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.

Originally Posted by Guest

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.

The vote difference from CA and NY (both liberal states) was 4 million votes. The overall vote difference was 200 thousand.

Originally Posted by Guest

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.

Originally Posted by LitespeedRider

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 ...

Originally Posted by Guest

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...)

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.

Originally Posted by Guest

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...)

Originally Posted by biker1

...The electoral college was put in place to prevent mob rule and does just fine.

Yep...so all states matter.

Final count can take a few weeks

Originally Posted by Guest

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.

Originally Posted by Guest

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)

Originally Posted by Don Baldwin

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.

Originally Posted by Guest

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.

Originally Posted by Guest

"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.

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.

Originally Posted by Guest

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.

Originally Posted by Guest

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?