The electoral college is a disaster for democracy, and you only support it since Drumpf won

The electoral college is a disaster for democracy, and you only support it since Drumpf won.

You cannot disprove this

...

FUNNY

ISN'T

IT

SAY IT WITH ME NOW: MADAME PRISONER

KEKED CTR LUL

This is what a blue state looks like.

When it looked like Hillary was winning I thought like that too. But Trump won and what can I say, I love the electoral voting system now.

GAS/BURN ALL HILLDAWG PEPES

OP BTFO BY MR PRESIDENT

>letting commiefornia decide every election on their own
Sounds like a great idea, my dude.

Your guy had 8 years in office to change it if you guys think it's so bad

Not a argument.

Prove that the electoral college is a democratic way of doing things.

Fuck democracy, fuck your feelings, Trump 2016

Talking out the other side of your fucking face this afternoon, eh CTR?

Nah, I'm good.

are u even trying right now?

Hillary and the DNC rigged caucus primaries and used corporate-funded superdeligates; the liberal media slandered Trump and showed biased polls for six months; George Soros provided rigged electronic voting machines---- and in spite of all their best cheating efforts, THEY STILL LOST.

My god, the ACTUAL nationwide support for Trump must be HUGE, easily 65-75% or more. This is truly a great day for America, and Western Civilization.

Here OP, have pic related. You're gonna need it.

Stop saying Drumpf. Stop being racist against germans. This is not funny anymore

so do you just concede to not having an argument, or

>The electoral college is a disaster for democracy,
Good democracy is retarded

We need Rank Choice Voting.

I supported it before he won, because it's a good system. Obviously, the uneducated voter can't decide everything. There needs to be representatives. It's an inherently good system.

Yeah, pretty much. Infuriating, isn't it?

...

Guess what...IT IS OVER.

>this is what CTR thinks a Clinton victory looks like

Without it, Mexicans would be deciding our future.

the popular vote is irrelevant. People vote differently in an electoral college than they do in a strictly popular election

Anecdotally I support Trump but i live in a very blue state. So I voted for Gary Johnson to give him a larger percentage of the vote. I encouraged my friends and family to do the same.

Had the election been based on a popular vote I would have cast my ballot differently.

>Disaster
The electoral college was designed so that no dangerous candidate could become president.
They chose Trump over Shillary, which means a lot bong.

I agree OP. It is shit but it worked in our favor this time so who cares

user.

It's over. CTR is gone. We won.

You can stop.

mfw it's been an entire election cycle and people still can't grasp the concept of population density

Imagine if Europe decided on a leader and did it per popularity vote. Countries mostly vote on one candidate by a landslide, mostly lead by targeted propaganda. Concentrate your marketing money on the few countries with huge populations, the smaller countries have barely any voting power anyway and can't change the results.

Actually, it is pretty good for ensuring all of the population and major groups have a chance. I'm starting to admire the founders, they knew their shit

ITT: shit shills say

Butt hurt faggot.
Trump won and you got BTFO.
How does it feel, Jamal?

Otherwise, everything would be decided by shitlib cities and nigger breeding pits

nobody cares you stupid cunt. We are not an absolute democracy because democracy is a piece of shit system that is doomed to fail.

so you're saying we should cut off Chicago into a city state and give it maybe 65% of Illinois's electoral vote? you're a genius lets do it :)

What _is_ the electoral college? Is that the process that decided who the parties' main nominee is going to be? Like primaries and shit?

Millions of illegal mexicans in california shouldn't decide who wins

States get the votes, not the population

You're doing this for free as of yesterday.
Take a break.

States are separated into districts. If a candidate gets the majority of the votes they get the district, if they get the majority of the state, they get the state, winner takes all the points that state is worth. Every state is worth a certain amount of points based on their population and some other shit

Trump is the new president.

What about now Drumpfsters?

Is it STILL a good system?

Nice try, Shillary, but I'M IN CHARGE NOW!!!

gives those that own the land a larger say. If there were no electoral college, you would only have to campaign in the biggest metropolitan hubs, which aren't a whole representation of what america is.

And if Hillary won the electoral vote and lost the popular vote would you be rioting in the streets to hand over the presidency to Trump?

The system is flawed when convenient to you.

Yes, because direct democracy is slavery to the masses. The electoral college is a disaster to DIRECT democracy, which is a good thing.

We are not a democracy, ahmed, we are a republic

Yes, it is still a good system. It is a disaster for democracy, which is the most retarded system bar anarchy

Who cares lol

We won you lose :^)

America is a republic you stupid cunt. It's the exact same system we have for fuck's sake. We're a constitutional monarchy. Why are so many morons parroting "muh democracy" every fucking day?

Pure democracy is a meme.

>We are not a democracy, ahmed, we are a republic
Yep this as well

>If a candidate gets the majority of the votes they get the district, if they get the majority of the state, they get the state
Hold on: Is that the majority of the state in districts or in numbers of votes?

Worded differently: If there's one district with 5 Million people and 9 districts with 10'000 people each, if I win those 9 districts, I win that state even though the 5 Million in district 1 might have voted against me?

you know "democracy" and "republic" aren't mutually exclusive terms right?

BY THESE TRIPS, I HONOR THE

BASED ELECTORAL COLLEGE

Nope, if you get the most votes in a state, you get that state, even if from a single district

I don't care about Democracy only Self-Interest

Yes, yes they are

democratic process =/= democracy

Get a dictionary, look up the terms "democracy" and "republic", because i have a feeling you're not sure what they mean.

all republics are democratic by their nature, although not all democratic countries are republics (for example, constitutional monarchies).

