you who support him deserve the consequences while the rest of us suffer though we knew better (well, those of us who have survived his presidency).

 

You're right, it'll never happen. If the Dems gain control of the Senate and if Biden wins, I hope they put all their effort into gaining statehood for D.C. and Puerto Rico. Right now both of those jurisdictions pay taxes without any representation in congress. No legitimate argument can be made against statehood. I know D.C. wants it; not sure about Puerto Rico, but after Trump abandoning them after the hurricane, they way want representation in congress.

 

True. Statehood for D.C and Puerto Rico will work better.

 

I will just do the first country listed. You can look up the others:

Argentina:

"The government of Argentina, within the framework of a federal system, is a presidential representative democratic republic. The President of Argentina is both head of state and head of government."

***

"The President and the Vice President are elected through universal suffrage by the nation considered as a whole. The Constitutional reform of 1994 introduced a two-round system by which the winning President-Vice President ticket has to receive either more than 45% of the overall valid votes, or at least 40% of it and a 10% lead over the runner-up. In any other case, the two leading tickets get to face a second round whose victor will be decided by a simple majority."

So, (1) it is in the western hemisphere, (2) it is a democratic republic like the US, and (3) the head of government is elected directly by popular vote.

You wrote I do not have the right to vote for President. I have clearly shown that I have the right since I am over 18 with no criminal record, and my state has not decided to allow the legislature to choose the electors. I have written this at least three times now. Not sure where your confusion is coming from. We both agree that a state has the right to allow the legislature to elect the electors (although I doubt any state has done it in the last 200 years), but what I have written over and over is that I have an absolute right to vote in this election. I am so eager to vote against the orange menace, I checked my voting status and I am active and ready to go. So, if you have some idea why I could be prevented from voting, please explain.

 

DC can't become a state without an amendment.

 

No. No. No.

Your state has given you the right to tell them who you would prefer. You have never voted for president in your entire life.

 

[

Not western democracy, so irrelevant.

You do not, and you have not.
You have a privilege granted to you by the state, and that can be taken away, at any time, by the state, through simple legislation.
If you had a right to vote for Presdient, the state could not take away your ability to do so.

 

You might want to look at the 29 times this has happened. You might also want to look up the Bork rule which was made my... Yes Joe ****ing Biden. So this was all the Dems doing..

That "incompetent idiot" had the economy doing incredibly well and that is with the RHINOS, nearly every Dem and nearly the entire media including social media against him..

Obama claimed you needed a "magic wand" remember?

 

Or trillion dollar deficits. Those were a bad thing when Obama was president even though he spent less each year than the last except for once. trump ramped up spending / deficits and was praised as a financial genius by the same people that freaked out about Obama trying to get us out of the last recession started under a Republican.

 

Who was the speaker of the house the first two years? Oh yes Paul Ryan.. The budget is on Congress not the President.

Do you understand there is little difference from a RHINO and a Progressive? Has it hit you yet or do i need to go over it YET AGAIN for you people?

 

That "incompetent idiot" was riding the economic expansion begun under President Obama. His employment numbers in the first three years weren't even as good as Obama's in his last three years. The "Rhinos" and the media were against him to the extent they were because he is a disaster who has no idea what he is doing and he is ripping apart the country.

 

Are you claiming it is not "western" or that it isn't a "democracy?"

You are being obtuse. New York has decided not to appoint its electors, instead relying on the votes of the citizens of this state. As such, being over 18, with no criminal records, I have an absolute right to vote. Civics 101. I will prove it when I early vote on the 24th to get rid of the orange menace.

 

Oh god your one of them....

 

Article IV, Section 3: New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

The Republicans have enjoyed ruling from the minority for far too long. They lose the popular vote, they control the Senate despite their senators receiving fewer votes than their Democratic counterparts. If Biden wins and the Dems are able to wrest the Senate from the Republicans, they would be insane not to put all their efforts into making D.C. the 51st state, and Puerto Rico (if they consent) the 52nd state. That means four new senators and more votes for president in the electoral college. Expending the court is a fools errand, but no reasonable person can argue that D.C. and Puerto Rico, two territories that are taxed with no representation don't deserve statehood. While they are at it, make Guam the 53 state. The U.S. Virgin Islands the 54th. The Republicans cannot be allowed to control the courts as a minority party because of the absurdities of the structure created by the founders. Hell, buy Greenland like President Meathead wanted and make it the 55th state. We need to relegate the party that represents a minority of the country to a minority position. That will force them to re-align their policies to gain more voters.