Texas secede? (Houston, Austin, Liberty: cellphone, freeway, American)

[Jrsgun]

A look at the Electoral Votes From Each State and a little math will tell you that the Electoral College system makes it possible for a candidate to actually lose the nationwide popular vote, but be elected president by the Electoral College.

In fact, it is possible for a candidate to not get a single person's vote -- not one -- in 39 states or the District of Columbia, yet be elected president by wining the popular vote in just 11 of these 12 states:
California
New York
Texas
Florida
Pennsylvania
Illinois
Ohio
Michigan
New Jersey
North Carolina
Georgia
Virginia
There are 538 total votes in the Electoral College and a presidential candidate must win a majority -- 270 -- electoral votes to be elected. Since 11 of the 12 states in the chart above account for exactly 270 votes, a candidate could win these states, lose the other 39, and still be elected. Of course, a candidate popular enough to win California or New York will almost certainly win some smaller states, as well.. But, when you play with popularity and numbers, anything can happen. And has.
ROLL UP YOUR SLEEVES & LET THE BATTLE BEGIN
GOD BLESS TEXAS & THE MILITARY

[awecelot]

I am aware of that. What I am challenging is the assertion that Lincoln won "because" he received a plurality of votes. He won because he received a majority of electoral votes, not because he received a plurality of votes.

[Jrsgun]

I hate burst to your bubble but it is an historical fact that he received just under 40%. The remaining 60+% did go to the other three candidates: Breckinridge (18%), Bell (12%), and Douglas (30%). Forty percent is not a "majority" of the available votes at all, let alone a "vast majority." Lincoln won because he received more votes than any other candidate which is very true, not because the "vast majority" of Americans voted for him. History can tell you a lot if you look in the right places where the truth is,not the lies.
ROLL UP YOUR SLEEVES & LET THE BATTLE BEGIN
GOD BLESS TEXAS & THE MILITARY

[awecelot]

Originally Posted by Jrsgun

I hate burst to your bubble but it is an historical fact that he received just under 40%. The remaining 60+% did go to the other three candidates: Breckinridge (18%), Bell (12%), and Douglas (30%). Forty percent is not a "majority" of the available votes at all, let alone a "vast majority." Lincoln won because he received more votes than any other candidate which is very true, not because the "vast majority" of Americans voted for him. History can tell you a lot if you look in the right places where the truth is,not the lies.
ROLL UP YOUR SLEEVES & LET THE BATTLE BEGIN
GOD BLESS TEXAS & THE MILITARY

Do you even read what I write? I never said Lincoln got a majority of the popular vote. I said that he DID get a majority of the electoral vote - 180 out of 303 votes.

[Jrsgun]

Back then people were not to concerned about electoral votes,that is part of history ,too.
ROLL UP YOUR SLEEVES & LET THE BATTLE BEGIN
GOD BLESS TEXAS & THE MILITARY

[awecelot]

Originally Posted by Jrsgun

Back then people were not to concerned about electoral votes,that is part of history ,too.
ROLL UP YOUR SLEEVES & LET THE BATTLE BEGIN
GOD BLESS TEXAS & THE MILITARY

That is BS and you know it (at least I hope you do). The electoral college is and has always been part of the Constitution.

You cost yourself all credibility with that statement.

[Jrsgun]

I have not cost myself any credibilty, but you might have,because the statement was to show that even if he won, does not mean the majority of the people wanted him. It is just like a Socialist to want to argue with a fact because it did not fit with their program.
What the facts show is that the Electoral College is not that perfect compared to a vote by the people themselves.

ROLL UP YOUR SLEEVES & LET THE BATTLE BEGIN
GOD BLESS TEXAS & THE MILITARY

[perticusrex]

This whole secede thing is so embarassing. No wonder the rest of the country thinks we are gun toting drunkard backwards thinking big truck driving morons.

[TNRyan23]

Originally Posted by perticusrex

This whole secede thing is so embarassing. No wonder the rest of the country thinks we are gun toting drunkard backwards thinking big truck driving morons.

Actually, I think Texas talks of secession is for all the right reasons. Texas seems to have the right idea and seems to be one of the few states that are not willing to bend over and take it from the government.

Not trying to be a nut or anything but if this country were to fall apart, There is no other state I'd rather be in then Texas. I feel Texas would have a better chance at survival then any other state if it came down to it. The fact that many Texans bare arms is also a great thing when you think about it. No one would ever dream of coming into a state/country where all of their residents have arms and a means to defend themselves.

[Angel713]

Originally Posted by TNRyan23

Actually, I think Texas talks of secession is for all the right reasons. Texas seems to have the right idea and seems to be one of the few states that are not willing to bend over and take it from the government.

Where I stopped reading. Texas is not willing to "bend over and take it" from the government, but this state sure has no problem asking the Feds for money. Just recently, one of the worst politicians in Texas (John Culberson) asked the Feds for money to rebuild a freeway near Houston. "We hate the government blah blah blah, but hey, can you help us build this freeway/mass transit/help us during national disasters?? Please????"