Kuzcotopia
If you can read this, you are as lucky as I am.
I agree. As I said, I'm ready to actually move on to Trump's policy positions, political tactics, and governance.
Let's do it.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Popular Vote is Irrelevant
- Thread starter Watchmen
- Start date
I agree. As I said, I'm ready to actually move on to Trump's policy positions, political tactics, and governance.
Let's do it.
And it's stage #2 of the grieving process
Parchment
Active Member
Calm down. At the rate you're going, you'll start to drool.
I think people miss the entire point of the electoral college, which in its current embodiment, serves the purpose of preventing large cities from controlling the entire country. @Adramelek is correct in his assessment.
People are just butt-hurt that Trump won. The EC has served plenty of Democrats very well in the past, probably more than Republicans actually. I have pretty liberal views, and don't particularly care for Frump, but give me a break.
I disagree. I think it's *the* measure of popular support. The fact that Trump chose a strategy aimed at gaining electoral college votes (and reasonably so, under the current system) doesn't mean he somehow has more popular support than he actually does.
If the rules were different, then the results would be different all around. None of this really speaks to the question of what the rules ought to be, though.
You need a course in logic. Or reading comprehension.
You already have a Senate that does that.
Monk Of Reason
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
It doesn't actually do that though. Its function has long since lost its usefulness.
And besides the point all together. Having an electoral college or any other form of indirect vote does not make us a republic. Electing officials to positions of power rather than having popular votes on each individual issue makes us a republic. If we got rid of the EC right now we would be no less a representative democracy than before.
Monk Of Reason
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Does it ever seem fishy that we have a near 50/50 split between the parties and never a more powerful shift to say even 60/40? Not really leading anywehre with this question I"m just curious as to your answer of why it is.
Perhaps it's different there in the frozen north, but here, Trump
will have presidential power because he won according to law.
It matters not that only 1/4 of voters actually voted for him.
(They weren't thrilled with Hillary either.)
You trumpet her slight edge in the popular vote, but what can
you actually accomplish with that?
Checks and Balances.
Perhaps in our modern age we could let the EC go. But I would do so with caution.
So the popular vote would have been the same, in your view?
Parchment
Active Member
Logic says Trump is your President.
Ad hominem. My point stands.
Do you think the popular vote would have been the same if we didn't have the electorate system?
What? I have no idea how you got that from what I said.
It would be suspicious if either side maintained a 60/40 split.
This is because the side with 40% need only move in the direction
of the other party to gain more votes. And everyone likes power.
Moreover, there's no plausible mechanism by which some cabal
could manipulate the votes to hover around 50/50.
Parchment
Active Member
Whatever all those things are if it doesn't agree with my world view then it must be some weird, outside source trying to influence something, somehow.
A little chaos and unpredictability in the election is probably good. One thing we do not need is a completely predictable outcome every time.