View Full Version : Electoral College vs Popular Vote
Rapscallion St Croix
11-10-2016, 05:26 PM
If Presidential Elections were determined by popular vote, either California alone or Cali plus New York would elect all of our presidents. The margin California gives to the Democratic candidate usually exceeds the popular vote difference in all the other 49 states combined. Opinion based on researching the last several elections.
LitespeedRider
11-10-2016, 05:49 PM
If Presidential Elections were determined by popular vote, either California alone or Cali plus New York would elect all of our presidents. The margin California gives to the Democratic candidate usually exceeds the popular vote difference in all the other 49 states combined. Opinion based on researching the last several elections.
True - BUT (there is always a butt)...if the election was on popular vote the campaigns would not focus only on "Battleground" states for the electoral college...we dont know how different the numbers would be if the campaign strategies were also different and geared towards that count style.
biker1
11-10-2016, 06:24 PM
The vote difference from CA and NY (both liberal states) was 4 million votes. The overall vote difference was 200 thousand.
If Presidential Elections were determined by popular vote, either California alone or Cali plus New York would elect all of our presidents. The margin California gives to the Democratic candidate usually exceeds the popular vote difference in all the other 49 states combined. Opinion based on researching the last several elections.
Allegiance
11-10-2016, 06:45 PM
True - BUT (there is always a butt)...if the election was on popular vote the campaigns would not focus only on "Battleground" states for the electoral college...we dont know how different the numbers would be if the campaign strategies were also different and geared towards that count style.
Liberals pay no attention to logic. They just want to ...http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161110/f4ab1d4ada06ba107e8cc022cf87c195.jpg
LitespeedRider
11-10-2016, 06:46 PM
The vote difference from CA and NY (both liberal states) was 4 million votes. The overall vote difference was 200 thousand.
Like I said - the campaigns would be vastly different...Trump spent no time with the idiots on the West Coast (just has Hillary spent none in Wisconsin...)
biker1
11-10-2016, 06:50 PM
Agreed. If you want to play the game you need to know the rules. CA and NY were not worth spending effort on if you were Trump. The electoral college was put in place to prevent mob rule and does just fine.
Like I said - the campaigns would be vastly different...Trump spent no time with the idiots on the West Coast (just has Hillary spent none in Wisconsin...)
Polar Bear
11-10-2016, 06:59 PM
...The electoral college was put in place to prevent mob rule and does just fine.
Yep...so all states matter.
jimbo2012
11-10-2016, 07:25 PM
Final count can take a few weeks
Don Baldwin
11-10-2016, 09:24 PM
Yep...so all states matter.
You think the 7 states with 3 electoral votes matter as much as CA with 55? CA has as many EC votes as the lowest 15 states combined...equal? I don't think so. IF all states mattered, they'd each get the same number of votes.
LitespeedRider
11-10-2016, 09:47 PM
You think the 7 states with 3 electoral votes matter as much as CA with 55? CA has as many EC votes as the lowest 15 states combined...equal? I don't think so. IF all states mattered, they'd each get the same number of votes.
It is not so much the states, it is the population base. As we have seen for going on three decades now - the Iconic term "Head West" is no longer a term for a directive of hard work and resourcefulness as so many Steinbeck novels would infer. Rather it is a pilgrimage to liberal nirvana where arrogant multi-millionaires can judge everyone around them...well...but for in some instances (such as Santa Barbara where fully 60% of the residents are uncounted homeless that could all be fed and housed for the cost of one Rolls Royce)
Polar Bear
11-10-2016, 10:21 PM
You think the 7 states with 3 electoral votes matter as much as CA with 55? CA has as many EC votes as the lowest 15 states combined...equal? I don't think so. IF all states mattered, they'd each get the same number of votes.
"Equal" was your word, not mine. That all states matter does not mean they are equal in number of votes. That's strictly your wildly illogical opinion.
