Name ONE reason the electoral college isn't a retarded, outdated, democracy-killing system that ONLY favors republicans

Name ONE reason the electoral college isn't a retarded, outdated, democracy-killing system that ONLY favors republicans
Protip: you can't

Other urls found in this thread:

peta.org/blog/american-adults-think-chocolate-milk-comes-from-brown-cows/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>we love affirmative action, except when we don't

>ONLY favors republicans
Explain Obama.

Go read The Federalist Papers

America is not a democracy so it ain't killing shit

Californias are not people and do not deserve to control this entire nation simply because alot of people live in that shithole

>only favors republican
what about when it doesnt OP?

You're right. It's outdated and terrible and awful and dumb and shit and stupid and retarded. Exactly like the Second Amendment.

Now change the law or shut the fuck up, faggot.

it's designed to work against gruop-think. It's working decently but should be working better.

We are not a democracy so it makes sense that our national electoral system is not democratic.

Electoral college is bad for democracy on purpose, because democracies suck.

Because urbanite trash are worth less then people who actually produce stuff like food

Commiefornias and New Cuckians should not decide the fate of America

>Name ONE reason the electoral college isn't a retarded..
there are several and if you don't know them by now then I would assume you are the retard.

obama won the popular vote, literally kill yourself ONLY republicans have EVER won an election without the popular vote because of the college

>democracy-killing system

oh sweetie, it's working as intended when we're not a democracy

well for one it protects the rest of america from the california shitskin invasion

if the other states were even a fraction as gay or deluded as california you tacos wouldve had an electoral landslide

there isn't political will power to improve it. the system has calcified and the political machine has embraced it and use it as a barrier to entry for the un-connected.

>ONLY favors republicans
Explain Obama then

people have been trying to abolish the electoral college for decades. but for SOME REASON its politically impossible.
huh, i wonder why that could be. i wonder why you can't get enough vote to do away with a system that ALWAYS favors one side

Yeah, Washington insider trump just won, proving your theory correct.

Without the Electoral College California, New York, Texas, and Florida would run the country.

>a small portion of the west coast of a massive country spanning four time zones and nearly every environment imaginable should be allowed to decide every election because they imported a bunch of spics

Yeah wow, direct democracy would sure do wonders for us. California knows what's best for New York and Illinois and Texas and Florida and Hawaii and Alaska and Ohio and Montana and Maine.

sore loser

its worked for centuries leave it be

You are mad because you are angry lol

The reason it was instituted was so a politician couldn't promise gimmes to heavily populated areas, thus ignoring the needs of the rest of the country

>Name ONE reason the electoral college isn't a retarded, outdated, democracy-killing system
Can't.
>that ONLY favors republicans
Because it also locks other parties out of the system, which benefits both parties.

What if I have, and I see 240 years of the system they created doesn't work? It's not the 18th century anymore, to the chagrin of the future slave owning classes. We can actually use modern, expressive voting systems like score voting instead of pledging allegiance to one or the other private corporation. But engendering corporate loyalty is the whole point of the vote, isn't it?

ha ha get bent leftie

If port cities dictated national policy beyond their already massive economic and regional influence, there would be no reason for the union to exist

Stay mad

We can't even get things both parties agree on passed. We are fucking locked in right now and only minor changes will ever happen politically unless there's a revolution, and no one cared about the EC that much. Maybe there will be the UBI uprisings of 2053.

Fpbp

...

>California and New York now dictate the entire country

Seems pretty fucking retarded seeing as we're the UNITED states of America.

>states that side with ME deserve to have more power per person because REEEEEE SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP
literally kill yourself.

it never worked you fucking retard.

so now they can ignore the entire country except swing states, great plan.

between republican and democrat, all the most powerful states per capita are ALWAYS red states, and the weakest per capita are ALWAYS blue states. this is objectively unfair and ALWAYS favors republicans

Because without it, cuckolds and kikes would dictate policy for "flyover" states. How stupid are you?

