How do i argue against a liberal who says hillary won the popular vote so she should've been president because more people wanted her??
I know illegals voted but I doubt there were over 3 Million illegals voting en masse without voter fraud being detected
Different states different sizes.
Why should a small town in the Midwest have less voting power than Commiefornia?
She won a plurality not a majority.
Oh ya and the constitution
Simple. Both knew the conditions to win. Hillary should've went for the electoral votes instead of the popular. Popular vote has always and will always mean nothing
You tell them that the electoral college exists for a reason....
He won 30 states versus her 20 states. Boom done.
The majority of big cities are liberal
>I doubt there were over 3 Million illegals voting en masse
that's where you're wrong
Just quote the founders you faggot
> Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States. It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue. And this will be thought no inconsiderable recommendation of the Constitution, by those who are able to estimate the share which the executive in every government must necessarily have in its good or ill administration. Though we cannot acquiesce in the political heresy of the poet who says: "For forms of government let fools contest That which is best administered is best,'' yet we may safely pronounce, that the true test of a good government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration.
t.Hamilton/Madison
>she won people, he won landmass
changing the rules in the constitution calls the whole system into question. If we get rid of EC, why have a president at all?
"Muhh one person Muhh one vote"
I think I saw somewhere that if you remove commiefornia's votes (on both sides) Trump wins the popular vote as well
I can't actually be bothered to go find it though, all you really need to do is say that the electoral college functioned properly and if they don't like it they can fucking leave
Dear, Mr.Hamilton...
you dont.
you explain to them that the popular vote doesn't mean shit, simply because of the fact that most people who vote don't know anything about the government or who is running
>the whole Union
>got btfo in every city and blue state
The USA is not a democracy. it is a republic.
>what is electoral college?
That popular vote was probably just from the commiefornians. Remember, they aren't people.
Do you even have a point? That's not inconsistent with what Hamilton wrote. Typical stupid leaf
The fact that it literally doesn't matter?
No country on earth has a direct democracy where all votes are equal. Not even Australia.
America isn't really a country. It's a union of 50 seperate countries. So those countries should be represented fairly.
Ask them why it should be different for this one time in history and remind them to stop being butthurt because it's been this way for a very long time
BECAUSE WHO GIVES A SHIT ABOUT LFYOVER STATES???
WHEN THOSE FUCKING CRACKER METH HEAD RACIST UP THEIR GDP TO 1/10 OF CALIFORNIAS THEN THEY GET MORE VOTING POWER SIMPLE.
FACE IT TRUMP LOST AND HE WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT.
KEK WILLS IT :)
Show that red and blue map of the USA where it's broken up into individual counties, and say that the number of counties matter more than the number of individual voters.
I mean it's a pretty damning image.
People didn't vote for trump in hopeless states like cali because they knew it is an electoral system and their votes wouldn't have mattered. To get an actual popular vote you would need to take another vote and inform people that it is a popular vote.
People didn't vote for Hillary in hopeless states like Oklahoma because they knew it is an electoral system and their votes wouldn't have mattered.
You say "well that's not what the law says, and therefore Trump is President and Hillary is a FAILED CANDIDATE"
If California was removed, the entire country would turn into the neo-liberal/conservative war monger it truly is.
Trump didn't campaign for the popular, he campaigned for the electoral.
If you have 3 chess pieces left, and checkmate your opponent who has 5 pieces left guess what? You still win.
If your opponent has 200 more yards than you in football, but you outscored him, guess what? You win.
The rules clearly state electoral votes win. Trump spent ZERO time campaigning for even one vote in Cali or Jew York, where Clinton won by almost 5 million votes combined. Who cares? Trump spent all his time breaking the blue wall, because he knew it was within reach, and was vital.
And he did.
Quit cryin' bitch nigga
This is Sup Forums logic...
Electoral college: Why should the big cities get to decide the laws in the country if they only represent a tiny portion of the views held within the country.
Minorities: lmao fuck minorities why should they get any say when the country is most white!!!
If you think small states deserve a disproportional amount of voting power then you should also believe a nigger vote is worth more than a white vote
...
>muh popular vote!
