ELECTORAL COLLEGE MUST GO

Get BTFO, Sup Forums

He SPECIFICALLY calls out your bullshit with the bullshit map you always post

youtube.com/watch?v=G3wLQz-LgrM&t=0s

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=V6s7jB6-GoU
youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=43s
youtube.com/watch?v=8EDW88CBo-8
youtube.com/watch?v=tN1MkAGuVyY
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

fuck off
youtube.com/watch?v=V6s7jB6-GoU

An overview of the EC does nothing against arguments for its abolishment.

It's because we understand the EC that we want it gone.

>someone with a channel devoted to other forms of voting that would arguably be better than first past the post makes a video about why first past the post is flawed
Wow drumpf btfo

The only thing that's wrong with the electoral college is the fact that they can change their vote. The part where the states decide though is how it's supposed to work. At least he recognizes differing opinion there.

His tone on not only this but especially his previous video show that he is very upset with Trump's victory, and might not have made the video had he lost. He's not being a total faggot about it, at least.

Then you are a huge retard who wants the major cities to decide what goes on and tyrannize and ignore everyone else.

Fuck off dude. California shouldn't be able to control the entire country's election. Seriously kill yourself and stop shilling your shitty channel.

>someone with a channel devoted to other forms of voting that would arguably be better than first past the post makes a video about why first past the post is flawed
What an absolute disgrace to the English language.

So, NOW they have an issue with it.

You fucking idiots, THOSE AREN'T TRUE

youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&t=43s

Then go ahead.

Secede. See what happens.

>lists the 11 biggest states
>claims they're not geographically diverse
what a fucking retard

LOL

KILL YOURSELF YOU SOCIALIST SCUM.

ALL HAIL THE PLUTOCRATIC PARTY, FOR MAY THE WEALTH BRING SALVATION TO ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not even arguing about electoral college. Just saiyan Trump as an outsider played the establishment's game with their rules and won.

Nah, fuck off, we're keeping it. I don't even care if it's "just" or moral or whatever else. It saved us from Hillary. It's a useful tool. We're not getting rid of it.

>lalalala reality isn't real it's not true lalalala

You stupid faggots we are a republic not a democracy.

Your not doing to the Presidential race what you faggots did to Senators elections.

Democracy is shit and only leads to Socialism.

Thats the primary and determined by super delegate, different issue but just as dumb honestly

Socialism is objectively a Plutarchy. The Plutocratic Class is simply called The Party.

So, an Eurocuck is posting a video about a system that he doesn't know about?

Libs can eat shit. Their tears are delicious.

AHAHAHAH
WHAT A FUCKING FAGGOT
BUTTHURT BECAUSE YOUR CANDIDATE DIDN'T WIN

He speaks like a numale

the november election is more or less a dry run to see what the people want.

Trump is going to win in december, he's already doing great things for the country.

He actually an American who lives in Britain.
He never like the electoral college, and wanted a different kinds of voting from his early days.
Still acted a bit like a faggot in this video.

>muh farmland
>mfw I come from a town in the middle of this "nowhere" that has a population of well over 100,000

So do our votes not count now or something because some faggot hipster said so?

>Spoiled brats living in their ivory towers once again trying to decide they know more than the people on the ground

He makes the mistake that everyone either thinks mostly the same as him or mostly agrees with eachother.

Treating it like stats while ignoring culture and is why his argument falls flat and why Silver is a cuck and got things so wrong.

He does this a fucking lot

Also a Remainer, I used to listen to his podcasts while driving and he is every bit the faggot he is in this vid.

If the states had more power and the federal government only did what it was initially designed to do then I'd be all for getting rid of the EC.

People would be free to move to the state the best fit their views and wouldn't have to worry about fags from California pushing their agendas onto them.

Why do people not want it to be this way?

Damn, she could've won 2008

We need to put an electorial per county in Governor elections. Each county gets 1 Electorial vote after votes are counted. Cities like Portland will no longer get to choose Governor just because more people live in their city. These city SJW's have too much influence over a state with a rural economy. Also go back to Governors choosing Senators.

I agree, as does your President.

Really?
Damn, I really like his videos in the beginning.
I'm still going to watch them, because a lot of them are interesting, especially his law heavy ones.
Him being really that much of a faggot, like this video is kinda disappointing.

Oh look another video from CCCP Grey

>Call it, heads or tails
>Tails!
>Whoops, looks like it's heads, you lose

>"WHY THE HEAD SIDE OF THE COIN IS A WHITE AND MALE SOCIAL CONSTRUCT AND NEEDS TO BE ABOLISHED. BOTH SIDES NEED TO BE TAILS BECAUSE IT'S UNFAIR!"

