Abolish the Electoral College (Putin, borders, speech, leader)

[Timonium]

Democrats want to disenfranchise rural voters.

Not surprising. Such a scum party

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by Timonium

Democrats want to disenfranchise rural voters.

Not surprising. Such a scum party

No surprise. They want to change everything that doesn’t work in their favor and hurts their feelings, which is most everything, lol.

[Jowel]

eBoLiSh? Is there some significance to "abolish" being written this way?

Your post is unclear on what you support or don't and why. It only rants about Democrats.

Can you please expound on what you're proposing and why you think it would be a good system for all lawful voters (and not just one party)?

[DRob4JC]

Originally Posted by Jowel

eBoLiSh? Is there some significance to "abolish" being written this way?

Your post is unclear on what you support or don't and why. It only rants about Democrats.

Can you please expound on what you're proposing and why you think it would be a good system for all lawful voters (and not just one party)?

Do you understand the electoral college and the purpose of it?

[atltechdude]

Originally Posted by Timonium

Democrats want to disenfranchise rural voters.

No, we want to enfranchise them equally to all other voters in the country, one person, one vote.

You want to preserve the EXTRA enfranchisement the EC currently gives rural voters over city dwellers.

[DRob4JC]

Originally Posted by atltechdude

No, we want to enfranchise them equally to all other voters in the country, one person, one vote.

You want to preserve the EXTRA enfranchisement the EC currently gives rural voters over city dwellers.

It's called - recognizing these other areas that do not border an ocean as sovereign states.

States matter.

We are not a pure democracy in a national sense. We are 50 separate democracies.

[Jowel]

Originally Posted by DRob4JC

Do you understand the electoral college and the purpose of it?

I do understand it, but it's up to the OP to make their case since they are the person who started the thread.

[atltechdude]

Originally Posted by DRob4JC

We are not a pure democracy in a national sense. We are 50 separate democracies.

Electing a representative leader by popular vote does not make the country a pure democracy. Not sure why there is such a high level of confusion between these two things among so many.

Pure democracy doesn't have representative leaders, the citizens themselves decide the issues in referenda.

Obviously, you can oppose the change to popular vote and say keep it the way it is, but arguing we would be a pure democracy with the change is not correct.

[Leona Valley]

Democrats just keep them borders open and ignore existing immigration law and with amnesty I doubt the dems will ever lose another presidential election. Keep those 3rd worlders that don’t respect our immigration laws coming.

Countries that ignore their immigration laws turn to garbage. And we're almost there.

[notnamed]

Originally Posted by DRob4JC

Do you understand the electoral college and the purpose of it?

Yep.

"in a direct election system, the North would outnumber the South, whose many slaves (more than half a million in all) of course could not vote. But the Electoral College—a prototype of which Madison proposed in this same speech—instead let each southern state count its slaves, albeit with a two-fifths discount, in computing its share of the overall count."

The Troubling Reason the Electoral College Exists