Don Baldwin
11-11-2016, 06:16 AM
Agreed. If you want to play the game you need to know the rules. CA and NY were not worth spending effort on if you were Trump. The electoral college was put in place to prevent mob rule and does just fine.
The Electoral College was put in place to ENSURE that "the system" goes on, that the corruption continues, that ONLY "their guy" gets elected. To keep out a REAL rogue.
"Equal" was your word, not mine. That all states matter does not mean they are equal in number of votes. That's strictly your wildly illogical opinion.
If you're not an "equal" you don't matter. It's like saying your kids opinion matters and then you and the wife go ahead and do what you want to do. Only an EQUAL truly matters, the rest are simply along for the ride and have NO say. Compared to CA, those other 15 states don't matter.
When 3 wolves and a lamb are discussing dinner...does what the lamb want really matter?
Welcome to the land of logic...I know you women find it frightening, confusing, unobtainable...but it rules the world we live in. Leave the important things to us white men, it's what we're good at. We got you this far. Where is the great "female" civilization? The great black civilization? The great hispanic civilization? There are none? Then STOP interfering and trying to change the great civilization white men created. You don't know what you're doing.
MDLNB
11-11-2016, 06:37 AM
I am against electoral votes, but I am glad this election worked out as it did BECAUSE of the electoral votes. Kind of like not liking tax breaks but using them when they benefit us. If you can't make the change, then you have to learn to work with it, use it to your advantage.
TexaninVA
11-11-2016, 05:15 PM
If Presidential Elections were determined by popular vote, either California alone or Cali plus New York would elect all of our presidents. The margin California gives to the Democratic candidate usually exceeds the popular vote difference in all the other 49 states combined. Opinion based on researching the last several elections.
The wisdom of the Founder's creation of the Electoral College has been proven once again. It's what helps keeps us a broad based Republic vs a coastal driven socialist democracy. I like that.
Dr Winston O Boogie jr
11-11-2016, 08:50 PM
The vote difference from CA and NY (both liberal states) was 4 million votes. The overall vote difference was 200 thousand.
Actually, the overall vote difference is supposedly 300,000. That number represents one quarter of one percent of the 120 million votes cast. I cannot believe that the way votes are counted produces accuracy to that level.
If we used the popular vote to decide presidential election we would have recount after recount in this case until it ended up in the courts who would probably decide it to be a tie. In that case, congress would elect the president.
If you think about it only one eighth of one percent of the votes plus one would have to be flipped in order to turn the results around.
Remember 2000 when we recounted the Florida votes. That was about six million votes. Can you imagine recounting 120 million votes?
Dr Winston O Boogie jr
11-11-2016, 08:51 PM
Also, there is this:
Do You Understand the Electoral College? - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6s7jB6-GoU)
jimbo2012
11-11-2016, 08:55 PM
all rural areas would essentially not be voting, NY CA would control with their high populations
PS as of an hour ago the diff is 400,000
Also there would be recounts all over the place the results could take a month
So let's not fix what's not broke perhaps
Don Baldwin
11-11-2016, 10:04 PM
If voting mattered...they wouldn't let us do it.
rubicon
11-12-2016, 06:24 AM
I mentioned this on another PT thread. the electoral college meets again December 19th. They can at that time recast their vote. I believe the riots are professionally arranged and aimed at attempting to intimidate the members of electoral college to recast their votes in favor of Hillary. If they do this nation will really come apart
Personal Best Regards:
Don Baldwin
11-12-2016, 06:41 AM
I mentioned this on another PT thread. the electoral college meets again December 19th. They can at that time recast their vote. I believe the riots are professionally arranged and aimed at attempting to intimidate the members of electoral college to recast their votes in favor of Hillary. If they do this nation will really come apart
Personal Best Regards:
The EC hasn't voted yet...this vote just chose which electors would be voting. The REAL vote takes place in January. They can STILL vote for Hillary or ANYONE they want, they COULD elect Sanders.
