One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Popular vote? Not that popular.
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
Oct 18, 2019 19:15:45   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
I am 100% for the Electoral College. Full blown Democracy is basically mob rule. However; we hear a lot from the left about all votes should be counted? Hillary won because she won the popular vote, every vote is important and blah,blah, blah. Almost 40% of eligible voters didn’t bother to vote in the 2016 election. Doesn’t seem like the vote is all that popular. Here’s another interesting stat. If you threw out California Trump wins the popular vote by over 1 million. This is also another worthless stat. My point. Stick with the Electoral College. A brilliant idea for a country of States.

Reply
Oct 18, 2019 19:19:00   #
teabag09
 
JFlorio wrote:
I am 100% for the Electoral College. Full blown Democracy is basically mob rule. However; we hear a lot from the left about all votes should be counted? Hillary won because she won the popular vote, every vote is important and blah,blah, blah. Almost 40% of eligible voters didn’t bother to vote in the 2016 election. Doesn’t seem like the vote is all that popular. Here’s another interesting stat. If you threw out California Trump wins the popular vote by over 1 million. This is also another worthless stat. My point. Stick with the Electoral College. A brilliant idea for a country of States.
I am 100% for the Electoral College. Full blown De... (show quote)


100% agree. Mike

Reply
Oct 18, 2019 19:30:14   #
Seth
 
JFlorio wrote:
I am 100% for the Electoral College. Full blown Democracy is basically mob rule. However; we hear a lot from the left about all votes should be counted? Hillary won because she won the popular vote, every vote is important and blah,blah, blah. Almost 40% of eligible voters didn’t bother to vote in the 2016 election. Doesn’t seem like the vote is all that popular. Here’s another interesting stat. If you threw out California Trump wins the popular vote by over 1 million. This is also another worthless stat. My point. Stick with the Electoral College. A brilliant idea for a country of States.
I am 100% for the Electoral College. Full blown De... (show quote)


Well said!

America's founders were exponentially smarter than today's American-in-name-only Democrats.

Reply
 
 
Oct 18, 2019 19:42:20   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Seth wrote:
Well said!

America's founders were exponentially smarter than today's American-in-name-only Democrats.
img src="https://static.onepoliticalplaza.com/ima... (show quote)


Thanks. Much smarter but the bars pretty low if it’s a Democrat bar.

Reply
Oct 18, 2019 20:02:20   #
Seth
 
JFlorio wrote:
Thanks. Much smarter but the bars pretty low if it’s a Democrat bar.


That's a given.

Reply
Oct 18, 2019 21:07:31   #
Iliamna1
 
Don't forget, California allows dead people and illegal aliens to vote. I suspect if all the cheating across the nation were eliminated, Trump also won the popular vote by a landslide.

Reply
Oct 18, 2019 21:16:09   #
Seth
 
Iliamna1 wrote:
Don't forget, California allows dead people and illegal aliens to vote. I suspect if all the cheating across the nation were eliminated, Trump also won the popular vote by a landslide.


LOL! For some reason I envision Pocahontas Warren delivering a campaign speech at a cemetery, pandering for the Dearly Departed vote.

Reply
 
 
Oct 18, 2019 21:26:23   #
no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun
 
teabag09 wrote:
100% agree. Mike



Reply
Oct 18, 2019 21:38:57   #
Iliamna1
 
Seth wrote:
LOL! For some reason I envision Pocahontas Warren delivering a campaign speech at a cemetery, pandering for the Dearly Departed vote.


Now that's funny! amid a huge funeral for some illegal drug kingpin who was shot by the drug cartel.

Reply
Oct 19, 2019 09:41:18   #
greenmountaineer Loc: Vermont
 
Without the Electoral College, small states like Vermont will be totally swamped by NY and California. However, the Electoral College is not being used as the Constitution says. I watched on TV, our three electors vote. Now they are supposed to vote for two people, one of whom does not come from their state. Then when all the votes come to DC, they get counted. There is no provision for Primary votes or any input from the people at all. But rather than doing that, Governor Shumlin and two others merely cast three votes for Hillary and ignored Bernie. So they violated the Constitution right there. The President should not need input from the people, as he supposed to be an executive. He carries out and enforces laws passed by Congress. But we don't have that anymore. We elect kings for four year terms. Taking money that Congress voted to be used for some project and using it to build a wall, is misappropriation of funds. If I had done that when I was chairman of the Bolton Select Board, I'd have been thrown in jail. But I guess it's OK if you are a king.

Reply
Oct 19, 2019 10:19:10   #
Seth
 
Iliamna1 wrote:
Now that's funny! amid a huge funeral for some illegal drug kingpin who was shot by the drug cartel.



