ADVERTISEMENT

Electoral College - Nate Silver

I find many of you beyond ignorant. The only thing giving your average American a say in who is president is the EL Coll. Any of you who still live in Iowa could say "Goodbye" to having any say in who is elected president if the electoral college was eliminated. LA, NY and Chi town would be the only places that would matter. You would never see a politician in Iowa again. Whatever the largest cities wanted would be all that mattered. Ask anyone who lives in a major city like I do, if you don't agree, too bad......

That happens already in non swing states....
I would argue if every vote counted you would see every state being shown love in elections that were in a dead heat.

The main determining number of the electoral college is the number of house of representatives. That needs to change and be more like one vote per 25K or such. Keep in mind that number has been set at 435 since 1913 and two more were added for Alaska and Hawaii. So as the US added 220 million people the number of electoral college votes has stayed the same...huh? It is no longer balanced and swung way too in favor of the rural populations getting more voting power. Which is how you get such a BS moment as the one now. Case in point, California has one electoral vote per 712,000 people, Wyoming — the least populous state in the country — has one electoral vote per 195,000 people.
 
If Biden wins the popular vote by +5% but Trump wins the EC then the country will burn. Hell it might anyways.
It will burn if Biden wins by 1% AND wins the electoral college. If Biden wins by 5% and Trump takes the EC it might FINALLY force the EC to be reformed or abolished. It is a totally idiotic way to elect the president. It always was.
 
I find many of you beyond ignorant. The only thing giving your average American a say in who is president is the EL Coll. Any of you who still live in Iowa could say "Goodbye" to having any say in who is elected president if the electoral college was eliminated. LA, NY and Chi town would be the only places that would matter. You would never see a politician in Iowa again. Whatever the largest cities wanted would be all that mattered. Ask anyone who lives in a major city like I do, if you don't agree, too bad......
Bull fvcking shit. This is idiotic. Minus the EC the "average American" in Iowa will have EXACTLY THE SAME VOICE in who is president as every other "average American". One vote that equals ONE VOTE.
 
Of course I do, it is your IQ

tumblr_moxsie59q51sx4jfio1_500.gif

But you still don’t understand what average means.
 
That happens already in non swing states....
I would argue if every vote counted you would see every state being shown love in elections that were in a dead heat.

The main determining number of the electoral college is the number of house of representatives. That needs to change and be more like one vote per 25K or such. Keep in mind that number has been set at 435 since 1913 and two more were added for Alaska and Hawaii. So as the US added 220 million people the number of electoral college votes has stayed the same...huh? It is no longer balanced and swung way too in favor of the rural populations getting more voting power. Which is how you get such a BS moment as the one now. Case in point, California has one electoral vote per 712,000 people, Wyoming — the least populous state in the country — has one electoral vote per 195,000 people.
But how many of those people in CA are legal?
 
Currently, at least 40 states don't matter and no candidate spends any time in any of them. But if you switch to a popular vote, every state matters. Candidates could choose to focus on just a handful of the biggest states, or they could try visiting all 50 to gin up support. It would actually make for a much more dynamic and interesting election. And it would make strategy way more important. Right now, there is no strategy. Just burn all your resources in 5-6 states.
 
Bull fvcking shit. This is idiotic. Minus the EC the "average American" in Iowa will have EXACTLY THE SAME VOICE in who is president as every other "average American". One vote that equals ONE VOTE.
I'm sorry, maybe you just don't understand. Sometimes things just might be too complicated for you. You're clear evidence that our founding fathers were smarter than some current Americans like you. That's fine i'm sure there are other things your good at.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: UKGrad93
People worried about the US being controlled by the NYC and LA voters, well then doesn’t that mean R’s should try to appeal to them more?

I’ve been mostly neutral on this but the concept of one person =/= one vote makes no sense to me in a republic.
 
If you think the red areas are going to sit back and let the blue areas dictate how they live their lives then you're out of your friggen minds. I told you this 4 years ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Speedway1
I find many of you beyond ignorant. The only thing giving your average American a say in who is president is the EL Coll. Any of you who still live in Iowa could say "Goodbye" to having any say in who is elected president if the electoral college was eliminated. LA, NY and Chi town would be the only places that would matter. You would never see a politician in Iowa again. Whatever the largest cities wanted would be all that mattered. Ask anyone who lives in a major city like I do, if you don't agree, too bad......

18.3 Million people live in the New York City Metro area
9.5 Million People live in the Chicago Metro area
13.3 Million people live in the LA metro area

286.9 Million Americans DO NOT live in any of those 3 metro areas. Complete fear mongering an in attempt to give small rural states out-sized voting power over the rest of the country.
 
Nyc understands and respects the issues facing Iowa? Since when?

Want to see how nyc would treat Iowa? During the peak of their covid crisis they tried to confiscate ventilators in Iowa by applying pressure on the federal government. Isn't that great of them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: your_master5
18.3 Million people live in the New York City Metro area
9.5 Million People live in the Chicago Metro area
13.3 Million people live in the LA metro area

286.9 Million Americans DO NOT live in any of those 3 metro areas. Complete fear mongering an in attempt to give small rural states out-sized voting power over the rest of the country.

Lolz
 
18.3 Million people live in the New York City Metro area
9.5 Million People live in the Chicago Metro area
13.3 Million people live in the LA metro area

286.9 Million Americans DO NOT live in any of those 3 metro areas. Complete fear mongering an in attempt to give small rural states out-sized voting power over the rest of the country.
Weak, you are so weak. You know I was using those three metro areas as an example, if you don't then I feel sorry for you. Rural values and traditional American policies would be eliminated by soft marxists, like yourself. Dems used to be reasonable but now they would rather vote for Mao than Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Speedway1
I'm sorry, maybe you just don't understand. Sometimes things just might be too complicated for you. You're clear evidence that our founding fathers were smarter than some current Americans like you. That's fine i'm sure there are other things your good at.

Really? Our founding fathers thought slavery was good thing. The founding fathers where just trying to write out a constitution that people 200 years ago could compromise on.

On top of that, we all have the benefit of more than 200 years of history to look back upon. There have been remarkable developments in democracy since the constitution was written.

We are yet again the only nation that does this. No one in the UK is asking themselves what William Pitt the Younger would do.
 
Weak, you are so weak. You know I was using those three metro areas as an example, if you don't then I feel sorry for you. Rural values and traditional American policies would be eliminated by soft marxists, like yourself. Dems used to be reasonable but now they would rather vote for Mao than Trump.

Sadly you don't even know what a marxist actually is in terms of ideology. And I would vote for neither Mao nor Trump.
 
Weak, you are so weak. You know I was using those three metro areas as an example, if you don't then I feel sorry for you. Rural values and traditional American policies would be eliminated by soft marxists, like yourself. Dems used to be reasonable but now they would rather vote for Mao than Trump.
Holy moly, is this a real post?
 
ADVERTISEMENT