Should the Electoral College Be Eliminated?

david starling

Well-known member
This is not factually correct.

It's called the cornoavirus or Covid-19, or variants thereof. Calling it the "China virus" has serious racist implications in the US, as Asian American citizens have been harassed by right-wingers who falsely blame them for causing the pandemic.
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/202...ed-discrimination-amid-the-covid-19-outbreak/

Donald Trump did not somehow cause the prosperity of 2016-2019, he merely took credit for it. This was a global uptick following the Great Recession of 2008.

Trump's willful ignorance of CV-19 and massive numbers of Americans sickening and even dying had chilling effects on the economy. Trump could have brought the country together to fight the pandemic He did not, and his inattention and even hostility to epidemiology means we're all paying the price.

Trump is not a man of faith. He doesn't go to church. I doubt that he reads the Bible. He doesn't follow the Ten Commandments. Just ask Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen, Roger Stone, the contractors he stiffed on his construction projects, the students he bilked out of thousands of dollars via his bogus Trump University, &c.

What Trump has done was make pledges to right-wing white Evangelicals to nominate conservative justices (whom he hopes will overturn Roe vs. Wade.)



I agree.



Under the Constitution, states have leeway to run the Electoral College differently. Most have gone for a winner-take-all sweepstakes. Maine and Nebraska follow a system of proportional representation, where the Electors are divided according to the outcome of the popular vote.

I support their systems.

The winner-take-all method of allocating Electoral Votes is OBVIOUSLY NOT the one that "forces candidates to tour all of the nation's...counties...parishes...and cities".

INSTEAD, it makes it so the CANDIDATES CAN IGNORE ENTIRE STATES, knowing in advance which candidate will receive ALL of a State's Electoral votes, whether they campaign there or not.

It's ONLY by tying the PROPORTION OF THE ELECTORAL VOTES that will go to a candidate to the PROPORTION OF THE POPULAR VOTES the candidates receive in each State that will make it worthwhile for the candidates to reach out to the ENTIRE NATION.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Dirius, David and I have been answering you repeatedly on your same old points. Your not liking or understanding our answers is different.
 

david starling

Well-known member
What a coincidence that your complain came page 4 - not before when you were engaging in the conversation, right after I posted the data you and waybread couldn't suddenly answer anymore - :wink:
:lol::lol:

No, it was just too depressing looking up death statistics. And, no one but myself was even talking about the EC anymore.
 

david starling

Well-known member
Here's proof that the Electoral College vote and the Popular-vote has failed to match only THREE times, NOT 5, as is usually claimed:

TWICE, in both Adams/Jackson in 1824; and, Bush/Gore in 2000, the Electoral College vote and the National Popular-vote DID in fact match.

But, in 2000, Florida's Election was SO fouled up, they couldn't count the votes in time. So, the Republican majority in the (allegedly "non-partisan") U.S. Supreme Court, appointed Bush Jr.as President. Even though, when the counting was finally finished, it turned out that Bush had LOST BOTH the Electoral College vote, AND the National Popular-vote.

Adams also lost both the Electoral and Popular vote to Jackson. However, there were other political parties at the time, and they siphoned off just enough of the limited number of Electoral votes, that Jackson came up just one Electoral vote shy of the required number. So, Jackson won both more Electoral votes and more Popular votes than Adams, but Adams was appointed President by a committee in the House of Representatives, which voted against Jackson by a slim partisan majority.
 
Last edited:
Top