Reply
 
 
Oct 19, 2019 11:15:31   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
greenmountaineer wrote:
Without the Electoral College, small states like Vermont will be totally swamped by NY and California. However, the Electoral College is not being used as the Constitution says. I watched on TV, our three electors vote. Now they are supposed to vote for two people, one of whom does not come from their state. Then when all the votes come to DC, they get counted. There is no provision for Primary votes or any input from the people at all. But rather than doing that, Governor Shumlin and two others merely cast three votes for Hillary and ignored Bernie. So they violated the Constitution right there. The President should not need input from the people, as he supposed to be an executive. He carries out and enforces laws passed by Congress. But we don't have that anymore. We elect kings for four year terms. Taking money that Congress voted to be used for some project and using it to build a wall, is misappropriation of funds. If I had done that when I was chairman of the Bolton Select Board, I'd have been thrown in jail. But I guess it's OK if you are a king.
Without the Electoral College, small states like ... (show quote)


Not misappropriation of funds at all. There is a case to be made that the southern border is a National Security issue. I believe this was ruled upon by the courts.

Reply
Oct 19, 2019 11:25:59   #
JimMe
 
JFlorio wrote:
I am 100% for the Electoral College. Full blown Democracy is basically mob rule. However; we hear a lot from the left about all votes should be counted? Hillary won because she won the popular vote, every vote is important and blah,blah, blah. Almost 40% of eligible voters didn’t bother to vote in the 2016 election. Doesn’t seem like the vote is all that popular. Here’s another interesting stat. If you threw out California Trump wins the popular vote by over 1 million. This is also another worthless stat. My point. Stick with the Electoral College. A brilliant idea for a country of States.
I am 100% for the Electoral College. Full blown De... (show quote)




Not only am I in favor of the Presidential Electoral College... I'm against State Legislatures mandating that their State's Plurality Winner receives 100% of their Electoral Votes...

I believe the concept of the Electoral College was the compromise between the more populated States - who wanted a "Total Plurality Winner of All The States" - and the less populated States - who wanted a "One State One Vote Plurality" - and the compromise was to have the President and Vice-President elected based on the States' Congressional Representation... This has the President and Vice-President elected by the Citizens within each House District, and the 2 Senators to represent the Voters' Statewide choice...

Read Our Constitution Article 2 Section 1:
House District Electorates were designed to represent how their House Districts' voters chose, and Senate Electorates to represent how their Statewide voters chose... Not "Winner Take All"...

However...
The States' Legislatures in 48 of Our 50 States have decided to make it a "Statewide Plurality Take All" for their State's Electoral Votes, which is Legal, but completely against what Our Constitution is looking for...

Reply
Oct 19, 2019 17:20:42   #
Lt. Rob Polans ret.
 
JFlorio wrote:
I am 100% for the Electoral College. Full blown Democracy is basically mob rule. However; we hear a lot from the left about all votes should be counted? Hillary won because she won the popular vote, every vote is important and blah,blah, blah. Almost 40% of eligible voters didn’t bother to vote in the 2016 election. Doesn’t seem like the vote is all that popular. Here’s another interesting stat. If you threw out California Trump wins the popular vote by over 1 million. This is also another worthless stat. My point. Stick with the Electoral College. A brilliant idea for a country of States.
I am 100% for the Electoral College. Full blown De... (show quote)


Actually, with all the fraud, 'dead votes', and illegals she lost even he popular vote.

Reply
Oct 19, 2019 18:36:56   #
bggamers Loc: georgia
 
greenmountaineer wrote:
Without the Electoral College, small states like Vermont will be totally swamped by NY and California. However, the Electoral College is not being used as the Constitution says. I watched on TV, our three electors vote. Now they are supposed to vote for two people, one of whom does not come from their state. Then when all the votes come to DC, they get counted. There is no provision for Primary votes or any input from the people at all. But rather than doing that, Governor Shumlin and two others merely cast three votes for Hillary and ignored Bernie. So they violated the Constitution right there. The President should not need input from the people, as he supposed to be an executive. He carries out and enforces laws passed by Congress. But we don't have that anymore. We elect kings for four year terms. Taking money that Congress voted to be used for some project and using it to build a wall, is misappropriation of funds. If I had done that when I was chairman of the Bolton Select Board, I'd have been thrown in jail. But I guess it's OK if you are a king.
Without the Electoral College, small states like ... (show quote)


I would rather have my taxes build a wall than to have illegals flooding this country and living on our wellfare and food stamps with free housing and medical thrown in THANK YOU

Reply
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.