SOCIALISM IS A PUSSY PARTY WHERE THEY PLAY NICE A FAIR.

PLUTOCRACY SAID, "FUCK YOU FUCKING FAGGOT, I'LL DO WHAT I WANT AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!!!"

>Neo Liberal Marxists know more than the founding fathers

Fuck off, go back to the USSR, oh wait...
& no, California & New York should not be allowed to control 48 states

Democracy is shit and anything that curtails it is good.

I'm not American but as far as I know the EC is working exactly as the founding fathers intended, to prevent giant states from dominating the country.

The problem is that states in America really are completely unlike each other. There's GIGANTIC differences in culture, demographics and landscapes, so it's foolish to treat America as simply a giant mass of amorphous people.

If there were states with gigantic populations that were overwhelmingly red people would be crying for ages about how "that one stupid state ruins everything for everyone".

Where were the protests when Hillary won the popular vote against obama in 08 only to see the electoral college give him the candidacy?

Progressives want everyone to submit to their moral views, that's why they push for political centralization. It doesn't matter if traditional rural areas aren't hurting anyone, the fact that those areas don't go along with progressive dogma is enough to upset them.

i agree with him on the last point about electors, we dont need them. they are useless at best and counterproductive at worst

>waaaaa los angeles, new york city, and philadelphia aren't making every election democrat, waaaaaaa

I'm glad Trump's list of SCOTUS justices are Pence-approved conservatives so we can have voter ID and destroy the democrat fraud grip of major cities once and for all.

The democratic party is a vocal minority, they don't represent America, there are less democrats in Washington and local state offices than there have been since 1928 and yet because they control the media, they lie to us and pretend we're the minority.

Eat shit and die, marxist progs.

The video clearly states that if the electors vote in a different direction than in the people of the state, then that necessarily leads to the harm of the people. That is not always true. The uneducated shouldn't be able to vote. If the uneducated masses vote in a way that would lead to their harm, then the electors should be able to vote in a different direction to save them. CGP Grey should go fuck himself.

What would we even change our election system to? State majority IE more red states = red wins and more blue states = blue wins? Direct democracy is garbage.

Yet if it went the other way it would be the best thing ever. So salty.

They really don't. Neither party's establishment wants to get rid of the electoral college, because most parts of the country are always going to vote one way or the other and the system allows them to only spend a billion dollars across the few battlegrounds that matter. If we shifted to a popular vote system, it would only exponentially inflate the money required to run as you'd need massive nation-wide ad coverage. Every extra vote would matter and be worth buying compared to the current system.

Most of the people complaining about the electoral college are idealists who think there's always some perfect solution that only they were smart enough to think of, while ignoring that every setup is going to have pros and serious cons. They don't want to talk about the cons of their ideas though.

>The uneducated shouldn't be able to vote

The problem with that is that it removes a vast-majority of the voter base and really puts the voting power in an even smaller group.

I think the only really good point is about the possibilty of elector revolt. Why do you guys even need the electors? Can you not just allocate electoral points instead?

But the fact that the college system straddles the line between popular vote and state vote isn't an actual criticism. It's completely reasonable to think that a 26 state majority would be unrepresentative, and equally a straight popular vote would be prepared to shit on small slices of the populace. Taking a middle ground stance isn't somehow ideological inconsistency as much as it is an acceptance that both methodologies have benefits and flaws. That's not a guarantee that the college system is the best possible system, but you're going to have to actually give an alternative system that fits the same niche.

>The uneducated shouldn't be able to vote
Actually that encourages taking money away from education to deliberately deny the vote to people you don't like.

It's absolutely retarded how liberals are now protesting electoral college vs. popular vote, If they wanted raw democracy, statistically speaking the vast majority of Americans disagreed with civil rights bill when it passed, disagreed with abolition of slavery when it passed, disagreed with the 19th amendment granting female voting rights, disagreed against marriage equality when it passed, disagreed with black voting rights.
Just saying in all those historical instances most liberals love the ideal of a republic rather than democracy and but before they finish theird same old quote "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner!" An opinion unfavorable their world-view is made they start spewing from both ends how the ideal of republics are suddenly a 200 year old archaic system that absolutely needs to be demolished. Pick your poison they will never get their absolute way until it's a dictatorship you happen to agree with, which is unlikely.
In any event, crush every fucking opposition while the time is ripe and adjust them to losing and not always going the exact way they wish.
Inner city/urban communities next to port-side have a much different lifestyle/community and are typically wealthier than others, their experience with jobs/economy doesn't equate to the rust-belt or midwest, they're undergoing a financial crisis and the east coast/west coast cities that aren't experiencing it shouldn't be able to numerically strong-arm them into the same economic policy that brought the rust-belt into said disparity. We went through 8 years of a progressive platform where we were unheard and saw that our jobs went overseas, our middle-class lifestyles vanished.. Despite this, were we the "ignorant rednecks" burning down cities all the while? The progressive party that protests classism is doing a fine job at portraying how the lavish inner-city bourgeois and corporate medias opinion is more valuable than others. 1/2

