U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-14-2019, 06:35 AM
 
Location: Plymouth Meeting, PA.
4,011 posts, read 2,055,992 times
Reputation: 1922

Advertisements

I guess you would be happy with California and New York determining the outcome of the presidential election.


Quote:
Originally Posted by emm74 View Post
You mean people had no problem when the person with millions more votes also won the Electoral College so there was no conflict between the two outcomes? Shocking, absolutely shocking
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-14-2019, 06:36 AM
 
Location: Plymouth Meeting, PA.
4,011 posts, read 2,055,992 times
Reputation: 1922
when? I never did

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1 View Post
Republicans had a problem with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 06:43 AM
 
Location: Plymouth Meeting, PA.
4,011 posts, read 2,055,992 times
Reputation: 1922
Why we need the electoral college.


https://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...-matters-18331
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 08:30 AM
 
3,387 posts, read 4,333,453 times
Reputation: 2226
Quote:
Originally Posted by FKD19124 View Post
I guess you would be happy with California and New York determining the outcome of the presidential election.
I would not be be- but are you happy with the fact that conservative voters in NY and Ca get exactly no representation for their Presidential votes. In 2016 Trump was able to eek out 1% an smaller wins in his final three states to win the Presidency. If in 2020 a Dem loses the popular vote by 2-3% but eeks out Florida by .01% to take the election, would you not feel their were plenty of votes ignored?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Denver CO
21,159 posts, read 11,768,218 times
Reputation: 32147
Quote:
Originally Posted by FKD19124 View Post
I guess you would be happy with California and New York determining the outcome of the presidential election.
This is a complete logical fallacy if you think it's responsive to the post you quoted.

But I am happy with ALL voters having a say, which means every vote being counted equally. Telling some people that their votes count less than the votes of other people isn't remotely fair yet for some reason, Conservatives are perfectly happy with it, because theirs are the votes which receive unfair advantage.

As usual, GOPers follow the "I got mine, eff you" standard because they only care about themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 09:24 AM
 
78,818 posts, read 33,532,796 times
Reputation: 15787
Quote:
Originally Posted by emm74 View Post
Primaries are irrelevant because there is no electoral college.

But you are still wrong because the Democratic primary was not solely determined by primary election votes, there were also pledged delegated awarded by caucus states which do not tally votes but those pledged delegates still get awarded.

And 2008 had the additional complication of Michigan, where a primary was held, but was not allowed by the DNC. Some vote counts award Clinton the votes she received there, but officially, they did not count in the totals.

In any case, as noted, that has absolutely zero to do with the Electoral College and primary votes do not carry over into the General Election.
In any case, Hillary still got more votes than Obama but still lost. It's not the system, it was Hillary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
2,890 posts, read 4,203,048 times
Reputation: 3098
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
ight...so you CITY should ENSLAVE an entire state... how thoughtful of you



the whole idea is that the EC makes it equal for a nation of STATES... this is not the peoples democracy of America.. it is the united STATES of America...

the electorial college is NEEDED

New York city(the city not the state) has a bigger population than over 10 other states COMBINED

nyc population 8.3 million

Wyoming 544k
Vermont 621k
n. Dakota 640k
Alaska 690k
s. Dakota 821k
Delaware 885k
Montana 974k
Rhode island 1.01 million
Hawaii 1.2 million
Maine 1.3 million

total 7.8 million

10 states combined less than the population of NY CITY

repealing the electoral college would take away any say of the smaller rural states



look at Chicago...ok the population of Chicago (A CITY) is 2.7 million..the entire STATE of Nebraska is 1.8 million

should a city negate a whole state???

should a urban jungle of 2.6 million out weigh and entire state (of 1.8 million) of rural farms producing all the food for the urban jungle...should those 1.8 million not count just because the city of 2.6 million is more welfare babies

look at Phoenix...ok the population of Phoenix (A CITY) is 1.6 million..the entire STATE of Wyoming is 550k million

should a city negate a whole state???

should a urban jungle of 1.6 million out weigh an entire state of rural farms producing all the food for the urban jungle...should those 550k not count just because the city of 1.6 million says so...awfully fascist to think that way




the electoral college is there for a reason...


