Elections Former Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton: The Electoral College "Needs To Be Eliminated"

[HomerThompson]

Look at the votes from the last election in terms of square feet. This why I'm fine with the electoral college. Densely populated cities tend to live in a bubble of self importance. They shouldn't get to decide for rest of the country.

Yes, because land should have voting rights.

 

[TSO]

The only thing that would change if the electoral college were ended is that republicans in blue states would actually vote.

 

[HomerThompson]

So fucking california and new york will determine the out come of all presidential elections from now on?

Fuck that.

No, the citizens or the country will, with each vote counting equally. The horror!

 

[HomerThompson]

The only thing that would change if the electoral college were ended is that republicans in blue states would actually vote.

Wrong. Democrats in red states would vote more too.

 

[Fawlty]

Yes, because land should have voting rights.

Democrats will start trucking in sand from northern Mexico to illegally vote!!

 

[BVG]

No, the citizens or the country will, with each vote counting equally. The horror!

Very rarely do I agree with your libtard views.

And this is yet another example.

You are a dumb fucking idiot. I mean I could explain to you the problem with having densly populated areas controlling the outcome of the presidential election without ever knowing the issues or problems facing rural/farm areas..but you would gloss over that because again.

You are a fucking libtard idiot.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

Well I think it's undemocratic that the over all number of votes doesn't determine the winner, this is an even greater issue in Canada where the winning party is determined by which party wins the most ridings and riding size varies greatly , the smallest riding has 30,000 people while the largest has about 170,000

Some form of proportional represtation is the fairest system imo

We are a representative democracy and have always been. What was the last thing we voted on at the federal level? The presidency is no different

 

[HomerThompson]

Very rarely do I agree with your libtard views.

And this is yet another example.

You are a dumb fucking idiot. I mean I could explain to you the problem with having densly populated areas controlling the outcome of the presidential election without ever knowing the issues or problems facing rural/farm areas..but you would gloss over that because again.

You are a fucking libtard idiot.

Terrific argument. Maybe you can explain why it wouldn't be more Democratic to do a straight popular vote? Just like we do for The Senate, Congress, Governors, etc. Politicians will still need all the votes they can get. It would certainly lead to solid red and blue states getting more attention.

It would be good to see more attention given to California. California has 39.25 million people, or roughly 12% of the population of the US. It also has the 6th largest economy in the world. To be properly represented in the Electoral college California would need 65 electors, not 55.

I'd like to see Republican Presidential candidates in California, and Democratic Presidential candidates in Texas. Everyone wins, and voter turnout would likely go up with every vote actually counting.

 

[regmma123]

The electoral college was created to help protect America from people like Crooked Hillary!

Moreso like don the con and dubya the dufus

 

[BVG]

Terrific argument. Maybe you can explain why it wouldn't be more Democratic to do a straight popular vote? Just like we do for The Senate, Congress, Governors, etc. Politicians will still need all the votes they can get. It would certainly lead to solid red and blue states getting more attention.

It would be good to see more attention given to California. California has 39.25 million people, or roughly 12% of the population of the US. It also has the 6th largest economy in the world. To be properly represented in the Electoral college California would need 65 electors, not 55.

I'd like to see Republican Presidential candidates in California, and Democratic Presidential candidates in Texas. Everyone wins, and voter turnout would likely go up with every vote actually counting.

Because the issues and porblems facing a new yorker or californian do not reflect as the same as those that live in the other 90 percent of the United States.

That's just common sense.

Something you lack.









Because you are a dumb fuck libtard with no argument but feels.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

Terrific argument. Maybe you can explain why it wouldn't be more Democratic to do a straight popular vote? Just like we do for The Senate, Congress, Governors, etc. Politicians will still need all the votes they can get. It would certainly lead to solid red and blue states getting more attention.

It would be good to see more attention given to California. California has 39.25 million people, or roughly 12% of the population of the US. It also has the 6th largest economy in the world. To be properly represented in the Electoral college California would need 65 electors, not 55.

I'd like to see Republican Presidential candidates in California, and Democratic Presidential candidates in Texas. Everyone wins, and voter turnout would likely go up with every vote actually counting.

