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

bobgeese said:
Because in ny, shit loads of people don't vote, because we know it doesn't matter.

I use ny as an example because NYC, and the rest of the state are as different as can be.

Also, if you think the pop vote is a good idea, just look at NY. They take everything and screw upstate over at every turn.
Click to expand...
Same thing happens in Illinois with Chicago.
 
There are a lot of merits to the argument, but it'll never happen. You'd have to get both parties on board and that simply won't happen when one side clearly benefits and the other clearly gets screwed. I wouldn't expect the Democrats to give up their advantage if the shoe was on the other foot. It's not a mere coincidence that every single time that a candidate has won the Electoral College but not the popular vote, it's been a Republican. It's the main thing the Republicans have going for them as the Democrats have a demographic advantage.
 
Jackie Blue said:
There are a lot of merits to the argument, but it'll never happen. You'd have to get both parties on board and that simply won't happen when one side clearly benefits and the other clearly gets screwed. I wouldn't expect the Democrats to give up their advantage if the shoe was on the other foot. It's not a mere coincidence that every single time that a candidate has won the Electoral College but not the popular vote, it's been a Republican. It's the main thing the Republicans have going for them as the Democrats have a demographic advantage.
Click to expand...

And it goes well beyond just the two parties as well. Because to amend the Constitution most of the states have to be on board. And smaller states have no incentive at all to change the system.

I understand why people don't like it. it's a compromise, and compromises means you didn't get your way. But it also means things aren't so great for the other guy either. You take away the Electoral College and I think we'd have far more regional restiveness and instability in our country than we do now.
 
Due to the high rate of cultural exchange in large port cities, they have always been thorns in the side of their countries' hinterlands, even if they are economically beneficial. You have all this 'extra-national' influence coming in from the outside and depending on one's perspective, it is not always good. And in the case of the United States I think the balance of it is harmful. This why I am for the electoral college.
 
IngaVovchanchyn said:
And it goes well beyond just the two parties as well. Because to amend the Constitution most of the states have to be on board. And smaller states have no incentive at all to change the system.

I understand why people don't like it. it's a compromise, and compromises means you didn't get your way. But it also means things aren't so great for the other guy either. You take away the Electoral College and I think we'd have far more regional restiveness and instability in our country than we do now.
Click to expand...
I opted not to get into all the details in my previous post, but yes you are absolutely correct. It's basically a pipe dream at this point, it would be fruitful to focus on other issues.
 
Lionel Mandrake said:
1. I'm not a republican

2. The United States is a huge culturally diverse country, places like New York City and L.A. that don't even collectively make up 1000 square miles, shouldn't get to decide what the rest of the very diverse 3 million square miles of the U.S. should do.
Click to expand...
Again....the amount of land doesnt outweigh the amount of people.

Dirt doesnt have a opinion on political issues.

If most people are of a type of culture then thats the culture people want for america.

It makes no difference if california or nyc went into the water and the liberals evenly spread out over the united states than how it is now.

The oponions of those that live 2miles apart is just the same as those whos houses are 3ft apart.

The electoral college is a joke and an insult to any unbiased civilized human.
 
The electoral college needs to be abolished. It's archaic and doesn't make any sense. One person, one vote.
 
oleDirtyBast4rd said:
How so? Coastal regions should vote for coastal matters and concerns. Same for landlocked and mountainous etc. I don't want people from Appalachia voting for issues in Louisiana. That makes no sense
Click to expand...
Most people dont vote in regards to the environment.

They tend to vote gor universal matters like immigration...federal budget/taxes..education and healthcare.
 
She is literally saying she only cares about half the country and wonders why she can't get elected.
 
revoltub said:
the electoral college gives the power by state, instead of individually.

the population vote would mean you only need to get cali and new york. that means the entire fate of the US is confined to 2 urban metropolises and the rest of the country is left in the dust with no chance.

at least in the electoral college, you have to most likely win more states than your opponent. Trump had less votes but he won more states.

As if it matters though. HIllary knew how the election worked. She new the rules and she new how to win this election. Shes lost, get over it.

she screwed over bernie sanders who should have been the candidate and karma is a bitch and she got what she deserved.
Click to expand...
If all the people in major cities on both coasts moved out and spread evenly across the country.. There is no rationality on why in that situation getting rid of the electoral college would all of a sudden be legit.
 