Tell her the popular vote doesn't decide who the president is. There's no argument to make.
Exactly the vote was taken under the assumption that your vote doesn't really matter. If it was a popular vote and people knew their votes mattered there would be higher turnout across the board and a closer race. Calling the results now the popular vote is moot because people chose to vote or not to vote under the assumption that it wasn't a popular vote.
Nobody ever said Sup Forums was consistent.
>singles
more people in more states wanted him as their president
most of the people that wanted hillary as president are in a handful of large states like california and new york
Tell the libtard they should have went to class instead of guzzling cocks in the restroom. 7th grade civics.
Trump won the majority of the electoral votes.
He took the vast majority of county districts.
We are a Republic, nigger.
Tell them Californians aren't people
Going to class wouldn't have changed the electoral vote system.
The electoral college is based upon geography, not race you stupid fucking leaflet faggot
Show them one of the election maps, especially the ones by county. So they can see that sea of red.
Explain the Electoral college this way.
1) Highly populated states like New York and California have PRIVILEGE when it comes to elections.
2) Their PRIVILEGE is systemic
3) The founding fathers knew they had to balance the POPULATION PRIVILEGE of high population states
4) So they set up the electoral college as a way to EQUITY. So that no state had more election PRIVILEGE than any other.
5) Remember, majority alone can't rule. Or else white people should rule their own nations.
6) EVERYONE needs to have a voice. Even the underprivileged flyover states
7) So the electoral college is the same as a PROGRESSIVE STACK in which high populated states have a voice, but they dont have ALL the voice.
8) EVERY state gets an EQUITABLE voice under the Electoral college to make sure EVERY state counts
Tell them that she knew the rules before she ran. Stop complaining.
Cucks stand up to defend Jewish extortionists.
The popular vote winning means nothing. It doesn't capture the people who didn't vote in stranglehold states because they were told the electoral college decides. If the deciding rules change the voting incentives change.
Because George Bush would have won against Ross Perrot and Bill Clinton if the election was based on majority vote. Clinton won via the electoral college and held a plurality. If majority was the deciding factor then there would need to be a run-off, meaning that top two candidates would be picked in a cage-match style election: Bill Clinton v. George Bush.
In a scenario like this, Bush would have been president in 1992 because the Perroters would have voted for him over Clinton.
The electoral college system has helped both major parties.
>small states deserve a disproportional amount of voting powe
You're suggesting Wyoming has more power than California now?
Perhaps you could do the math on that one, leafnigger, and get back to us. "A comedy Jew said so..." is not a proof.
Why you should you argue against that liberal? You can be at the same time non-pc and a Trump supporter and say that there should not be a electoral college. This time Trump happened to win because of the stupid system, some time a Democrat will win because of the stupid system.
There's no need to argue. As soon as they say Hillary should have won because of the popular vote, smile, say "guess what? Trump won and he's your president!" They will try to come back at you with an argument or a retort, but keep smiling and just repeat. I've been doing this to all the liberal fucks at my college and they eventually shut up and start pouting. It's really satisfying my man
She won because people wanted to vote weed. Very lefty / Liberal thing.
...
if texas left it'd do the same but for far left ideologies like communism
Tell them that Hillary's popular vote "win" comes ENTIRELY from California, then ask "Why do you think California should decide the election for the 49 other states?"
California has much less voting power on a per capita basis compared to lots of other low population states.
How is geography less arbitrary than race or another factor like that?
Trump won because the FBI is corrupt and works for the republicans. She would have won without Comey's letter.
>I doubt there were over 3 Million illegals voting en masse
Its not like millions of illegals voted democrat
its not not like dead democrats voted
its not like dems threw out trump votes and voted multiple times
That could never happen
Current year and there are people who still don't know that a US President is elected by the majority of the people in the congressional districts. Learn to constitution....
Quality bait
>1 bait by this post
The day will come when you hide every shitpost you ever made and silently piss yourself as your fellow liberals are being openly executed for their crimes against civilization.
Holy shit that's genius. Explain it to them in their own terms. It doesn't come off as condescending and I could honestly see this resonating with some of my lefty friends.
