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.
And you're fine with that? The electoral college serves no purpose. I mean. Look who we have in office. That's a poor case for upholding it.
If you want to abolish the Electoral College, then light proverbial fires under your Congressperson and Senators to push for a constitutional amendment, or write to officials in states whose legislatures haven't yet ratified the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, or do both.
I don't care which method you use. I would be fine with the popular vote. But the candidates have to know which vote they are going after before the campaign starts. A popular vote win is a totally different ground game than an electoral college win. That is why the popular vote win in an electoral college election is meaningless.
Bush also lost the Popular vote, but won EC. Republican Presidents have historically been far worse and far more corrupt going back to at least Nixon.
Not really. Hillary ran up the popular vote totals in California, but many conservatives that live in California choose not to vote, same in States like New York, Illinois, etc. Because of the way our system works, Dems don't turnout in heavily red states, and conservatives don't turn out in heavily blue states. Trump was leading in the popular vote until the votes in Cali started to come in, that's when the results started to change. But again that's not too surprising given that everyone with a brain knew that California was going to go Blue, so a lot of Conservatives living in California didn't bother to vote. Dems tend to vote in larger numbers than Conservatives, especially in heavily blue regions/states of the country.
If the rules were changed to a popular vote wins the Presidency, then it would all depend on the voter turnout nationwide and Dems would not necessarily have an advantage. Since voter turnout now is meaningless in states that are already pre-determined to go red or blue, many people that may have in the past ignored general elections, would suddenly find themselves key demographis by both parties in trying to sway them to (a) vote and (b) vote for their candidate.
Okay, so what's wrong with kids born to illegals? They're granted citizenship by the 14th Amendment.
You realize you were wrong, so now you are attempting to move the goalposts.
I've never said so called 'anchor babies' aren't citizens. Check my post history. You are confusing me with some other member.
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.
LOL.