Yes, amerifriends, the country should be run by the powerful city/cities; fuck this bullshit that country men have votes worth more than the cities that actually make the country.
I'm happy Shitllary got cucked, but it's bullshit that the rednecks are worth more than the most powerful cities in the US.

>educated meme
Yeah, because I want some retarded cunt who has a degree in dance to have a vote while an electrician doesn't

it needs to back to land owners or x amount of liquid assets.

>Didnt provide a reasonable alternative
>All he said was that the electors shouldn't be allowed to vote against their state party, which shouldnt mean abolishing the whole thing

Land ownership I could agree with; x amount of liquid assets would cause more problems, I think.

the fucking salt, the S A L T, it can power me for weeks months YEARS, oh sweet sweet election

Yes, that's true. A small group that can guide the rest of society to prosperity should be in control. Eventually, assuming the educated are generally benevolent, the rest of society will reach such a level where education is a matter of choice alone. Furthermore, the educated would have a better chance to guide society to prosperity than the uneducated. But all of that rests on benevolence. So if the majority of the educated are benevolent, then yes, the uneducated should not be allowed to vote. A good amount of people think that anything that takes their voice away from them is harmful. This notion is unfounded, and can be wrong at times.

This this out.

holy fuck...

*Check this out

>i normally dont care about this but since my candidate lost i have to bitch about something

I hope you fucktards realize that I don't mean meme degrees like women's studies.

Good thing we aren't a democracy.

2/2 Continue to provoke these pricks, make them out for the hypocrites they are, continue pointing out the media bias/corruption and it will continue to dissuade any moderate roots left in within their party.

We have a massive advantage right now but complacency will give them a clear route for their agendas, we need to take advantage of the angst and anger to gas-light it, make no concessions otherwise they will spread the poison they spew, be open about your philosophy/ideals, make the progressive platform socially unacceptable, we have the reasonable people behind our party and moderates have already dissented in droves to support us. Start pointing out the fundamental flaws in them, at best they will clamp their ears and shout over you, only dissuading more people in the process. Reveal your autistic power levels, we are safe to spread now.

This guy is someone who gets over his fucking head every once in a while. He forgot we have three fucking branches of government on top of our electoral college.

Tell me a system that would fairly represent the few farmers feeding the many urbanites.

If we were run by the cities, there would be no chance for an even moderately right-wing candidate ever getting elected. Why should faggots from liberal faggots from San Francisco and Oregon and niggers from Detroit and Chicago decide our fate? The country men are worth more than all of them combined

See, there are some problems with this:

Liberals tend to be more "educated", but I doubt we'd consider them voting for the best-interest of all since they tend to vote with their hearts instead of heads.

We can't really assume people are generally benevolent -- especially if fewer people are given the power of choice: I could only see corruption abound from that power.

I don't like uneducated voters voting, trust me, but it's not an easy fix; however, no perfect system exists, either.

And we understand it and support its authority to the utmost. Good luck getting it changed, kiddo. Heh.

We're a republic, you faggot.

>let me portray the electors as rich money bags so my viewers will hate them and thus system
>let me provide a scenario that has never occurred to argue against it

A system that protects land owners who own large patches of land such as what comprises the majority of STATES, which the electoral system does.

>PragerU
>youtube.com/watch?v=8EDW88CBo-8
>youtube.com/watch?v=tN1MkAGuVyY

At this point, most degrees are meme degrees (outside of STEM, medicine, and other shit like economics). Good luck convincing people to only allow people with those majors to vote.

I agree in principle that only educated people should have any say, but our modern educational system is so shitty that even then there's no real point

You said uneducated and other than a mandatory IQ test (which doesn't measure education, just receptivity to it) or a standardized test (which will fail to screen out idiots who are sheltered and useless) or some degrees you arbitrarily determine to matter. In which case, who would be in charge of updating the list when new degrees are inevitably needed because of technological advances?

Just concrete evidence you are a productive member of society and has something to lose if things go sideways instead of siphoning gibs.

The problem is that they want to replace the EC with FPTP. Maybe if they advocated instant-run off, so third party votes could be viable then it may be worthwhile, but what they really want is just Democrats winning in their preferred flawed system.

