Poll: most people who voted in 2016 want to abolish the Electoral College

Because you can't, and you know it.

 

Let me dumb this down for you at the base core. You can thank me later. Familiar with golf? Ever heard of match play? The Electoral College IS state by state match play. You win the state, you win the points for that hole. At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is the number of states won (and their point values). It doesn't mean diddly if you have the best score overall because your opponent took X's on a few useless holes and decided not to play hard there. And there you have it.

 

Southern states were allowed to count their black populations a decade before the 12th amendment was passed. The most populous state at the first census was Virginia. Delaware and Rhode Island were the smallest. Which is northern and which is southern?

Donald Trump outsmarted Hillary and ran his campaign based on the rules of the election.

Stop bein' sore losers. You don't get to change the way an election is held after you've lost.

 

When you win game 7, it doesn't matter how runs your opponent had in games 1 thru 6.

 

Bingo. Hillary ignored the white working class of the Great Lakes. She was campaigning in California less than a month before the election. Why? To solicit more campaign donations she and Bill could keep after the election.

Congrats Hillary, you beat won California by the biggest margin ever, and you still got the same number of electors as Barack Obama, John Kerry, and Al Gore.

 

The Electoral college does not require that if you win the state you win the electoral votes. The way electoral votes is apportioned is up to the state. Most states (4 have winner take all--the winner of the state gets all the electoral votes. Two states--Maine and Nebraska--apportion the electoral votes by Congressional district--i.e. the winner of the vote in the Congressional district gets the electoral vote from that district, with the overall state winner getting the two electoral votes representing the Senators.

 

So then it should be easy peasy to get an amendment to the constitution passed. Right?

 

It aint being "sore losers".

It's about the legitimacy of the election and you, for your own blind purposes refuse to understand that the fundamental illegitimacy of the Electoral College must stop.

You think you are living in a democracy. Nothing could be further from the truth, given the significant margin of 2.1% by which defeated Donald Dork - the highest in modern history.

Only brainlessness could permit any other conclusion ...

 

Useless prattle ...

 

I'm not an expert on US politics, but if the electoral college system is no good, why wasn't it abolished years ago?

 

Since 2000, the EC cost the Dems 2 elections, so naturally they want to change it.
Before then, and whenever a Democrat won, it was fine.

- - - Updated - - -

Much like your disproven claim that "the fact that a Popular Vote does not win the presidency is a major debility for any functional democracy on earth".

 

Thing is, it's NEVER going to change, because changing it requires 3/4ths of the states, and the states are not going to vote against their own interests. It would be like a state saying "We only have half the population, so were going to give up one of our Senators"... Isn't going to happen, ever!

 

Or Like a world series, where you won 3 games by a total of 20 runs and lost 4 games by one run each.

 

Wrong.

il·le·git·i·mate
ˌiləˈjidəmət/
adjective
adjective: illegitimate

1. not authorized by the law; not in accordance with accepted standards or rules.
"an illegitimate exercise of power by the military"

- - - Updated - - -

Because the states aren't going to give up their power.

 

A political movement to abolish the electoral vote will go nowhere. It won't even be a blip on the radar. Why bring it up?

 

Likely true and that's as it should be

 

The Founding Fathers wisely agreed on some level of geographic representation as well as popular.
Donald Trump won 3,084 of America's 3,141 counties. Hillary got 57.
And of the 62 counties in New York, where Hillary was Senator, Trump won 46 to Hillary's 16.

Everything balances out. Ms. Clinton failed in the "broad appeal" area as the above demonstrates.
It would be sad to witness America run by a few population concentrated areas.
That is not what the Founding Fathers had in mind. They wrote in geography so that would not happen.
Ref. The Connecticut Compromise.


Moi

r > g

Where is the line of all the promised to go to should Trump win.
Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us. ​

 

Useless prattle? I'd say it's fairly relevant. Them's the rules and the Skankipotimus got sent to the showers. God Bless America!

Read em and weep!

 

same reason president Trump brought it up when Obama won when he thought Obama was gonna lose the popular vote

people don't like the idea that a person with less votes could win.... but I agree, it's not gonna change and it's pretty rare anyways

 

Senseless drivel.

I can show you a hundred countries where ONLY THE POPULAR VOTE COUNTS in a national election of the Executive.

Nobody but nobody should screw-around with the popular vote, an intrinsic value in a modern democracy preoccupied with human decency and fairness.

Wakey, wakey - open your closed eyes to reality ...

From WikiPedia:

 

Correct. It takes just 13 states to stop any such amendment.

 

Oh, the irony.
The President election isn't a national election - it is 50 state elections, plus DC
In fact, -all- elections are state election.

 

You know this statement is not true

- Not a single western democracy selects its head of government by popular election. Not a single one.
- In fact, several western democracies choose neither their head of state nor head of government by popular election.
- In fact, most western democracies, when voting for seats in their legislature, vote for parties, not candidates - thus, none of the people in those legislatures are popularly elected.

Clearly, there is no demonstrable or theoretical link between the popular election of a head of state/government and a successful democracy.

 

Incredible ... the arch-attachment to belonging to a state and not the union.

Unbelievable in modern societies.

And what about the counties - the states are nothing but an agglomeration of counties!?!

Wait!, and the counties! They are nothing but cities!

Yep, we are a nation of cities ... !