We are a representative democracy and always have been. We don't vote for things at the federal level. Why should city slickers from NY or CA decide things for iowa farmers?

 

[HomerThompson]

Because the issues and porblems facing a new yorker or californian do not reflect as the same as those that live in the other 90 percent of the United States.

That's just common sense.

Something you lack.









Because you are a dumb fuck libtard with no argument but feels.

Says the guy with no substantive points, and nothing but insults. I'd love to see a popular vote instead because I think it's more Democratic, and doesn't endanger our Constitutional Republic in any way. In fact, it would lead to more involvement from everyone, and a better representation of the will of the American people.

 

[HomerThompson]

We are a representative democracy and always have been. We don't vote for things at the federal level. Why should city slickers from NY or CA decide things for iowa farmers?

They wouldn't be. They would just be getting a fair weight for their vote, which is 1 to 1. 1 person, 1 vote. States already get 2 Senators regardless of their size to help balance power to the states. Having 3-5 states decide every election is asinine.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

They wouldn't be. They would just be getting a fair weight for their vote, which is 1 to 1. 1 person, 1 vote. States already get 2 Senators regardless of their size to help balance power to the states. Having 3-5 states decide every election is asinine.

It is 1 person 1 vote. Quit pretending otherwise as it's disingenuous. You are represented within your state, and your state is represented federally. Why should the presidency be different than any other issue? States should be deciding for themselves, not the whole country

 

[HomerThompson]

It is 1 person 1 vote. Quit pretending otherwise as it's disingenuous. You are represented within your state, and your state is represented federally. Why should the presidency be different than any other issue? States should be deciding for themselves, not the whole country

In a winner take all system, where if I vote Democrat in Texas(or whatever solidly red state) my vote doesn't count at all. The same thing in reverse for Republicans in California(or whatever solidly blue state).

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

Terrific argument. Maybe you can explain why it wouldn't be more Democratic to do a straight popular vote? Just like we do for The Senate, Congress, Governors, etc. Politicians will still need all the votes they can get. It would certainly lead to solid red and blue states getting more attention.

It would be good to see more attention given to California. California has 39.25 million people, or roughly 12% of the population of the US. It also has the 6th largest economy in the world. To be properly represented in the Electoral college California would need 65 electors, not 55.

I'd like to see Republican Presidential candidates in California, and Democratic Presidential candidates in Texas. Everyone wins, and voter turnout would likely go up with every vote actually counting.

But then the unpopular party wouldnt be able to use the EC to rig the election for the oligarchs.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

In a winner take all system, where if I vote Democrat in Texas(or whatever solidly red state) my vote doesn't count at all. The same thing in reverse for Republicans in California(or whatever solidly blue state).

Where do you get the notion it doesn't count? The elections are held at a state level. Your vote shouldn't count federally as it was never intended to.

If you want to make the argument the state should be broken up as well by county then we can have a discussion, but you aren't making sense by attacking our representative democracy

 

[regmma123]

Hillary has been throwing down the hammer since getting screwed in the election. And she is right here. The overwhelming majority wanted her as President, yet our system makes some random farmers in irrelevant states votes be more important than those in places like California and NY who are the pulse of the nation

lol at irrelevant farmers

who grow the food we eat

 

[WiolentOne]

The founding fathers understood that hiveminders would be the death of liberty. That's why we don't have a direct democracy.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

New York (CNN) Hillary Clinton told CNN on Wednesday that it is time to abolish the Electoral College, part of a sweeping interview where the former Democratic nominee sought to explain why she lost the 2016 election.

"I think it needs to be eliminated," Clinton said of the Electoral College. "I'd like to see us move beyond it, yes."

Clinton won the 2016 popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, a fact she routinely brings up in her new memoir. But Trump won the Electoral College, a body of 538 members who select the president based on the popular vote in each state, meaning the person who gets the most votes nationally doesn't necessarily win the election.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/13/polit...son-cooper-electoral-college-cnntv/index.html

Everytime I hear Hillary talk, I'm reminded of a quote from the Spartacus series...

"Words pour from her mouth like shit from ass."