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.
Read up on the reasons behind the Electoral College, then argue with me about it.
That's a nice tidbit. I'm not sure what senators have to do with the electoral college other than each state getting two electoral votes added to the number of representatives the state has. And the weakest argument is to point to something hardly related to disparage a valid point by someone else.
Senators being appointed by the state legislature prior to the 17th Amendment does not strengthen your argument. Are you saying that it would take another amendment, similar to the 17th, to change how we elect a president? Are you saying that we should discount all amendments because they weren't "originally in the Constitution?"
Electors used to mainly be appointed by state legislatures with no popular vote at all. Should we go back to that?
I can guarantee that would happen in Maryland. Good God, the Democratic Congressional candidates who are in the primary are all campaigning against Trump. Very little about why they should be nominated. The Democratic candidates for Governor are doing the same. Nothing about the Republican incumbent, Larry Hogan, but talking about Trump. Which worked for O'Malley when he ran against Bob Ehrlich when he ran for a second term. O'Malley did nothing except talk about Bush.
In a recent special election in Pa. the Republican candidate ran against Nancy Pelosi and never put forth an idea of his own. He said he was Trump before Trump was Trump and lost in a district that orange Jesus carried by 19.5%. See how that works?
You do realize that senators, governors, house representatives, etc are all voted by popular vote... wait no sorry...ahem... mob rule; as per your own definition. It is fine to make the argument that the election of the president should be done differently and the reason why is.... <insert your reason here>? But it is something else to say we simply cannot elect a president by popular vote even though nearly every other elected office in the country is by elected by popular vote.
You know that America is a Republic, right? Not a democracy...
The main reason HRC won the popular vote was because of California. We know there are bunch of questionable voters out there.
Links or facts to back up that statement? Are you alleging massive voter fraud in California? To have millions of illegal aliens vote would require an operation so large and obvious that it would be impossible to escape detection.
a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.
Links or facts to back up that statement? Are you alleging massive voter fraud in California? To have millions of illegal aliens vote would require an operation so large and obvious that it would be impossible to escape detection.
It doesn't need backed up. Clinton beat Trump in popular vote by 3 million. 4 million in California. California does count but without it, she also loses the popular vote.
a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.
The United States is a republic, the individual States are not...
Dems will reverse this as soon as Republicans win the popular vote. Crooked stuff like this always backfires on them.
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.