SHOULD she have won?

SHOULD she have won?

I voted Trump but I think if millions more wanted Hillary to win than she should have become president, right?

Should we change the system? How?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

no way, that libcuck should have lost to col. sanders before she stole his secret chicken recipe

SAGE

The electoral college is stupid. I didn't want her to win but I've always hated the electoral college and am not going to suddenly act like it's a good thing when it's convenient

Thanks for your opinion I'll now bump.

The system exists for a reason. Entire states would become entirely irrelevant for campaigning and more importantly campaign promises if all you had to do to was get the popular vote.

They would just constantly campaign in cities and completely ignore the rural area and voters.

Now this doesn't mean the system is perfect. There are certainly changes that have merit (not being winner takes all for example), but it serves its purpose and was an inspired decision.

The very first step should be requiring photo ID to vote. If you don't accept that, then fuck all of your other suggestions.

look, she played her hand wrong, plus she's just stupid and this country really can't tolerate anymore social experimentation.....we need to recover before the next round of letting the inmates run the asylum.

A couple million illegal beaners voted due to lack of voter ID requirements. Subtract those assholes, and Trump would have gotten the popular vote as well.

Factor out dead people and illegal aliens, and Trump would have won another five states, along with the popular vote, handily.

No wonder you Nazis on the left hate the notion of voter ID so much, and scream and wail if the concept of voter fraud is even brought up.

If trump wanted to win the popular vote he would have won it, believe me!

no you faggot.

the FOUNDING FATHERS created the electoral college for this reason. so CALIFORNIA cant decide the president.

imagine if the cucks had complete control.

The electoral college is insurance for dems practice of importing future voters and jerry mandering in select areas,which is what you accuse republicans of doing all the time because you people don't even know what your talking about. Your voters may be stagnate(non whites)and declining(white liberals/Jews)but your a monolith.

>founding fathers
>California
Fuck off, leaftard.

Under no circumstances should she have one. Civilization is at stake and we must use every opportunity we can to get back at our opponents. The left has been ass raping us by using amoral and illegal tactics and we must do the same.

Stop it he had no clue that turn out would be so high in cali.

Republic (Rome) > Democracy (Athens)

This

Uh no dude we didn't have cali yet but the idea is similiar.

>entire state of California gets to decide who runs the other 49
Yeah fuck that, the electoral college exists for a reason.

I dislike the electoral college, but I always appreciate the butthurt it causes in Jew York and Cuckifornia when the kikes and faggots don't get their way.

Illegal votes don't count. And we're not a democracy.

Why are you so clueless?

/thread

No.

The entire point of the electoral college is to ensure that more populous states do not dominate the smaller states of the Union. That whole horseshit that libs were arguing about where a Wisconsin voter is worth more than a Californian? That's the point.

If any change is to be considered, it should be that the 'winner take all' rule be voided, and state electoral votes divided by % won.

Lol voted for Trump my ass nice donkey there.

Sage this faggot.

Shareblue generic shitpost

No, democracy is a retarded communist system but, if a society is democratic regional representation is far superior to the popular vote.

No. We should have senators only. That way you need to win the most states instead of the most votes, full stop.

popular vote is fine but only with mandatory voter photo ID

she didn't win. President Trump won.

>play by the rules
>lose
>WELL I WON ANYWAY!!!

This.

OP is confirmed faggot for bringing this up for the nth time.

america is not a direct democracy. america is a constitutional republic. if you are too stupid to know the difference, then the problem is YOU and your hilariously tiny brain.

>jackass flag
>jackass post

yeah, all is in order here.

So Queen was able to manouver to H7 and Black Bishop is out of kill range while Black King is stuck? Assuming White just moved to H7 then wouldn't Black King be up and have a kill move against White Queen?

It's called democratic REPUBLIC for a reason

Bump

she only won 57 counties, trump won more than 3k. This is slide-thread level b8.

All illegals voted. She did not win. The system is fine. You did not vote Trump, shill.

i suggest the case for the electoral collage on youtube it is a 5 min vid and will tell you exactly why it is the only thing that has kept a country the size of the us with so many different opinions from state to state from fracturing into separate country or more civil wars

It's no small embarrassment to me as an American that we have less trustworthy and legitimate elections than Mexico and our 3rd world anti terror bombing ranges. Photo ID, purple finger, Election Day = national holiday, NGO observers... I want it all.
And if you're going to bring up Russia then ask yourself this, the intelligence apparatus of the US knew about Russian interference when it happened during the campaign, why did they do nothing about it until after Election Day? and fuck all at that?

Not this thread again

>muh popular vote
fuck off shill

This, ensure this thread does not get any more bumpage

Latest research and investigations prove at minimum 10 mil illegal votes. (double votes, noncitizen votes, and so on)

>do a little research shillfags

The system was designed specifically to work how it did this election, small centralized power-centers ruling over the countryside would have led to the US crumbling long ago.

White Bishop exists

ignorant piece of shit

Sure, we should change the way the system works. There's nothing wrong with enforcing voter ID to make sure each ballot is legit, right? :^)

this was the image, fuck face

I'll fucking persecute you all

Care to elaborate? The winner has only lost the popular vote 5 times, and it never happened once in the 20th century. (Harrison in 1888 and Bush in 2000).

