There are still a lot of votes to be counted in California, so the national popular vote isn't set.
That being said...
Most analysts I've seen expect Trump to win the national popular vote by about 2%.
Trump will win the tipping point state (Pennsylvania, as expected) by right about 2%.
That means that in this election, there was no advantage at all to either side in the electoral college.
This was mainly because Trump did much better than last time in deep blue states like New York and New Jersey (the margin in New Jersey is currently under 5%, which is closer than Arizona!).
But as more and more Republican voters move from rust belt states like Wisconsin to red states like Florida, you might see the Dems take over the electoral college advantage.
So, be careful what you wish for in getting ride of the EC... you just might get it.
Yeah, I'm sure some will say "I don't care who it favors, the EC is wrong..." but if the EC had saved you from a Trump win, I have trouble believing the Left would still be ripping it.
@sh76 saidUnlike right wingers, most Leftists have some consistency in their beliefs. A long standing belief of the Left is increased democracy. No matter who the EC favors, it should be abolished.
There are still a lot of votes to be counted in California, so the national popular vote isn't set.
That being said...
Most analysts I've seen expect Trump to win the national popular vote by about 2%.
Trump will win the tipping point state (Pennsylvania, as expected) by right about 2%.
That means that in this election, there was no advantage at all to either side in ...[text shortened]... the EC had saved you from a Trump win, I have trouble believing the Left would still be ripping it.
Let's see how right wingers here feel about the filibuster if, as looks likely, the GOP holds onto their House majority.
@sh76 saidIt's simple: if your side loses a fair election due to the popular vote, would you feel robbed? Most people would say no.
Yeah, I'm sure some will say "I don't care who it favors, the EC is wrong..." but if the EC had saved you from a Trump win, I have trouble believing the Left would still be ripping it.
If your side loses a fair election due to the electoral college, would your side feel robbed? Most people would feel they were.
Assuming no disputes over election fraud, neither side would complain about losing due to the popular vote. Therefore, it's still the better option.
- Joined
- 20 May 16
- Moves
- 42242
@no1marauder saidIs that what’s happening to California, hanging onto leftists beliefs? It’s crazy how many are coming to Texas from there like you wouldn’t believe.
Unlike right wingers, most Leftists have some consistency in their beliefs. long standing belief of the Left is increased democracy. No matter who the EC favors, it should be abolished.
Let's see how right wingers here feel about the filibuster if, as looks likely, the GOP holds onto their House majority.
@sh76 said'Yeah, I'm sure some will say "I don't care who it favors, the EC is wrong..." '
Yeah, I'm sure some will say "I don't care who it favors, the EC is wrong..."
Stop right there. You are correct.
Good job.
@vivify saidYou omit the reason for the EC. Weave that in so that your post makes sense. If you don’t, uninformed minds, like sue and No1, will not get the full picture of your post.
It's simple: if your side loses a fair election due to the popular vote, would you feel robbed? Most people would say no.
If your side loses a fair election due to the electoral college, would your side feel robbed? Most people would feel they were.
Assuming no disputes over election fraud, neither side would complain about losing due to the popular vote. Therefore, it's still the better option.
The Electoral College does give an advantage to smaller population states, IMO.
Every state gets 2 ec's regardless of population size.
Right now, the smaller states tend to be republican, so the repubs, in effect, get a helping hand.
8 years ago, Hilary Clinton beat Donald Trump by almost 3 million votes, a 2.1% spread, but Trump received 304 electoral votes and Clinton 227, winning easily
@Earl-of-Trumps saidNah.
The Electoral College does give an advantage to smaller population states, IMO.
If you do the math, it only takes 11 states to win the presidency. 11 out 50. Imagine of those states ever supported the same party? How is this a good idea?
If must keep the EC then it should be seriously revamped. Instead of winner-take-all, electoral votes should be divided up by percentage; that would make it much more fair. Also, get rid "electors". They are unnecessary, and in some cases, a liability to fair democracy.
@vivify
If they took the 2 senate seats out of the calculus, then you may only need 10 states to win.
Ok, you have 11 states v. 39 states. tale away the 2 gift votes from all states, and that takes 78 e votes from the 39 states.
you'd see, as an example, Vermont go from 3 to 1 evotes. I know, I know, - damm math!
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19081
@Earl-of-Trumps saidWhich highlights how it's a completely flawed system.
The Electoral College does give an advantage to smaller population states, IMO.
Every state gets 2 ec's regardless of population size.
Right now, the smaller states tend to be republican, so the repubs, in effect, get a helping hand.
8 years ago, Hilary Clinton beat Donald Trump by almost 3 million votes, a 2.1% spread, but Trump received 304 electoral votes and Clinton 227, winning easily
@AverageJoe1 saidThe original reason for the EC was to have a release valve so that demagogues would not be elected.
You omit the reason for the EC. Weave that in so that your post makes sense. If you don’t, uninformed minds, like sue and No1, will not get the full picture of your post.
Oops.
Since it has failed its original purpose twice now, it's past time to eliminate it.
@Suzianne saidFounders: "Let's have a Democracy! Let's choose the President by Voting!"
The original reason for the EC was to have a release valve so that demagogues would not be elected.
Oops.
Since it has failed its original purpose twice now, it's past time to eliminate it.
OtherFounders: "Hemhemhem, no. Then cow hands and muckrakers would have a voice. Let's have a Democracy among selected white, rich, male property owners!"
Founders: "Oh yes, you are right. That sounds much better. Let the Elites Choose For Us!"
EC = Elites Choose
😆
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147606
@no1marauder saidThe US is not and has never been a “democracy”… can you people not understand that?
Unlike right wingers, most Leftists have some consistency in their beliefs. A long standing belief of the Left is increased democracy. No matter who the EC favors, it should be abolished.
Let's see how right wingers here feel about the filibuster if, as looks likely, the GOP holds onto their House majority.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidDidn't say it was.
The US is not and has never been a “democracy”… can you people not understand that?
But due to the efforts of progressives it has become more democratic in, for example, recognizing women's and blacks' right to vote, in providing for direct election of Senators and in ensuring that State legislatures reflect the principle of representation based on population (see Baker v. Carr).
Abolition of the EC would be another step in that direction (as would abolition of the filibuster).
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147606
@no1marauder saidbut you want to increase democracy and do away with the EC 😂
Didn't say it was.
But due to the efforts of progressives it has become more democratic in, for example, recognizing women's and blacks' right to vote, in providing for direct election of Senators and in ensuring that State legislatures reflect the principle of representation based on population (see Baker v. Carr).
Abolition of the EC would be another step in that direction (as would abolition of the filibuster).