>Hi everyone I really love oligarchy haha

I was arguing FOR the electoral college. CGP has good videos but he occasionally pulls of his bullshit pseudo-intellectual critiques.

he makes good points. The reason i favor the electoral college is because at the moment it protects the power of states. But he's right, that effect will slowly fade away with urbanization and one day texas and florida will be blue states thanks to huge cities.

So we need to purge.

OH NO A STICK MAN WITH REDDIT GLASSES!!! HOW COULD ANYONE POSSIBLY REFUTE THAT?!?!?!?!

That's because you failed to make right-wing attractive to begin with, not an issue with cities running countries.
Madrid used to be the right-wing center of the country and has run and still runs -albeit, with Podemos becoming way too strong, precisely because the right has been fucking up constantly in the last decade- shit and it SHOULD be like this.
No subhuman form Sevilla or Bilbao should be given the privilege of having more say over national matter than a Madrilean,

lel he admits in the video in OP that his argument there is retarded

if you want the electoral college changed, write to your congressman you fucking faggot

>they have some bad opinions, therefore, they are wrong about everything
Is CGP right about everything?

His argument is we should abandon the electoral college because there is a possibility something that has never happened in history could happen that in principle is irrelevant to the function of the college itself and could be amended while keeping the college in place but we should throw it out regardless because of how it is now.

This sort of retardation is why liberals will always lose.

electoral college can go when all the illegals go

stop padding your numbers Commiefornia

Right wing ideas (and I mean genuinely right wing ideas, not shit like Jeb or Kasich) are inherently unattractive to many in a democratic system, especially in a multicultural democracy.

The issue in the US is that all are subhumans are congregated in cities. Cities are where faggot hipsters, dindus, and spics live. Decent working people are usually found in rural areas in the US.

*our

You're jumping to some liberal tier conclusions there.

I recommend suicide before you attempt to have a thought again.

I will get right to it

Wew lad. Rekt. Based.

>this has never happened in US history

Gee asshole I wonder why? probably because D.C would run red with blood.

It doesn't change the fact that one vermonter's vote becomes equal to 3 texan votes under EC rules. Say what you will about the balance and tradition, it just doesn't seem very fair.

Also, all ideas do have their cons, but realise that the use of electors (who by the way are not even legally obliged to vote the way the people asked them to) is a relic of the past, back when we couldn't get from one edge of the country to the other in less than a day. Unless you can come up with a valid functional reason for it being there, which I have trouble with.

And why do you argue about the money spent? Do you spend that money? Does it come out of your pocket? Are you sure they will spend more money instead of trying to spread their spending out more evenly?
The current system has the major problem of the candidates only being really interested in the wants and needs of a few states with close races, leaving every other state forgotten to be shit on later. Don't know about you, but to me that does not seem like the way a government system should work. Ignoring deeply red or deeply blue states because the candidates "have them in the bag" seems to imply that the people who support you the most matter the least. Which seems counter-intuitive to me. (for example in the 2008 elections only 4 states received at least a single visit from each candidate, out of the 50 you have. I don't believe not having to give a fuck about every other state should be a part of the way the system is designed)

Not to mention the completely retarded and imho unacceptable mathematical problem that in certain scenarios it is possible to make a candidate win with only 22% of the popular vote.

And that is not to say that there cannot be a system that cares about something else than just what the majority of people want. The City of London chooses its mayor by giving votes to both the people as well as companies who have their HQ there. So companies get votes, but that's a different system.

>That's because you failed to make right-wing attractive to begin with, not an issue with cities running countries.

Apparently not.

And yet it is fair.

A hundred rural sheep aren't more valuable than a dozen independent land working men. Their votes aren't equal because they aren't equal. Repealing 3/5ths was a mistake.

I can't believe people are even discussing this.

To get rid of it, they need 3/4 of states to agree. The smaller states will never, ever agree because their votes are the ones protected by the electoral college.

Please try to think critically at least once in your lifetime.

>you failed to make the right wing attractive
>states that have not voted republic in decades flipped red

lol. take your self righteous cosmopolitan bullshit and shove it. the vote of producer states should count 3 times as the votes of federal welfare sucking parasites like california

Almost everything about this video is wrong. This man, who does decent research for most of his videos, is an emotional mess right now and can't think straight.

Sup Forums cant be BTFO for the next 8 years, stay mad faggot, your opinion is invalid... you dont even understand basic civics.

wtf I love jews now

Checkd and rekt

It's true that if urban areas keep growing the possibility of liberal agglomerates choosing the president by themselves is possible.
They wouldn't be able to change the constitution at least.

I don't believe people actually watch this smug retard's videos.