You fucking lost and you're salty as fuck.

You cannot disprove this.

She'll have her reign in 2020 once people realize Trump is the worst president possible.

Hillary lost. Get over it.

Not quite m8

>In a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters. In a "pure democracy," the majority is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the minority.

Like I said, when morons like you scream democracy all the time what tiy really mean is democratic process.

Keep crying bitch

no, they're not.

democracy = a government which is put in place by people through voting.
republic = the highest positions are held by elected representatives from the common people (as opposed to monarchies, empires, etc).

>Clinton
>democracy
Those two combined are so obscure.

hillary won the popular vote by a few hundred k, she had twice that many illegals in cali alone vote for her, not to mention dead people

You lost the US independance war. Deal with it.

Trump won the popular vote too. It only seems otherwise because of the millions and millions of votes given to Hillary through rigging - voting multiple times, illegals voting, dead people voting, machines registering Trump votes as Hillary votes, etc etc.

Kill yourself.

so weird how right-wingers/"conservatives" are against direct democracy when it more often than not plays out in their favor. Example: Compared to the rest of Europe, Switzerland was 40 years late with allowing women to vote, because you need a majority in the actual population here. in other countries, the parliaments had enabled it in the 20s and 30s, we got it 1968.
Reminder: If the elites decided who the president is you would know have a Madam President.
Also Brexit.

When the CTR starts to enjoy Sup Forums and continues to shitpost without getting shekels from the Klingon Foundation.

>b...b...but Hillary won the popular vote!
That wasn't what they were campaigning for all this time. There would have been massively different campaign strategies if the popular vote decided the president and you can't use the popular vote of an electoral college race as proof of anything except your own retardation.

Five bucks says that you are the asshole OP in this screencap I made from two nights ago.

>She'll have her reign in 2020 once people realize Trump is the worst president possible.
says increasingly nervous man for the n+1th time, after failing to figure out how to tie a noose

I don't support it as a system in itself. I do support it as the rules that Americans chose to play by. If they don't want to change it, then who am I to oppose it?

>Not an argument
>Get a dictionary
Nice one ahmed

well those definitions are, just like, your opinion, man.

BLACK BEARD IS ON OUR SIDE

>Prove that the US operates democratically
>US is literally not a democracy

All hail Supreme Leader Donald Trump.

holy shit

>>In a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters.

this is true, although it's not the defining feature of a republic. go and look up where the word "republic" comes from. republic simply refers to a system of government in which the highest positions of authority are held by common people, and not inherited.

>In a "pure democracy," the majority is not restrained in this way and can impose its will on the minority.

There is no country on earth that uses a system of "pure democracy" in which all decisions are guided by a majority of vote. This does not mean there are no democratic countries. All western countries are democratic, they just don't utilise a "pure democratic" system.

You still keep getting it wrong.

You keep saying democracy but providing the definition of the process of voting.

Democratic =/= democracy

They're related but not synonymous.

Republics are democratic in their nature, but that doesn't make them democracies.

You're right. We should let the cucks in NY and CA always decide who our president should be.

Spoiler: [spoiler]It will always be Democrat[/spoiler]

Hillary conceded therefore TRUMP WON

You're right, but what are you gonna do about it hahahaha

Electoral college was made that the heavily populated don't have such a huge advantage. A candidate could simply travel from one big city to the next one and would basically win. With electoral college you HAVE to be present in the rural areas (and be popular there too) so it's about really being appealing for the average citizen and all parts of society, not just the pure mass of people.
Sounds pretty democratic to me.

I predicted this would happen, if Hillary had won but lost the popular vote you'd be sucking the electoral colleges dick as if it were a north african muslim immigrant

I am all for getting rid of the electoral college. But white votes should count as double.

It's not and with the GOP running everything now it's not going away any time soon.

This. Basing elections entirely on popular vote would mean that New York and California would basically get to pick the president every time. I already don't particularly care for states having absurd amounts of electoral votes - I'd like to see it skewed even more heavily toward less densely populated states. No single state should have more than 25 votes.

You might say, "Oh, but that just means that the votes of people in rural areas are worth more", but the alternative is that people whose very necessary occupations require large amounts of unoccupied land - farmers, for instance - would have virtually no say in the electoral process and if any issue directly affecting them arose, they would be completely at the mercy of people packed into coastal cities. Our current system already trends too heavily in this direction.

Acceptable alternatives include restricting voting rights to landowners and/or people who have spent a few years in military or civic service.

How can OP ever recover?

Electoral college is a retarded system.

But I don't care how Trump won.
Even if it turns out there was fraud or some huge mistake - a win is a win even if it's unfair.

Im amazed these threads are still going
IT IS OVER
TRUMP WON
HILLARY LOST
THATS IT
Sup Forums PULLED IT OFF
DONT YOU FUCKING TELL ME Sup Forums DIDNT PLAY A PART IN MAKING THIS HAPPEN

>Democratic =/= democracy

>They're related but not synonymous.

at this point, i'm guessing english is not your first language. the only difference between those two words is that one is the adjective, the other is the noun.

it's like saying "gay" is not the same thing as "gayness." one is a noun, the other is the adjective.

>There is no country on earth that uses a system of "pure democracy" in which all decisions are guided by a majority of vote. This does not mean there are no democratic countries. All western countries are democratic, they just don't utilise a "pure democratic" system.

I agree, that's not what I said. It's subtle and you're missing it. A system can be democratic without being a democracy. "A Democracy" is a bastardised word used to mean "a democratic system". People use them interchangeably because they're stupid.

If American still exists by then.