Less people vote for candidate A

>less people vote for candidate A
>he wins


Other urls found in this thread:


This will happen to trump too but reversed.

He'll get the majority votes, but not the electoral collage.

bush did 9/11

all knows

>Carry less states


Also remember UKIP last election.


What the fucking hell is wrong with USA?

>royal family inherits power through a millennium of incest


The electoral college was a mistake

>archaic inbred monarchy still exists yet holds absolutely zero power


Its called Voter Fraud, faggot.
Look it up.

1. Also Gore cheated on his voting
2. You are not American, no matter what you say everything you say about America in any capacity will ever be right

Bush won fairly though.


States decide the president, not the people.

Learn some facts chuckle-cuck.

>unironically advocating for pure democracy

Kill yourself. The Electoral College is like a sprinkle on a pile of shit.

How so?

The windsors/hanovees werent too much inbreeds like the habsburgs

>Unironically advocating for the EC
Kill yourself

what the fuck happened
>red republican
>blue democrat
why was everything backwards?

I don't know anyone who is in favor of keeping the electoral college. Everyone I know regardless of their political leanings is in favor of a national popular vote.

>it's another leaf who thinks he understands how the electorate works episode
these reruns are getting old

>13% of the total vote
>0.15% of the seats in the Parliament


google solid south

your argument doesn't make sense at all

But the UK system allows for more powerful third parties so if seats were directly proportional we'd have nothing but Italian style coalitions

>people mad at this but they dont vote in any public elections or attend a town hall/committee meeting

nothing to blame but yourself

That's because every layman's first response to "Should we keep the electoral college?" is "What the fuck is the electoral college?", and then they refuse to learn what it is.

My dumbass sister literally tried to tell me that the members of the EC were chosen by the two presidential candidates, and that those chosen could vote however they wanted.

thank you

good read

>Against democracy

Nothing new here

>But the UK system allows for more powerful third parties

Are you retarded? Due to the FPTP system, there will never be a relevant third party.

More powerful compared to America and the UK literally had a coalition government a year ago I'd say that means the Lib Dems were relevant

I used to be against the electoral college, but you guys really don't want my blue state to control elections more than they already do.

>My dumbass sister literally tried to tell me that the members of the EC were chosen by the two presidential candidates, and that those chosen could vote however they wanted.
She's only half wrong

Remind me of what Lib Dems were able to accomplish during their time in the government.
Which policies did the Tories change because of that coalition?

>democracy works when I win
Burgers actually believe this

The electoral college prevents mob rule from being the number one reason a candidate wins.

A 2 party system just allows you to pick which color asshole you want sitting on you. What is the point?

That may have been true. But Gore is a Dick

Stopped Snoopers charter, Human Rights Act, invested more in green energy and enviroment

>dumb foreigners think full democracy is a good idea

Newsflash lads, this is a republic, not a democracy.
It's a damn good thing we have the electoral college because it lets states represent their interests even if they have a low population. This is good because even states with barely any people like the Dakotas and Montana are very important to our economy because of their resources. If it were up to retarded city liberals in CA and NY, all our coal mines and oil wells would be shutdown and the country would fucking collapse.
The EC saves America from mob rule.

Actually many of the electors can vote any way they want. A few states have laws binding their electors to the will of that state's voters. However, among those that do not have such laws the electors can vote for anyone they choose and are not even bound to the presidential candidates on the ballot. They can vote for Mickey Mouse if they want.

because local elections party affiliation doesnt really matter

Republics are a form of democracy. It's just not a direct democracy.

Our constitution is the only reason our country hasn't gone to shit

We're not a democracy, we have a democratic form of voting but we're not a democracy. Democracy isn't a catchall term

fuck you thats jebs big bro

You do know Bush literally stole the election right?

Gore won Florida

It is though. The term is representative democracy to be specific.

We're a representative republic, you moron.

It was purposely setup that way so majoritarian politics wouldn't take over the government.

Al Gore and Bush knew the rules of the game. Al Gore lost, Bush won.

His brother jeb gave him Florida.

>government comes to confiscate your guns
>you let them

explain to me how elections work in USA of A land

Republics are democracies dumbass.

Even if that was true, Bush still had nine more states

Democratic republics to be more specific. Otherwise 99% of countries on Eart wouldn't be democracies.

America is a republic and the system it uses is a representative democracy.

Republic simply means elected officials representing their civilian groups.

Out of the dozens of systems to have a republic, America uses the system of a representative democracy.

Money in, money out.

>balancing representation per individual voter and representation per individual state

florida caused him to win and it is true.
literally stolen election.