Getting rid of it, terrible idea. Now, if you wanted to add more electors (and more representatives) into the system to give the more populous states a little more say than they do now, that is fine because it will still be difficult for the larger states to overrun everything else but there are just too many people in our country to keep things as they are. We need more representatives in our more populous states.

Or we need to do away with the entire constitution and draft a new one to fit the modern america

Yeah, cause Trump was such an outsider and never rubbed elbows with filthy politicians, especially not the likes of the crooked Clintons or kike bankers.

Government already dictates more to the average person in CA and NY than Wyoming and Vermont. The EC and the Senate are the best ways to balance it out.

To prevent states with larger populations from having undue influence.

The Founders wanted to balance the will of the populace against the risk of "tyranny of the majority," in which the voices of the masses can drown out minority interests.

If the election depended solely on the popular vote, then candidates could limit campaigning to heavily-populated areas or specific regions.

LOL
YOU STILL WANT A CIVIL WAR?
TRY AND CHANGE IT

You're surrounded and the military is with the people
How hard will it be to just say "Goodbye" to the cancerous regions?

Hint: Not very

Yeah I dunno man. Why is it so hard to make amendments to the highest ruling law document of a land? Why can't one generation of uneducated fucking faggots undo the entire threads that hold together our country because of their feelings!? FUCKING BULLSHIT MAN! WHY CAN'T WE JUST CHANGE SHIT ALL WILLY NILLY GOD DAMN IT REEEEEEEEEEEEE

It's purpose is exactly about what happened in 2016. People have a hard time admitting this simple truth. Working as intended.

It's necessary so that each state has an equal say as to not create animosity between the different states. You think Texas would appreciate California deciding the election? I don't.

Because it literally saved the republic in 2016

>democracy

USA is a Republic. The President represents the States. The Electoral college is the States electing the president.

Congress represents the people.

My one complaint about what you've said is that swing states do change, not quickly and easily but they do. I rather our presidential candidates go to swing states rather than the most densely populated regions of the country

The Electoral College guarantees certainty to the outcome of the presidential election. If the election were based on popular vote, it would be possible for a candidate to receive the highest number of popular votes without actually obtaining a majority. [11] This happened with President Nixon in 1968 and President Clinton in 1992, when both men won the most electoral votes while receiving just 43% of the popular vote. [11] The existence of the Electoral College precluded calls for recounts or demands for run-off elections. The electoral process can also create a larger mandate to give the president more credibility; for example, President Obama received 51.3% of the popular vote in 2012 but 61.7% of the electoral votes. [14] In 227 years, the winner of the popular vote has lost the electoral vote only five times. [2] This proves the system is working.

So why did Democrats put the system into place?

>actually thinking these states are monolithic hive minds
>current year
Put down your theory papers and canned arguments and look at the world as it is. Here's a compromise for you: require the Maine and Nebraska proportional elector systems in all states, if you really need to have some oligarch between the people and the vote.

I see no problem with this.

Only because of the winner-take-all CUSTOM in assigning electoral votes. The founders hated democracy and set out to thwart it every way they could. The electoral college was one of them.
Clearly the problem is in a voter having to pledge allegiance to a candidate, which is completely circumvented by non-ranked-choice voting methods like score voting.

>muh larp
>muh traditions
>muh cheap slaves
>muh bourgeoisie
You are obsolete. Neck yourself.

>Congress represents the people.
In the same way a dragon dildo represents a dragon penis. Enough of this representational shit.

Fucking idiots complain about it today and praise it tomorrow,
Enough with the hollow and pointless politics

You know damn well how important checks and balances are in THIS country

Yeah what kind of idiot cant see the importance of the electoral collage.

>In the same way a dragon dildo represents a dragon penis. Enough of this representational shit.
What is your specific solution?

But you already live in a democratic state that legislates most of the laws which govern your day to day life. The Federal government of the United States is a system designed to represent each of those democratic states in a forum for their joint interests. Congratulations on not understanding though, enjoy complaining about the president the remainder of your adult life while ignoring the hard working state legislature that really governs you 99% of the time.