When establishing our federal government, smaller States like Rhode Island had feared they would have no voice, and therefore no protection, against the more populous States like New York or Massachusetts. Similarly, the sparsely populated agricultural regions feared an inability to protect their interests against the fishing and shipping industries dominant in the more populous coastal States. These concerns on how to preserve individual State voices and diverse regional interests caused the framers to establish a bi-cameral rather than a uni-cameral legislative system.

In that wise plan, one body preserved the will of the majority as determined by population and the other preserved the will of the majority as determined by the States. As Constitution signer James Madison confirmed:

The Constitution is nicely balanced with the federative and popular principles; the Senate are the guardians of the former, and the House of Representatives of the latter; and any attempts to destroy this balance, under whatever specious names or pretenses they may be presented, should be watched with a jealous eye.

The Founding Fathers considered all forms of government; thoughtfully, intellectually, historically and they debated and agonized and then they compromised, agreed and then pledged their lives their fortunes and their sacred honor to establish, protect and enable the government they had created. The education, the intellect and the faith of those men can not be underestimated. We can only bring poverty and unrest if we deign to ignore their wisdom and replace our Constitutional Republic, the rule of law, with a Democracy, rule by the mob.

The point is, undermining or ditching the Electoral Collage is a part of the plan to convert America to neo-Marxist mob rule with top-down control by the national (and global) ruling class....the simple fact is the national vote SCHEME is just that a scheme being pushed by the likes of George Soros and the fascist liberals looking to bring some hybrid of Marxism to the USA
Very good post, and well said.
What people have forgot in this country, or is forgot the right word, is that the STATES have a say in the election of a President. They ask how can a State vote, it's land and land can not vote. One has to realize just who created this government, it was a contract between the STATES to create a central government, this contract is called the Constitution of the United States, and We the People agreed to this contract. The States do have a voice in their choice of President, for the POTUS represents the UNION, and the STATES are the UNION.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 10:01 AM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,296 posts, read 14,034,647 times
Reputation: 6497
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpeatie View Post
I would not be be- but are you happy with the fact that conservative voters in NY and Ca get exactly no representation for their Presidential votes. In 2016 Trump was able to eek out 1% an smaller wins in his final three states to win the Presidency. If in 2020 a Dem loses the popular vote by 2-3% but eeks out Florida by .01% to take the election, would you not feel their were plenty of votes ignored?
that is simple..stop the winner take all mentality of the left


California has 55 ec votes..Hillary won that state by 60%...60% of 55 is 33...Hillary gets 33 ec of California, Trump gets 22


New York has 29 ec votes...Hillary won with 59%....59% of 29 is 17.... Hillary gets 17 votes, trump gets 12


Florida has 29 ec votes...trump won with 51%....51% of 29 is 14.7.... trump gets 15 votes,hillary gets 14


Michigan has 16 ec votes..trump won by .3%(IOW a 50/50)...trump gets 8 Hillary gets 8


etc, etc, etc.


its not really that hard
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 10:07 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
12,470 posts, read 4,216,580 times
Reputation: 9776
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
that is simple..stop the winner take all mentality of the left


California has 55 ec votes..Hillary won that state by 60%...60% of 55 is 33...Hillary gets 33 ec of California, Trump gets 22


New York has 29 ec votes...Hillary won with 59%....59% of 29 is 17.... Hillary gets 17 votes, trump gets 12


Florida has 29 ec votes...trump won with 51%....51% of 29 is 14.7.... trump gets 15 votes,hillary gets 14


Michigan has 16 ec votes..trump won by .3%(IOW a 50/50)...trump gets 8 Hillary gets 8


etc, etc, etc.


its not really that hard

Here is a problem with this.
What happens when someone wins 58% of Wyoming and there are only 3 electrical votes to be distributed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 10:25 AM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,296 posts, read 14,034,647 times
Reputation: 6497
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeerGeek40 View Post
Here is a problem with this.
What happens when someone wins 58% of Wyoming and there are only 3 electrical votes to be distributed?
actually simple rounding..
with the 3 it is the largest rounding


3 votes are 33% each


someone wins with 58%.. round to the closest 58 is closer to 66 than to 33..the winner gets 2 the person coming in 2nd gets 1


now say there are 5 ec votes... ie 20% each


now someone wins with 58%... 58 s closer to 60 than to 40
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top