Electoral College

The winner of this US election won 90% of the EV. Guess his % popular vote.
Absent your own personal political preference, do you srsly actually support such an unfair system?

Ah gee maybe those states should have divvied up their electoral votes in a "fair" way reminiscent of their popular vote? Oh except nobody will do that because states aren't fucking retarded(except for a few tiny ones) and don't want to willingly lower their political influence.

yeah it's pretty awesome, eat shit and die commie

>yfw when one day the tiny states support a party you absolutely hate and these words come back to haunt you

nixon or Regan

> unfair
> states in a union given greater balance

im glad the candidate who appealed to the most varied demographics of americans won, yes

>haunt you
ohhh so spooky a commie cuck talking about ghosts

>O...one day you'll live to regret it!!!
>M...muh true communism has never been tried!!!
Damn my dude. What is it with commies and their hypothetical situations?

That's the 1980 election.
Raygun won with 50% of the vote.

We have fifty states, each of which has their own unique economic needs, social ideals, political demands, etc. What's important to New Yorkers is not the same as what's important to Georgians, or Texans, or Iowans, or Hawaiians.

The electoral college does what it has always done and was always meant to do - it ensures that the winner of the presidential election is the person whose platform appealed to the largest plurality of different STATES, and therefore, the largest number of different kinds of voters with different needs and priorities, not just a simple majority of voters.

Yes an electoral system prevents abuse by more population states.

>all the dumbasses ITT saying the electoral college protects "small states"

1.) The electoral college was designed to remove the presidency from popular vote, not to protect small states. The number of electors from each state reflects the number of representatives in the House, which is based on population.

2.) Over the last 200 years states have altered the methods of selections of electors such that now they reflect an absolute popular vote in all but two states.

3.) This system of approximation of direct election of the presidency creates profound distortions such that, as things stand now, unless you live in one of five or six battleground states you might as well not vote at all.

It has nothing to do with "urban areas" or Democrats vs Republicans. A GOP voter in KKKentucky is every bit as disenfranchised as is a Dem in Commiefornia.

>mfw commie still cant into US political system.

Here ya go

He didn't say anything about being a commie you fucking faggots

STOP PROJECTING

Did you know that there are over 300 million people living in the US?
Did you also know that these 300 million people are distributed all across 50 different states, with varying degrees of population density?
Finally, did you also know that the needs of these 300 million people should be taken into account instead of simply catering to a few states and a few population centers?

If you still don't understand why the EC exists, then you should neck yourself.

>commie is called commie
>"i am found out"

Real political scientists of the left and right are unanimous that it should be removed because it is completely irrational and it disenfranchises voters of both parties, rural and urban.

Just wait until the tables are turned in twenty years. Republicunts will be begging for a constitutional amendment.

Good lord. Just look at this neophyte.

T. butthurt commie

>do you srsly actually support such an unfair system?
Yes. We're a union of states. I'd also like to repeal the 17th Amendment and have the state legislatures elect senators again.

This.

Take out California from the Electoral College and Donald wins the popular vote. California is exactly why this system exists, without all I would have to do is pander to one portion of the country (and where are the most people located? In the liberal urban cesspools.) and make them shitloads of promises so I poll into 70% range there. At least with this system we get a little more pandering to both sides because battleground states are a thing.

I mean do you fags honestly think that states would just sit there election after election if their vote meant jack fucking all and they were paid no mind whatsoever?

Exactly. Look at the bellyaching coming from California with calexit and other succession plans. Liberals must've slept through the part of their intro to American government when they went over the Constitution. We are a group of states coming together as a nation, where states get more autonomy when it is top down.

You see everyone, the problem with communism is that not only does it completely ignore a nation's history, but tnat it is also quite hostile in their attempts to make a point. Leftists get a lot more violent than the right wing, which causes more people to gravitate to the ring wing that promises them protection and national unity. The right wing then gets an enormous mandate to stomp out leftists.

>We are a group of states coming together as a nation
A better representation would be a group of nations coming together as a federation.

That would be a good way to put it, yes.