The statement is true.

...

It turns half of America into either Greater California and the other into Greater New York

Essentially the USSR.
>You're Poland and want to do such and such
>too bad, Russia voted no.

The Union would collapse immediately

Anyways democracy is shit

he's still right you know

thank god we're not a democracy

>Democrats are all but guaranteed to win a state with 55 electoral votes

STFU. Are Democrats too stupid to realize how much harder it is for Republicans to win the EC due to this?

>You are obsolete.
I keep agreeing with you. This is all stupid and dumb and mean and retarded and slow.

Now change the laws or shut the fuck up, you faggot. Read the Constitution and stay mad.

The Founding Fathers enshrined the Electoral College in the US Constitution because they thought it was the best method to choose the president. Using electors instead of the popular vote was intended to safeguard against uninformed or uneducated voters by putting the final decision in the hands of electors most likely to possess the information necessary to make the best decision; to prevent states with larger populations from having undue influence; and to compromise between electing the president by popular vote and letting Congress choose the president. [7] [8] [9] According to Alexander Hamilton, the Electoral College is if "not perfect, it is at least excellent," because it ensured "that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications." [7] The Founders wanted to balance the will of the populace against the risk of "tyranny of the majority," in which the voices of the masses can drown out minority interests. [10]

Direct democracy. Failing that, score voting, with at-will recallability of any representative, which might even extend to first-level appointees.

I'll stay mad, thanks. Maybe when the US gets its ass handed to it for its knee-capping overseas we can have ourselves a Grundgesetz.

Ah, so no more country then.
I get you.
Like 40 states would leave at minimum.

tHIS IS SOME LOW LEVEL BAIT, op. wHY ARE YOU EVEN TRYING?

The USA is in many respects a bad, abusive marriage. Sometimes divorce really is the right solution, aside from not having gotten into some creepy smothering combination in the first place.

Give out electoral votes proportionally. Pretty simple answer tbqh. You're precious red minority is protected an even given a voice in states where they are outnumbered (Think 1/3 of Cali's votes being red.) and it is far more reliable than winner take all at following the will of the people. The Senate and Congress were already made to defend the small states, the presidency doing so only gives unjust power to the minority. Power to do something like, I don't know, winning all three branches of government despite most people not wanting it that way.

Divorce would be great.
I want to laugh when California loses its water.

nigger heres why it was established. my vote shouldn't be equal to theirs
peta.org/blog/american-adults-think-chocolate-milk-comes-from-brown-cows/

>Maybe when the US gets its ass handed to it for its knee-capping overseas
Off topic and irrelevant to the topic at hand. Back on topic: read the Constitution and change what it says via the outlined procedures or shut the fuck up.

>the electoral system is rigged in favor of a party I don't like
>my solution is to rig the electoral system in favor of the party I like
>when my people win I have no complaints
>when they don't drastic country destroying changes must be immediately implemented

Hillary won the popular vote in 2012. Shouldn't she have made Obama a one-term president?

That was the dem primaries.

>Why don't big states get to dictate the all of America's policy.

Aren't liberals the ones who are afraid about inequality and giving the less powerful rights?

And 2008 iirc.

They say that.
It has fallen flat though.

Rollbacks. One representative per 30,000 people. Senators chosen by state legislatures.

Start lobbying.
:-)

We aren't a democracy and were never supposed to be one.

no,only republicans praise it. ever.
checks and balances dont matter at all.

>Back on topic
>muh constitution is holy writ
Honestly, getting beaten down by the rest of the globe is more likely over the next 50 years than getting the turkeys who have to ratify these things to vote themselves out of power. The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

Every scientist in the state would be drafted to work on efficient desalination. It would be a laugh.
>maybe if they pay Colorado enough they'll get visitation

>we are condemned forevermore to reenacting the 18th century.
Ethos isn't an argument.