FrankensteinMMA said:
Again....the amount of land doesnt outweigh the amount of people.

Dirt doesnt have a opinion on political issues.

If most people are of a type of culture then thats the culture people want for america.

It makes no difference if california or nyc went into the water and the liberals evenly spread out over the united states than how it is now.

The oponions of those that live 2miles apart is just the same as those whos houses are 3ft apart.

The electoral college is a joke and an insult to any unbiased civilized human.
Click to expand...

1. Nonsense. It's a completely sensible compromise that has allowed half a continent to live in peace with only one major internal war in the past two centuries. It allows both the cities and the countryside a good deal of autonomy from the influence of the other. Wyoming doesn't dominate California. Neither is it dominated by California.

2. It's politically impossible to remove it now, and it was pretty much impossible to form the Union without the Great Compromise.

3. What our country needs is a greater emphasis on federalism, so that national elections don't mean as much as they do now. Empower the states and local governments, in areas ranging from drug laws to education. Coastal liberals should be free to mold their communities and cities to match their cultures and the same should be true of heartland conservatives. Obviously the federal government should still protect citizens rights as enshrined in the Bill of rights an other amendments as well as things like the Civil rights Act.
 
FrankensteinMMA said:
If all the people in major cities on both coasts moved out and spread evenly across the country.. There is no rationality on why in that situation getting rid of the electoral college would all of a sudden be legit.
Click to expand...

What are you even talking about?

The electoral college gives voice to the most states.

There are issues in rural america that people in citys will never have to deal with. There are more people in cities and therefore more people who care less to emphasize with blue collar americs.

The popular vote would put less populated states at a dissadvantage.

Urban populations hace hive minds.
 
It's like when a super popular president complains about term limits...how the fuck to wake up in the morning and expect anyone to take you seriously. You played the game by the rules and lost. STFU already.
 
Gandhi said:
It's like when a super popular president complains about term limits...how the fuck to wake up in the morning and expect anyone to take you seriously. You played the game by the rules and lost. STFU already.
Click to expand...

It's especially annoying considering when everyone knew Trump would lose, she was on the forefront, telling people to trust the electoral system, and dont complain when the vote goes the way opposite you.
 
FrankensteinMMA said:
Again....the amount of land doesnt outweigh the amount of people.

Dirt doesnt have a opinion on political issues.

If most people are of a type of culture then thats the culture people want for america.

It makes no difference if california or nyc went into the water and the liberals evenly spread out over the united states than how it is now.

The oponions of those that live 2miles apart is just the same as those whos houses are 3ft apart.

The electoral college is a joke and an insult to any unbiased civilized human.
Click to expand...

but where the people are matters. As I said in a former post, due to the high rate of cultural and ideological exchange in heavily populated port cities due to influences coming in from outside, they can pose a threat to the institutional stability of a commonwealth. Let's face it, many of the people coming in and setting up shop in L.A. and N.Y. (whether legal or not) couldn't give a shit about the stability of our founding principles. Whether in the long run the electoral college is a positive good or not, one thing it does do is help to maintain stability. And because I happen to want to conserve most of my country's original principles, I am naturally for the electoral college. But if somehow the college became a threat to that, then I would probably not be so peachy about it.

I am not a pure democratist. It is ultimately ideas that matter to me, not what a majority of people happen to want at a given moment. It is what they think, not that most of them happen to think it that matters to me.
 
Last edited:
oleDirtyBast4rd said:
How so? Coastal regions should vote for coastal matters and concerns. Same for landlocked and mountainous etc. I don't want people from Appalachia voting for issues in Louisiana. That makes no sense
Click to expand...
Why even have a Federal system? Amirite?
 
What about voter Id n ardressing issues regarding voter fraud?
 
FrankensteinMMA said:
Most people dont vote in regards to the environment.

They tend to vote gor universal matters like immigration...federal budget/taxes..education and healthcare.
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood the overall point. In those different areas are drastically different values. People in Iowa have unique issues and concerns. This is why we vote at the state level and not federal.
 
aside from pros and cons of electoral college, libtards clinging to popular vote result show how truly retarded they are. the outcome of the popular vote is inconsequential since winning popular vote was NOT the goal. it is like in a race you lose, but claim that you won because you made more strides. who gives a shit about strides (popular vote) when the winner is the one who came to finish first (won by electoral college).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,949
Messages
55,456,648
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top