America is a republic meaning the minority of any political position , religion, or race should have a fair say being democratic means majority rules

The electoral college effectively makes any state with a clear majority irrelevant. It's pretty much the same thing.

What if the states were to adopt the electoral rules that Maine operates under?

this actually already explained it well enough
If the countryside were completely neglected from the get go the nation never would have prospered.

fuck off with these threads

>Should we change the system? How?

Yes and get rid of voting for anything other than how your tax money is spent. Don't pay tax? You don't vote. On second thought, get rid of the bandwagon fallacy meme altogether, fuck your appeal to popularity.

Catholic>Christianism. Thats basically what you just said. Democracy in ancient Athens meant that males above 30 that have both parents Atheneans , own some land in Athens and have fullfilled their military obligations vote for an elected representative , one for each of the 10 Districts , and these representatives form the "forum" of Athens.Between them, one is elected as military commander. Find the differences with republic (rome). Basically what romans did was copy exactly what we had. Culture, pantheon, political system , arts, even fucking fashion. (except military lol get rekt) and alter it just a little tiny bit so that they feel it's theirs.

But as I mentioned in the electoral college makes any state with a majority irrelevant. What's the difference? Candidates already ignore small red states like Wyoming and Montana and small blue states like Maine and Vermont, nothing would change except that candidates would travel to New York, Texas, and California more.

It doesn't bother you that our president is elected by a combination of Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania pretty much every time?

Actually OP, to your question of how we should change it, only property owners, with no form of lien on their property, with multiple forms of identification should be able to vote, and yes that would disqualify me at the moment.

Honestly your problems get into issues that can never truly be solved and aren't worth worrying about, as the census and demographics change in the US the points of contention will always change, yes they've been similar for many years, however most solutions would quickly become partisan and the parties in power would ensure processes designed to fix them would be corrupted to favor their interests.
Just look at how the Democrats have managed to convince people that you shouldn't even need ID to vote, its absolutely insane to say that people unable to even acquire something that EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN should have should be able to vote.

I think the voter ID question is valid but republicans ignore some aspects when discussing it. Sure, it would be nice to validate everyone's ID but there are some things to consider:

1) how much voter fraud actually occurs?
2) will the state make it convenient to get IDs (nearby, cheap/free)
3) what are the actual consequences of implementing these laws?

Point #1 is completely glossed over (please show me an election in the past 20 years where voter fraud affected the outcome).
Point #2 is ignored by republicans.
Point #3 is also ignored - the only visible affect of these laws is that poor minorities vote less. That should tell you a lot about why democrats are against it.

If republicans had a plan in place to actually help poor people in rural areas get IDs (something like free, mail-delivered IDs) I don't think democrats would care as much. Having to pay for an ID you need in order to vote is a vote tax with a different name.

Remember when Bernie got more votes then Hillary in the primaries?

No, because that never happened.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016

>Popular vote:
>Clinton: 16,914,722
>Sanders: 13,206,428

threads like these getting this many replies is the reason why Sup Forums is dying.

just imagine

there is a timeline where hillary actually won.

god, the world would have ended.

>5 million syrian refugees taken in by new york

>california becomes new syria

>mexico conquers the south with no resistance or wall

>whites exterminated by the hordes of refugees

we dodged a bullet, folks

No.

sage

Except the millions more she won by were illegals so...

1
>Democrats block and/all attempts to actually do a proper investigation into voter fraud
>proceed to use "no evidence of voter fraud" as a talking point
Seriously its fucking insulting, fuck a new study just came out saying over 5million could have voted illegally in 2008, and then before even bothering to do research Democrats "debunk" it using the exact same studies that the study itself called into question to come up with its numbers
2) IT IS ALREADY CHEAP AND EASY TO ACQUIRE AN ID YOU JUST HAVE TO NOT BE A FUCKING RETARD
3) muh poor minorities fallacy is complete bullshit, you fucks use it to cover for blatant fraud and you know it.

Fuck off

/thread

/thread

This right fucking here. It doesn't help Hillshill's case that most of her votes came from fucking sanctuary cities.

it''s clear there were irregularities. the only way to sort it out is to open up the ballot and investigate the counting procedures and machines

The electoral college mirrors the legislative branch, where the house is divided by population of each state, but the senate is divided evenly. A state gets one electoral college vote for each senator and representative.

Furthermore, since each state decides how its elections go, if a national popular vote was implemented, there would then need to be far greater federal control over elections for JUST the presidency. States could not not have different early voting timeframes, referendums, voter ID laws, or even senate races on the same day as the presidential election, because each of these things can cause more people in certain states to turn out than others. Californians who may not vote in a presidential election may turn out for ballot measures, or because their senator is up for election, where texas may have no ballot measures or senators to vote for, depressing turnout. Louisiana may have voter ID laws that depresses turnout, whereas New Mexico may not.

That case study was based on a study done in 2008.

Also studies are not empirical evidence that anything happened.

now yall talking. points should be divided by voters

This, every fucking time/thread

>hiding your indian flag
fuck off

>unironically trusting Americans to choose a leader