>democracy

321.4 million divided by 30,000
10713 Representatives in the House

Time for a new capitol building

Now, senators chosen by state legislatures sounds good to me

Bwahahahahahahahaha.
Your sour grapes are entertaining.
And exactly why the voters the democrats lost will not be coming back.
Instead of figuring out why you lost and learning from it you are bitter and want to hurt your political opponents when really you should be trying to win them over.
Keep up the good work.

Better yet, how about they telecommute so that they don't speak off the record to one another and they don't trade sexual favors with each other to get bills passed?

>system created by white founding fathers favors white people

seems to be working just fine

>environmentalists block desalinization efforts to save rare tortoise near extinction

USA isn't a democracy you fucking chimp

Why SHOULDN'T New York amd California have greater power when they are way more important than states like Alabama and Idaho?

>Mfw i'm not even a fucking American and I have to fucking awnser this neanderthal.

1- You are not a direct democracy, you're a federal republic of STATES.
2- The STATES part is important because every state has it's own priorities and needs, almost like different countries.
3- Without the electoral college overly densely states would rule america with an iron fist and suck out all the resources of the rest of the country for their own benefit even more than they do already.
4-You would have to abolish the concept of federal states, which, would be tyrannical considering how culturally different alot of the American states are, it's simply to big.
5- You're a faggot.

ITT: Butthurt burger self-fellates

They do have greater power, in the House of Representatives by having more. They also have greater power in the electoral college by having more votes, but it is tempered so their greater power is not overwhelming

Familiarize yourself with the basic construction of the american republic.
That will give you all the information you need.

>the electoral system is rigged in favor of a party I don't like
It's not rigged, it's working as intended.
>my solution is to rig the electoral system in favor of the party I like
I guess rig means a system that more closely reflects the will of the people. I mean, it's not like it would take votes from both parties in their strongholds.
>when my people win I have no complaints
I don't agree with Democrats on most points, you're just grasping at straws.
>when they don't drastic country destroying changes must be immediately implemented
What part of what I said is "country destroying" and needed to be "immediately implemented." You're putting words in my mouth and assuming I'm just another cuckhold who voted for Hillary, how about offing yourself in a manner where you might be able to address my points without trigger words and meme phrases.

How can the electoral college kill democracy if it isn't something that we ever had? The statement has no logic too it. Maybe if we had a democracy (by whatever your standards are) and then implemented the electoral college, you may have a point.

>environmentalists block desalinization efforts to save rare tortoise near extinction
good thing I still have Great Lakes water to quench my thirst from all this popcorn.

>every state has it's own priorities and needs, almost like different countries.
>considering how culturally different alot of the American states are, it's simply to big.
Actually, states should be abolished anyway, and the republic, if we must keep this shitty aristocratic form of government, should instead represent counties. The cultural and other differences within a state are greater than those between states.

>How can the electoral college kill democracy if it isn't something that we ever had?
Very true! The point is that the Federal system is about five times overdue for a reinvention, by Jefferson's count. But the designs of dead men have to earn their own keep, and the elective aristocracy of the USA has shown itself to be the most corruptible form of government, rather than the least.

The electoral college protects the voting power of those that grow the food, mine the resources, and build the infrastructure from the population centers that merely consume it.

These guys get it. We are constitutional republic.

>The Constitution is not a suicide pact.
Agreed. Now use the outlined methods to change it or shut the fuck up.

Why should I work toward something that isn't going to happen when something that is almost a certainty will fulfill the desirable aims of eliminating the electoral college?
Stop sucking oligarch cock. It's bad for you.

I don't get what you're even saying at this point. You are bitching about the Constitution and I'm telling you how you can change it. What is your point right now? What are you saying? Use your words.

Without it NYC and LA disenfranchise the rest of the country?

First off we aren't a democracy and second I'll be damned if I let everything be decided by popular vote alone because then it'll just be a matter of weeks before those faggots out in California drain the great lakes dry for their faggoty luxury crops.