The person who wins the most votes in one state wins that state. Each state is worth a certain amount of points in the electoral college. Candidate with the most points wins.

it's no worse than the UK

>Unironically advocating removal of one of the few aspects of state sovereignty we still have
The only thing wrong with the Electoral college is each state doesn't have he same amount of electoral votes

it doesnt

There should be no balance
We are a Union of 50 states
not 300 million people
The house should be eliminated

To be precise, each state is worth a number of electoral college votes equivalent to the size of its congressional delegation (i.e. number of House representatives + 2 US Senate seats).

I know this is hard to understand, but we're a Republic, not a full blown democracy, thank God.

Bush would have still won if the recount was done the way Al Gore wanted it.

However depending on how you did the recount, Bush would have still likely edged out ahead but was still possible for Al Gore to have edged it out.

The difference in votes were less than 0.01%, the only way to put it to rest would have been to have a reelection in Florida.

Thats exactly how its going to happen. There are no rules saying you can't bribe electoral colleagues for voting power. Its literally based off faith they'll vote with their states populous in mind but really they can vote for whoever they want.

The Queen has to sign every single case by herself, she also gives advises to the parliament.

Swiss's system is quite good desu

What you mean to say is that you think the Union should be dissolved.

Or do you seriously think that we could maintain a national government without a nationally-representative legislature?

I think romney had that problem too. Most votes but obamas electorals tho were high

>unironically being happy that some people decide for him who is the president

Well, americans love their nanny state...

No, Obama beat Romney by about six million votes.

>Senate represents the states on equal footing
>House represents the population
>bills must pass through both the House and the Senate to become law

Seems like an acceptable system to me, we are ONE nation made up of 50 states.

We would still have the senate

Most states have laws against faithless electors. Plus the electoral college would never do that anyway for obvious reasons

Then why are some states given more votes than others?

Lib Dems were on track for 100 seats with Clegg at his peak

Can't a party win 50% of parliament while having less votes in the UK as well?

>Be British
>>Criticize American popular vote

Have you seen how your Parliament works?

All states get equal votes in the Senate. The House represents different population districts within the states to give the voters in those districts their own "voice".

Liberal media suppressed conservative votes in Florida by repeatedly claiming Florida polls were closed despite the fact that the western panhandle, which is strongly conservative, still had polls open for another hour.

Yes, and the Senate, as you noted represents the interests of the 50 states, not 300 million people. The distinction is, to say the least, important. There's a reason the GOP has put so much effort in the gerrymandering the House.

>Then why are some states given more votes than others?
In what? The Electoral College?

their mottos 'freedom' and 'democracy' really make you think

the entire purpose of the electoral college is to give smaller states more influence in the federal government so that national policy is not totally dominated by a few large states

it was a necessary compromise that goes all the way back to the founding of the republic when the smaller colonies like Georgia, Delaware, Rhode Island, New Hampsire, New Jersey, South Carolina demanded more representation

Virginia was larger than the 6 smallest of the 13 colonies combined

meanwhile in UK, UKIP gets 12.6% of the vote but 0.2% of seats

>only western country with any semblance of a right wing
>Nanny state

Not an American but I'm pretty sure the establishment won't let the electoral college vote trump in, even if a few laws have to be bent

And this leads to states getting more representation than others both in Congress and the Presidency
This kills Federalism

most states have laws against electors doing that.

You only believe this because you haven't been paying attention.

>In what? The Electoral College?
Both the House and Electoral College

Dixiecrats happened. The republican party was anathema in the south for 100 years after the civil war. You ran as a democrat regardless of political ideology.

That's when we take down the government and build it again.

>with any semblance of a right wing
>right wing


You nigger

>democracy is mob rule when I don't like it

was it because lincoln was a republican and fought the south?

genuinely curious I don't know about this

So you'd rather have Delaware have the exact same political clout as Texas despite it having less than 1/27th of the population of Texas?

>implying I said trump


Eh, he at least won both in 2004.

Better than Bill Clinton who won both elections with under 50% of the popular vote.

The electoral college makes perfect sense and only idiots who don't understand it disagree.

Is this really the only one?

I assumed it was unlikely but not THAT unlikely

but electoral college is literally mob rule on a state by state basis
>republican voters in cali all have their electoral college votes cast for the democratic president, despite voting for the other candidate, because more people in that state voted democrat
>not literally mob rule

he didnt though. Bush won recounts 6 out of the 9 methods the use for counting votes.

