The electoral college needs to go, its broken and only serves to disenfranchise voters

How long as it been since republicans won a presidential vote that is representative of the population of the citizens of America?

 

Their job is to void citizens votes or “group them” so they mean nothing? You cannot be serious

 

Oh look - you got caught moving the goalposts, and NOW you want a do-over. How cute.

Back to the points put to you, which you tried to side-step:
- Someone voting in WY is not voting in the same election as someone voting in NY, so your comparison is invalid and unsound.
- No one has ever won a "national vote" - your term - as there is no "national vote" - all elections are state elections.
- What governmental entity, empowered by law, certified the 'popular vote'?

 

How long as it been since republicans won a presidential vote that is representative of the population of the citizens of America?

 

Ah - you cannot handle the fact you were caught moving the goalposts, and you cannot address the issues put to you.
As I thought.

Please - feel free to continue your tantrum.

 

It’s a rational response to your lack of knowledge about the homeless related public health issue in major California cities.

 

Not a tantrum, I was discussing the op and it’s claim that the electoral college disenfranchises voters. Thus the question, How long as it been since republicans won a presidential vote that is representative of the population of the citizens of America?

I don’t care what the current law is, that is not the basis of the discussion as set forth in the OP, the discussion is why the law needs to go.

Care to answer the question or we can continue this mindless copy and paste.

 

Both of my statements are absolutely true. Do your homework. It’s completely obvious.

 

the homelessness is caused by extreme population density. I’m not sure what part of that is funny? Care to elaborate?

 

False again.
Many liberals are against illegal immigration making your second point a flat out lie and trumps contributions to America are up to interpretation at best. Far from ‘fact’

 

yes and Texas votes mostly to the right, so what, should we remove Texas from the counts too, only count bipartisan states

 

yes, 1 vote equals 1 vote, so we do not get another affirmative action President like Trump

 

yes, your point?

the popular vote shows who most American voters wanted as their President... and in this case that was not Trump

you may not like that fact, but it's a fact none the less and is relevant to show Trump did not get the most votes, Hillary did, she got Millions more then Trump.. Sad!

no one is saying Trump did not win, that is not what is being discussed

 

Hillary got millions more votes then Trump, so obviously Trump's votes were worth more then 1 vote each

if one vote equaled one vote, Hillary would of won

 

Nothing has changed that you want 2-4 states to control every election over the will of the rest of the country. As far as the Left is concerned, only the big populated states matter. The rest can go to hell. You have to be smart enough to know they could have never got all those states to join unless they knew they would have a voice in how the country is run.

 

and you want affirmative action for the smaller states, so we have more affirmative action Presidents like Trump

 

The big states may not have had the popular vote elect the President, but their big numbers does give them more power in Congress to help make the laws over the smaller states. This way, both big and small states have a voice in how the government is run. Under a strictly popular vote the smaller states have virtually no say at all. The big states control everything.

 

Oh please. That’s ridiculous.

 

Name one.

The robust economy has eluded you ???

 

Who is proposing that ???

 

so saith the progressive haters of america!

 

Yes, I understand the need of the electoral college 250 years ago.
I do not understand the need for one now other than one party cannot make it off of policy alone.

Clinton had 8.7 million votes in California, I fail to see how 8.7 million votes could overrule the rest of the nation. If you take the top 4 states she won — California 8.7M, Florida 4.5M, New York 4.5M, and Texas at 3.8M — that is far from the number needed to elect a president which had 62M voters.

Your math is off

 

just saying CA and TX are polor opposites, if were gonna talk about California voting left, then we also have to talk about TX voting right

 

Let me repeat myself, as you sort of missed it

The big states may not have had the popular vote elect the President, but their big numbers does give them more power in Congress to help make the laws over the smaller states. This way, both big and small states have a voice in how the government is run. Under a strictly popular vote the smaller states have virtually no say at all. The big states control everything. They would have never got a 13 state nation on just a popular vote.

 

In California but no where else, Trump won the majority in twice as many of the elections held than did Hillary. And again in which of those state elections did everyone's vote not count the same?