Tony is desperate

[UsualName]

The system simply forces the political powers to consider people from a bigger part of the country, which are citizens just as the others that live in more heavily populated areas. This does not mean that the politian can simply ignore people in more populated areas, because he/she still has to please them, otherwise they will not vote for him.

Mob rule (a.k.a. Democracy) is not a good idea. Venezuela is a great example of this. A dictator was literally voted in by the mob, because if people realize that if they band together, they can vote to explore a certain group of people, they will do it.

The U.S. Constitution has the primary goal of limiting government's powers and avoiding mob rule is crucial to this. It simply is a stupid idea that people from a handful of big centers have a disproportionate amount of power over the lives of people living hundreds or even thounsands of miles from these centers.

After all, we're talking about a FEDERAL election. It only makes sense that this election takes in consideration the WHOLE COUNTRY, otherwise there would not be much difference between this election and the ones in local state and municipal elections. There's a reason for this difference to exist.

No. The electoral college is rooted in slavery and house apportionment.

Remember that only white property owner could vote but the electors were based on senate and house representation. Hence why there are 538 electors today.

It was never about the whole country.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

The system simply forces the political powers to consider people from a bigger part of the country, which are citizens just as the others that live in more heavily populated areas. This does not mean that the politian can simply ignore people in more populated areas, because he/she still has to please them, otherwise they will not vote for him.

Mob rule (a.k.a. Democracy) is not a good idea. Venezuela is a great example of this. A dictator was literally voted in by the mob, because if people realize that if they band together, they can vote to explore a certain group of people, they will do it.

The U.S. Constitution has the primary goal of limiting government's powers and avoiding mob rule is crucial to this. It simply is a stupid idea that people from a handful of big centers have a disproportionate amount of power over the lives of people living hundreds or even thounsands of miles from these centers.

After all, we're talking about a FEDERAL election. It only makes sense that this election takes in consideration the WHOLE COUNTRY, otherwise there would not be much difference between this election and the ones in local state and municipal elections. There's a reason for this difference to exist.

Excellent points----and if I may be permitted to add----presidential candidates would stop going to Kansas and would concentrate all efforts on NY, LA, CHI, HOU etc. if The Electoral College were ever abolished.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

No. The electoral college is rooted in slavery and house apportionment.

Remember that only white property owner could vote but the electors were based on senate and house representation. Hence why there are 538 electors today.

It was never about the whole country.

What you are saying, if accurate, is not relevant to the The EC. What you are saying, if accurate, is relevant to voting in general.

 

[LacesOut]

Many of those red blocks have large open spaces with little or no population. Cows and birds don't vote, people do. State elections are not Electoral College they are popular votes. Cuomo won the popular vote.

it is not hard to understand....

But But But
MUH Red States Use More Food Stamps...

 

[Buy1Sell2]

No. The electoral college is rooted in slavery and house apportionment.

Remember that only white property owner could vote but the electors were based on senate and house representation. Hence why there are 538 electors today.

It was never about the whole country.

In addition, The EC was actually anti-slavery. This is why Southern States were only credited with 3/5 of a black person to calculate their representation. The North made this compromise to avoid the Southern States from having too much power, while enticing them to be in The Union. It was always on the mind of The Founders that slavery would need to go away, but this was how they kept he Southern States from being too strong and not eventually abandoning slavery. As you can see, a war had to happen later.

 

[Tony Stark]

[

Agreed----in addition, the power that they seek is also over groups of people like Blacks. This is how they continue to be the party of racism. They do nothing for Blacks or other groups, yet project that they are the only ones that can help them. This is the new US slavery.

Maybe they should vote for the party that supports the confederacy and think they deserve monuments

 

[El OchoCinco]

But But But
MUH Red States Use More Food Stamps...

I think you have a mental problem that blocks you from having an intelligent conversation.

I said to you 2 or 3 times that Red states are the poorest in the country so the GOP has just as much a vested interest in supporting welfare for voter support as Dems. Then you come back with drivel as though you chose not to read my post.

Also you mentally do not understand how popular votes work in State elections.

So try not to do this:

 

[Buy1Sell2]

[

Maybe they should vote for the party that supports the confederacy and think they deserve monuments

They do. They vote for The Democrat Party.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

No. The electoral college is rooted in slavery and house apportionment.

Remember that only white property owner could vote but the electors were based on senate and house representation. Hence why there are 538 electors today.

It was never about the whole country.

Yup.

https://time.com/4558510/electoral-college-history-slavery/

 

[UsualName]

What you are saying, if accurate, is not relevant to the The EC. What you are saying, if accurate, is relevant to voting in general.

The electoral college is a design to give southern slave holding states more power in choosing the president. That’s all there is to it. As I have pointed out, historically this has not been a problem in that the popular vote aligned with the electoral college outcome the vast majority of the times. It used to be a fluke.

Now it is the norm when republicans win and the gap is widening.

Also, it is absolutely true “blue” areas are the gdp engines of this country and make up a disproportionate amount of the countries productivity. This further adds to the divide because while Fox News is running hit pieces on California, California knows it’s rich and paying for less affluent red states, aka welfare states.