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.
In the aftermath of the 1960 election in which the democrat John Kennedy overwhelmingly won the electoral vote, but lost the popular vote, outraged and disgruntled Republicans pushed hard for abolishing the Electoral College. Likewise, it was outraged Democrats who supported the electoral loser and who demanded abolition of the Electoral College in 2000. Indeed, in the three elections in American history in which the electoral vote did not match the popular vote - 1888, 1960, and 2000 ⎯ support or opposition to our federal system of election enshrined in the U.S. Constitution has been based not on principle, but on partisan election outcomes. Over 700 aborted attempts over the last 200 years to undermine our federal system have failed abysmally once the disastrous consequences have been fully explained and appreciated.
I could care less about polls, but I'm really freaking happy that we don't elect the President via popular vote. I realize that lefties want to proclaim Hillary queen due to her popular vote win, but how fast would they switch sides on that argument had she won the electoral college and Trump won the popular vote? I'm willing to bet that there would be nothing from the left about changing the way our system works if that were the case.
Of course not. Many on the left including news media were thanking the Founding Fathers for the electoral college because they believed he'd win the popular vote but lose. The jokes on them
That doesn't mean pointing out the popular vote is invalid. Particular since many people say Trump was elected by the American people... that's decidedly untrue.
For what it's worth, I don't much care for Hillary Clinton. I dislike Trump slightly more. I think the electoral college needs to be reformed so that individual voting districts can count a vote toward a particular candidate rather than simply having who ever wins the majority of districts in a state receive all the electors. I consider that a pretty fair compromise between the popular vote people and the electoral college people.
On some level that compromise sounds reasonable, but a good question is how those individual voting districts are drawn. If they are equivalent to districts for the House of Representatives, then their boundaries are subject to partisan drawing methods by the legislatures of their respective states.
In 2012 Romney actually won more congressional districts than Obama, despite losing both the popular and electoral votes decisively and unlike Trump, carrying fewer states than his opponent (24 vs. 26 for Obama). Of course both campaigns would likely have followed different strategies if the objective was to win more congressional districts, but there would be even more risk of electing a president with a questionable mandate than under the current system.
I could care less about polls, but I'm really freaking happy that we don't elect the President via popular vote. I realize that lefties want to proclaim Hillary queen due to her popular vote win, but how fast would they switch sides on that argument had she won the electoral college and Trump won the popular vote? I'm willing to bet that there would be nothing from the left about changing the way our system works if that were the case.
I think any system is in trouble where basically the population is split in half and yet the slightly bigger half (whichever it may be depending on the criteria) gets the nod as if it had reached 90%.
No wonder the population becomes more and more radical when people rejected by half the population such as Obama and Trump become president and claim to represent all of society.
Zogby shows Trump now 45%, up with Hispanics, union and western state voters
I personally don't care about polls because they are like the weather -- wait and it will change -- but I know some of you live and die by them. Enjoy!
But Polls are BS according to you and the far right, so you have your answer.....
If you find all these polls confusing, political strategist Dick Morris explained the difference last night on Coast to Coast AM with George Noory. In terms of presidential approval ratings, the only poll that is relevant is Rasmussen because they sample likely VOTERS. Other polls just sample random adults, not necessarily voters or even here legally. Knowing that, I will only pay attention to Rasmussen polls from now on.
You guys understand there is a 1-2 week or so delay in the aggregate polls right?
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.
