Discredit Slate all you want but anyone who can do spreadsheets can download the total vote by state and come up with the fact that CA would need 165 EV to match the EV voting power of Wyoming’s voter. But to be fair, FL would need 110 EV to match same. Illinois 70. And so forth.
This line of thinking no longer fools anyone, but if the left wants to double down on fundamental reasons as to why they lost this election, that is fine. Our cameras have been rolling on the streets recording these protests/riots, and we’ll be showing them to the heartland voters again in 2018 and 2020.
Based on what? This is the faulty premise, that the national popular vote mean something.
As a matter of fact, giving each state two senators is unfair in a sense. There is nothing inherent in the concept of equal reprentation for each state in every circumstance. Reprentation in the senate is balanced by reprentation in the House by the fact that bills must be approved by both bodies. But in electing a president, there is no such balancing body. The unfairness of equal reprentation by state can be seen in how the Untes Nations General Assembly works, where the United States get only one vote, the same as the island nation of Saint Lucia with its 165,000 people.
The Senate is completely fair. There are 50 sovereign states. Each state deserves to have equal representation in the affairs of the federal government, which the states created , as this is part of the very nature of federalism.
Agreed 100%This line of thinking no longer fools anyone, but if the left wants to double down on fundamental reasons as to why they lost this election, that is fine. Our cameras have been rolling on the streets recording these protests/riots, and we’ll be showing them to the heartland voters again in 2018 and 2020.
The progressives have lost all credibility with this because Hillary supporters knew to some extent that it was possible for her to win the EC while losing the popular vote. Even one of Nate Silver’s late models had that happening.
So they weren’t going to dare argue it before the election.
This is nothing more than attempts by the far-left who have for years been secretly looking for ways to win without the heartland, fly-over working class and sweep election cycles easily so they can get elected and vote themselves, their families, their friends and lobbyists free stuff. That’s all this is. There is virtually no merit whatsoever to their arguments or their protests.
And it’s not progress; it’s a regression. Describing the behavior of many protesters and safe space attendees as whining would indeed be very accurate.
Excellent discussion.
Hillary can’t accept she was a flawed candidate from the beginning. Its her fault and that’s it!!!
In theory the states can do this. But even this mechanism relies on a super majority. So the individual state really has no power.
The excuse du jour …
This principle of how a President is elected is highly innovative; it’s not how we do it, or have ever done it. This is your faulty premise.
In our bicameral legislature, the perogatives of the states, as states and by population are balanced in the Senate and the House. Do you object to proportional representaitonint eh House?
As pointed out already by Pro Vobis, this is not a fact.
I think the discussion has been interesting, but I haven’t read anything like this in the thread at all. Did I miss something?
I don’t see where such labeling is helpful to the discussion.This line of thinking no longer fools anyone, but if the left wants to double down on fundamental reasons as to why they lost this election, that is fine. Our cameras have been rolling on the streets recording these protests/riots, and we’ll be showing them to the heartland voters again in 2018 and 2020.
The progressives have lost all credibility with this because Hillary supporters knew to some extent that it was possible for her to win the EC while losing the popular vote. Even one of Nate Silver’s late models had that happening.
So they weren’t going to dare argue it before the election.
This is nothing more than attempts by the far-left who have for years been secretly looking for ways to win without the heartland, fly-over working class and sweep election cycles easily so they can get elected and vote themselves, their families, their friends and lobbyists free stuff. That’s all this is. There is virtually no merit whatsoever to their arguments or their protests.
And it’s not progress; it’s a regression. Describing the behavior of many protesters and safe space attendees as whining would indeed be very accurate.
Yet Hillary did not go for the electoral vote. She went for the popular vote which is not how we elect the president. You would think she knew that!
I don’t see where such labeling is helpful to the discussion.
Trump himself has built on the very infrastructure which you seem to despise. Is it any wonder Republicans are skeptical of his plans?
But I digress. The point I’m trying to make is that the electoral college can be manipulated to produce the outcome you wish. It’s not a left- right thing to do want it takes to win an election.
HC along with the operatives behind her campaign were so convinced the election was hers to lose,because of that she didn’t work as hard as she should have.DT on the other hand never gave up went after the states with only one electoral vote,in doing so he created a path to victory.HC put all her eggs into the heavily populated liberal areas.The chickens came home to roost for HC…finally!
I don’t think she went for the popular vote instead of the electoral vote. What I think happened is that her campaign relied on the ‘rust belt’ vote going to her as it has gone to the Democrat in the past. Trump was a different kind of Republican though and he convinced enough voters there to vote for him to win the states. That is all he had to do to win the election.
New York voted for Hillary overall by 59% of total votes.