>Why should a small town in the Midwest have less voting power than California?
Because they have fewer people
They played the same game and she lost
All she had to do was go to wisconsin twice, but she didn't visit once
>Minorities
>illegal immigrants and felons the democrats allowed to vote in california
Trump got more of the minority vote than any republican candidate in decades. 1 in 3 hispanics voted for him. kill urself m8
why should someone in a gay flyover state's vote be worth more than someone from an educated state?
lol "90% of the population lives in 10% of the geography so 10% of the population should have as much say as 90% so my feelings aren't hurt." America, the first safe space.
Literally avoiding the argument
...
If only their beliefs weren't really "what supports my agenda best"
Ask them if they think California should decide for the entire country and then remind them that Trump only lost the popular vote because of California.
Didn't the polls show something like Clinton 48 vs. Trump 46 before the election, so Republicans in states such as California and New York were as passive as Democrats in states such as Texas and the result would have been the same even with different incentives?
Or are only voters that intend to vote counted in the polls? In that case, is there polls where everyone's opinion is equally counted?
donald trump won by 2mil~ votes not counting california and new york
IT IS NOT NOR HAS IT EVER BEEN A POPULARITY CONTEST.
>How do i argue against a liberal who says hillary won the popular vote so she should've been president because more people wanted her??
It simply is not how we do things here. American Presidents have never been elected via a majority of the people. Ever
Tell her that how the electors are apportioned is up to each state. CA for example would never permit an apportionment based upon the popular vote because that would give more electors to the Republican candidate.
>How is geography less arbitrary than race or another factor like that?
Geography isn't arbitrary at all, you clown. A geographical college exists because it's more important that a candidate has some support throughout the whole union than that he manages to scrounge a narrow, fleeting majority of support. It's not meant to protect minorities, it's meant to give the whole nation better candidates.
>off by one
Kek laughs at you. You have no power here.
>How do i argue against
This isn't fucking Tumblr. Kill yourself you retarded cunt.
Remind them this is the usa and that the sovereignty of states united under a common government needs to be respected
Because Texas alone has a population comparable to that of France, and Californians don't know what it's like to live in Texas. San Francisco and NYC should not determine who runs the country.
>How do i argue against a liberal who says hillary won the popular vote so she should've been president because more people wanted her??
>I know illegals voted but I doubt there were over 3 Million illegals voting en masse without voter fraud being detected
nice try. should you be getting your ass pounded by a leaf tonight?
The 8 million uncounted absentee and military votes would say otherwise.
don't address this faggot as if it really wants a good argument. it's shilling undercover.
Just say that if the election WAS determined by popular vote then Trump would campaign more in California, Illinois and New York. Also we have the electoral college so the popular vote doesn't matter.
>if u voted 4 drumph ur a racis and hate minorities this is totally an argument!
>why are you avoiding my argument!
you have no argument. illegal immigrants are not allowed to vote. the electoral college stops commie fucks in california from bussing 4 million mexicans across the border to get drivers licenses and restoring voting rights to democrat felons in order to sway the election.
you lost over 20 million democratic voters because Obama was a terrible president and hillary clinton is a lying neocon cunt who stole the primary like a tin pot dictator. We're shutting the gates on illegals, which means no illegals getting amnesty, which means no illegals voting for gibs, which means when paired with Hillary Clinton and Soros destroying the faith of everyone under 40 in the democratic party forever you will never win another national election.
feels fucking good knowing we'll have a decade of trump and 50 years of a concervative supreme court.
But even if Trump happened to win this time, direct popular vote with a second round just is objectively the best system.
>I doubt there were over 3 Million illegals voting en masse without voter fraud being detected
First of all you need to realize how easy it is for anyone to vote in California. Illegals get to have driver's licenses. The DMV doesn't question your status. Once you apply for a license you are automatically registered to vote. Ballots are then mailed to your house and you can fill out and drop off all without having to show any ID.
Its crazy easy for illegals to vote here.
Second, Obama himself was encouraging illegals to vote illegally before the election.
Fuck these liberals.
