Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hillary Clinton - 59,814,018
Donald Trump - 59,611,678
So no, the people didn't vote Trump in, he won based on Electoral College technicalities (a shame James Madison didn't get his wish in the Constitutional convention to get a popular vote). The people chose Hillary.
In the end this is heavily split however, revealing we really need to get better at compromise. Democrats lost via the legitimate election system, so they need to concede some things. Republicans now have a President that will go in losing the popular vote (like 2000 with George W Bush but even a bigger margin, so we've had our second Republican President in 16 years not elected by a Democracy) and can't make the argument more people chose him, so they will need to concede some things.
Hillary Clinton - 59,814,018
Donald Trump - 59,611,678
In the end this is heavily split however, revealing we really need to get better at compromise. Democrats lost via the legitimate election system, so they need to concede some things..
"We really need to get better at compromise?" do you remember that 2 weeks after the 2008 election Obama told republicans in congress that his win was a mandate and that they better get in lock step with his administration. Where was Hillary on compromise? It's the losers that have to figure out why they lost the war of ideas and find a way to the table but it's the winners that determine the route.
I'm not saying railroad, aka 2008, is the way forward but you can't expect Trump and a Congressional mandate to meet half way in the aisle because your side lost.
Jeez, let me say it louder so you can understand... THEY ARE NOT EQUAL!! Equal would be a state getting the exact % of the electoral college as it's % of the national population
Well it is apportioned by population from the census after the standard 3 are assigned to each state. So you dislike the 3 electors that is an automatic for each state or what? It's not like Wyoming is getting those 3 and California isn't. California gets those 3 and then they get their share based on their population. Or you want the number of electors to increase overall? Congress can do that but I think the last time was when Hawaii was added to the union so it's pretty darn rare.
You do know it's a fixed number of electors, right? And then they are apportioned via population. California, given their population, gets a lion's share but other state who have dramatically increased in population over the years mean they have gained while some other states have lost electors.
Guess I'm having a hard time understanding exactly what you find unfair about the apportionment of electors.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,604,784 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel
Well it is apportioned by population from the census after the standard 3 are assigned to each state. So you dislike the 3 electors that is an automatic for each state or what? It's not like Wyoming is getting those 3 and California isn't. California gets those 3 and then they get their share based on their population. Or you want the number of electors to increase overall? Congress can do that but I think the last time was when Hawaii was added to the union so it's pretty darn rare.
You do know it's a fixed number of electors, right? And then they are apportioned via population. California, given their population, gets a lion's share but other state who have dramatically increased in population over the years mean they have gained while some other states have lost electors.
Guess I'm having a hard time understanding exactly what you find unfair about the apportionment of electors.
It is unfair to bigger states who don't get as much representation as their population, while it is too generous to smaller states which get more representation than their population would warrant. Like I said CA only gets 77% representation (13% of population, but only 10% of electoral college) while Wyoming gets 300% representation (0.2% of population, but gets 0.6% of electoral college) and those are just the extreme ends
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Meeting half way....
Trump didnt win the popular vote, so why are his supporters saying he won the 'silent majority'?