If that's the case then the Federal government would have to be scaled WAY back and have much of the fed's duties/powers handed back over to the states themselves.

>First pass the post voting system
>48% vs 47%
Enjoy the mob rule ;)

>Federal government would have to be scaled WAY back and have much of the fed's duties/powers handed back over to the states themselves.
oy vey we cant let that happen
it would be like the 6 million all over again

Slit your own throat Leftypol.

>constitution says we the people
>states decide

finished your homework yet?

It happened twice in the 19th century. Almost happened in the early 20th century.

I still fail to understand how they could manage to keep coming up with significantly different results after multiple recounts.

Don't get me wrong, I'm more Libertarian than anything and an advocate of state's rights over federal oversight, I just don't see that ever happening in my lifetime.

Literally happened the previous election cycle you fucking pleb.

Then the third party went full retard and imploded.

Increasing the personal allowance was a key lib dem manifesto pledge

>wahhh something happened I don't like so it's shit

depended on what method they used for determining a valid vote.

Lenient standard. Any alteration in a chad, ranging from a dimple to a full punch, counts as a vote. By this standard, Bush won by 1,665 votes.
Palm Beach standard. A dimple is counted as a vote if other races on the same ballot show dimples as well. By this standard, Bush won by 884 votes.
Two-corner standard. A chad with two or more corners removed is counted as a vote. This is the most common standard in use. By this standard, Bush won by 363 votes.
Strict standard. Only a fully removed chad counts as a vote. By this standard, Gore won by 3 votes.

Including overvotes in the above totals for undervotes gives different margins of victory:

Lenient standard. Gore by 332 votes.
Palm Beach standard. Gore by 242 votes.
Two-corner standard. Bush by 407 votes.
Strict standard. Bush by 152 votes.

le shadow government maymay xDD

user, you have to disentangle your conception of the House of Representatives and the states. Again, as you first indicated, the 50 states are distinct from the people who inhabit them. The House represents the collective will of the people independent their state of residence (notwithstanding that state governments play the chief role in determining which House district individuals vote in).

As it stands, the Electoral College is structurally predisposed to favor the interests of Federalist America (because smaller states are disproportionately represented in it by their US senators). Obviously you would prefer the balance of power to be tilted completely in favor of Federalism, which I will reiterate would be tantamount to dissolving the Union. Because no matter what you think of them, you must realize that the 40 million residents of California would not tolerate having the same national legislative representation as the people Wyoming.

Of course he would, because he's counting on the majority of states remaining red in perpetuity. Which is a hopeless wish.

Sounds like some shit-tier ballot design to me. All elections I've participated in had scantrons where you just colored in a bubble next to the candidate's name using a pen and it was then deposited into a machine that read and stored the ballot.

>I just don't see that ever happening in my lifetime.
The feds are making too many promises they can't keep and will probably collapse within 50 years

>he fell for the democracy meme

In 50 years I'll be 78. There's a good chance I won't live that long.

>that the 40 million residents of California would not tolerate having the same national legislative representation as the people Wyoming.
Good bye

It's happened several times man. Just never has made a difference.

>mfw this happens this year and Trump loses because of it
The butthurt will be never ending.

Yeah, we should let California and New York decide all of our elections for us. I'm sure the other 48 states will be pleased with that.

>cities should overpower everything

It's much more likely that Clinton would win the popular vote and lose the EC than that Trump would.

>40% of states vote for candidate B
>he should win

Not all states are equal fag. We could nuke the midwest and the south and lose zero productivity.

>We could nuke the midwest and the south and lose zero productivity.

Where will you get bread?

We could nuke California and solve 90% of this country's problems

Well your country is called united states of america not united america

>Four million votes
>1 (one) seat

And lose 40% of the agricultural output.

This. States rights ma nigga

Mostly just overpriced winter vegetables
The world will go on

Electoral college is intended to be a check against tyranny by the majority.

At least in America, the vast majority of the time, the President is chosen with a majority of the total vote

Unlike in the UK where Tories got 30% of the vote and rule a majority of the HoC

>advocating for Communism lite

Representative because of democracy, retard. Like every modern democratic form of government, it is representative. As opposed to fundamentally undemocratic republics like those which existed in Medieval Europe, in which the average citizen had no say at all in governance. Or direct democracies which simply dont work on a national level.

There is no real functional difference between the American republic and most other democratic governments, apart from the electoral college, which has less to do with it being an inately 'republican' asset and more with British-inherited political tradition.

I'm trying but it's pretty much nonexistent

Your retarded

Have fun with no readily available, cheap grain, livestock, or natural gas then...