1 post by this shill-d
anyway just insist 3 million illegals did vote
when they ask for proof ask them for proof that the popular vote matters
You can win every regular season game in baseball and if you can't win 4 games in the World Series, you lose.
Wrong. There were 5 million.
Here's a better picture, explanation included.
It's like this. If you're playing a game of football(or handegg as non-Americans call it), the goal is to score points, not run the ball the longest distance. If one team is moving the ball across the field a greater distance then they are more likely to win. However, if they don't get touchdowns and/or field goals they will still lose. For this reason, the teams are not trying to run the ball, they're trying to get points. If the goal was only to move the ball down the field then they would play differently and not focus on making touchdowns.
Changing the victor of the election is as stupid as changing the rules of football after the game is won and instead giving the victory to the team that ran the ball the greatest distance. If those were the rules, then the other team deserved a fair chance to try to run the ball, which of course they didn't get because the rules were fucking changed after the game was over.
If the election was decided by different rules(popular vote) then Trump would need to know so he could campaign differently. The campaign for winning popular vote would basically involve pandering to 15 major metropolitan areas. If he had campaigned this way, he would have won the popular vote, he would just have used a different campaign strategy. He completely ignored California and New York just like Clinton completely ignored Texas. If the election was by popular vote Trump would have to campaign in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and New York City. Clinton would have to campaign in Dallas and Houston. Either way, Trump would have still won, he was the better candidate.
How about mentioning all the invalid votes for Hillary as found by a neutral party and how the votes are still counted despite voter fraud.
Nice shitpost.
He still wasn't elected democratically.
there is no popular vote
there is a summation of several smaller popular votes
50 people at her rallies forced to be there practically at gunpoint.
20,000+ at Trump's rallies with 5k waiting outside
Yet, somehow Hillary gets more popular votes then him?? Something is rotten in Denmark. Maybe it was the Russians...
Reeeeeeeeeeee!!!
remove California and Trump wins the popular vote by a few millions. why should one state decide who wins or loses. We need the electoral college because america is too bid and diverse. Take a group from New York City and compare them to Detroit or Chicago, they will be different. take Austin Texas and compare them to Nashville TN. What is a southern accent, Jersey accent, even Minnesota accent which is basically the same as a fucking leaf, fuck you Canada. Look at gun laws, Cali has basically a bolt action pistol law while in Tennessee, you can open carry an AR. And the popular vote shouldn't matter cause the electoral college is in place. Why should i go out to vote for republican in California when the state been voting Democratic since 1988. the same could be heavy republican states like Tennessee, the only difference is California has 38 million people and Tennessee has 6.5 million
Youll acomplish nothing. You cannot argue with an idiot because they will bet you with experience.
>but I doubt there were over 3 Million illegals voting en masse without voter fraud being detected
lol this retard made it to Sup Forums and doesn't know what sanctuary cities are.
regardless, your argument should be that no one deserves to win the presidency if they didn't win the electoral college, because that's not how it fucking works you retard.
That isn't an argument, retard
>argue
Trump won, she lost.
End of argument.
Imagine having the United Nations where China and India won every vote because they had more people.
We are the United STATES. From the beginning, it was set up so that people could move to different parts of the country and run things on a state-by-state basis, with a overarching, but clearly limited federal government. This allows more freedom because you can take advantage of all this space to have progressive and conservative parts. It lessens the tyranny of the majority.
Trump lost the overall popular vote, but he won far more of the individual states' popular votes.
Ask your liberal friends if they are for gay marriage and legal marijuana. Then ask them if they would be happy if those things would still be illegal everywhere in the United States. They are legal in some states, so people have places in the US where they can get high and marry a same-sex partner without having to wait for 200 million voters to agree with them. The beauty of being a collection of states like we are.
I'm sure they would have been quite happy with the victory of the electors all decided to vote for Hillary or Bernie on December 19. But they didn't. They voted for Trump, because they represent the people of the fifty United States. Fifty popular votes that picked the one best candidate as president.
That's how democracy works you retard.
You don't. You admit trump was just a 'fuck you' vote, and that Putin manipulated the fbi and the media and Sup Forums to help trump, and all the poltards got played by a real puppet master