November 8, 2016—Election Day
Registered voters cast their votes for President and Vice President. By doing so, they also help choose the electors who will represent their state in the Electoral College.
Mid-November through December 19, 2016
After the presidential election, the governor of your state prepares seven Certificates of Ascertainment. “As soon as practicable,” after the election results in your state are certified, the governor sends one of the Certificates of Ascertainment to the Archivist.
Certificates of Ascertainment should be sent to the Archivist no later than the meeting of the electors in December. However, federal law sets no penalty for missing the deadline.
The remaining six Certificates of Ascertainment are held for use at the meeting of the Electors in December.
December 13, 2016
States must make final decisions in any controversies over the appointment of their electors at least six days before the meeting of the Electors. This is so their electoral votes will be presumed valid when presented to Congress.
Decisions by states’ courts are conclusive, if decided under laws enacted before Election Day.
December 19, 2016
The Electors meet in their state and vote for President and Vice President on separate ballots. The electors record their votes on six “Certificates of Vote,” which are paired with the six remaining Certificates of Ascertainment.
The electors sign, seal, and certify six sets of electoral votes. A set of electoral votes consists of one Certificate of Ascertainment and one Certificate of Vote. These are distributed immediately as follows:
one set to the President of the Senate (the Vice President) for the official count of the electoral votes in January;
two packages to the Secretary of State in the state where the electors met—one is an archival set that becomes part of the public record of the Secretary of State's office and the other is a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes;
two packages to the Archivist—one is an archival set that becomes part of the permanent collection at the National Archives and Records Administration and the other is a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes; and
one set to the presiding judge in the district where the Electors met—this is also a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes.
December 28, 2016
Electoral votes (the Certificates of Vote) must be received by the President of the Senate and the Archivist no later than nine days after the meeting of the electors. States face no legal penalty for failure to comply.
If votes are lost or delayed, the Archivist may take extraordinary measures to retrieve duplicate originals.
On or Before January 3, 2017
The Archivist and/or representatives from the Office of the Federal Register meet with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House in late December or early January. This is, in part, a ceremonial occasion. Informal meetings may take place earlier.
January 6, 2017
The Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes. Congress may pass a law to change this date.
The Vice President, as President of the Senate, presides over the count and announces the results of the Electoral College vote. The President of the Senate then declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.
If a State submits conflicting sets of electoral votes to Congress, the two Houses acting concurrently may accept or reject the votes. If they do not concur, the votes of the electors certified by the Governor of the State on the Certificate of Ascertainment would be counted in Congress.
If no Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution provides for the House of Representatives to decide the Presidential election. If necessary the House would elect the President by majority vote, choosing from the three candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each state having one vote.
If no Vice Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment provides for the Senate to elect the Vice President. If necessary, the Senate would elect the Vice President by majority vote, choosing from the two candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each Senator having one vote.
If any objections to the Electoral College vote are made, they must be submitted in writing and be signed by at least one member of the House and one Senator. If objections are presented, the House and Senate withdraw to their respective chambers to consider their merits under procedures set out in federal law.
U. S. Electoral College: 2016 Key Dates (https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/key-dates.html)
MDLNB
11-12-2016, 07:34 AM
When we had riots in D.C. because of the murder of MLK, the national guard was activated. It's time for this nonsense to be shut down. A petulant tantrum cannot be allowed to continue to the point that it is embarrassing for our country. Obama needs to do something constructive for a change. Does her really want this to be the legacy that he is remembered for?
Don Baldwin
11-12-2016, 09:10 PM
When we had riots in D.C. because of the murder of MLK, the national guard was activated. It's time for this nonsense to be shut down. A petulant tantrum cannot be allowed to continue to the point that it is embarrassing for our country. Obama needs to do something constructive for a change. Does her really want this to be the legacy that he is remembered for?
Johnson destroyed the country in the 60s...the rest are just milking the most out before the collapse.
villagerjack
11-12-2016, 11:25 PM
Saved Photo

vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.