The popular vote.

[Jim Jones]

Can anyone point to a democracy, majority rules, government that succeeded?

 

[LongGone]

I tend to be more moderate than many on the forum. I voted for Hillary. Even though the election did not meet my preferences I still believe in the Electoral College. Without the Electoral College presidential candidates would only campaign in the most populous and appeal to the needs of those living in the most populous regions. Without the Electoral College the votes of those outside of population areas would have little impact. We talk about traditional swing states but the Electoral College gives any state no matter its size to potentially be a swing state or to impact the election. The Electoral College helps us to be a more centered politically than we would if all was done by popular vote. Most elections the popular vote and the electoral vote are the same but the way campaigns are run would be very different if all was decided on popular vote. Not a perfect system but one that has served us well. 

 

[biscuit1953]

 

[Tatterdemalion]

Why is a Star Trek character telling me this?

 

[biscuit1953]

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

You are consistent at least even if you are consistently misinformed.
The 'founding fathers' were not monolithic and many of them were a part of the abolitionist movement.

And yet, many weren't. Not to mention, many (most?) believed women should not have the right to vote either. Their own wives! So don't give me this crap that they were all about "freedom" while literally discriminating against much of the population; those who were not white males. They had some good insights, no doubt about it. But there were many who refused to allow freedoms of others while signing off they did. They created the history for many of the problems we are experiencing today. They should be as responsible for the bad parts of their governing ideas as much as credited for the good parts.

These ungrateful Cubans! Don't they know they lived in the land of liberal nirvana!
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/dozens-cuban-migrants-land-florida-keys-media-reports-213412795.html

 

[HeDied4U]

Now the Electoral College is racist? What a lark! It put Obama in twice and Hillary's husband in twice. Until Trump won, Hillary was excited about having them "in the bag."

The "progressives" keep racism alive. It's an old, worn out tactic that undermines the suffering of previous generations.

I can't wait until Monday when this will be over


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

AMEN!!

 

[HeDied4U]

 

[biscuit1953]

For the forum infidel/apostate (Smellin) the reason women weren't allowed to vote is because America was founded upon Biblical principles and one being that the man was the "head of the house" and he voted for his family.  The concept of the family of course in 2016 has been so perverted that when they legalize marriage between a man and a dog (and it will happen) they will get tax deductions just as any other "family".  There is no hard set Biblical rule that women shouldn't vote but the founding fathers used that principle at that time.

 

[LongGone]

Big surprise there is a higher crime rate in more densely populated areas.

 

[LongGone]

For the forum infidel/apostate (Smellin) the reason women weren't allowed to vote is because America was founded upon Biblical principles and one being that the man was the "head of the house" and he voted for his family.  The concept of the family of course in 2016 has been so perverted that when they legalize marriage between a man and a dog (and it will happen) they will get tax deductions just as any other "family".  There is no hard set Biblical rule that women shouldn't vote but the founding fathers used that principle at that time.

So widows with children were not families...single males living with their parents were families and but single women living alone were not families. Whatever the reason it was done the logic is hard to follow.

 

[biscuit1953]

For the forum infidel/apostate (Smellin) the reason women weren't allowed to vote is because America was founded upon Biblical principles and one being that the man was the "head of the house" and he voted for his family.  The concept of the family of course in 2016 has been so perverted that when they legalize marriage between a man and a dog (and it will happen) they will get tax deductions just as any other "family".  There is no hard set Biblical rule that women shouldn't vote but the founding fathers used that principle at that time.

So widows with children were not families...single males living with their parents were families and but single women living alone were not families. Whatever the reason it was done the logic is hard to follow.

We live in an imperfect world but single women were under the authority of their fathers until they married. 

 

[biscuit1953]

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

You are consistent at least even if you are consistently misinformed.
The 'founding fathers' were not monolithic and many of them were a part of the abolitionist movement.

And yet, many weren't. Not to mention, many (most?) believed women should not have the right to vote either. Their own wives! So don't give me this crap that they were all about "freedom" while literally discriminating against much of the population; those who were not white males. They had some good insights, no doubt about it. But there were many who refused to allow freedoms of others while signing off they did. They created the history for many of the problems we are experiencing today. They should be as responsible for the bad parts of their governing ideas as much as credited for the good parts.

The founding fathers, I repeat, were not monolithic. They were not perfect human beings, they were not committed Christians, they were not united in their convictions.

Yet, they had the foresight to lay the foundation for what was to rapidly become one of the greatest nations on earth...by whatever standard you might choose to measure it. They allowed for the constitution to be amended because they knew that cultural norms, public opinions and political, economic and military circumstances would change.

That is proven true in practical, literal ways...mainly the direction the desperate flotillas have always traveled...toward the USA and away from countries that have policies, convictions and philosophy that you champion here.

And, that is a fact! 

 

[Ransom]

And I thank you for your honesty.

You're being sarcastic, but of course I was pointing out what liberals are really saying: I'm better than them.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

And I thank you for your honesty.

You're being sarcastic, but of course I was pointing out what liberals are really saying: I'm better than them.

Actually, I was not being sarcastic because I thought you mentioned the truth. I appreciate authenticity even though I might disagree with the conclusion.

 

[sword]

If you like this map, check out the one for the 1984 presidential election.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/1984nationwidecountymapshadedbyvoteshare.svg/500px-1984nationwidecountymapshadedbyvoteshare.svg.png
Notice California used to be almost completely red before the over 1 million legal immigrants and 2.5 to 3 million* illegal immigrants moved in.

*According to the Pew Research Center

 

[Ransom]

The popular vote

. . . is now moot, and the fact that more faithless electors broke ranks with the Democrats than the Republicans ought to make some leftard heads explode.

 

[LongGone]

If you like this map, check out the one for the 1984 presidential election.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/1984nationwidecountymapshadedbyvoteshare.svg/500px-1984nationwidecountymapshadedbyvoteshare.svg.png
Notice California used to be almost completely red before the over 1 million legal immigrants and 2.5 to 3 million* illegal immigrants moved in.

*According to the Pew Research Center

Not sure what point you are trying to make. Immigrants (legal or not) do not vote. Considering the population of California is 38 million the number is not overwhelming. You used an election that was one of the biggest landslides ever with a extremely popular Californian running.

 

[biscuit1953]

If you like this map, check out the one for the 1984 presidential election.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/1984nationwidecountymapshadedbyvoteshare.svg/500px-1984nationwidecountymapshadedbyvoteshare.svg.png
Notice California used to be almost completely red before the over 1 million legal immigrants and 2.5 to 3 million* illegal immigrants moved in.

*According to the Pew Research Center

Not sure what point you are trying to make. Immigrants (legal or not) do not vote. Considering the population of California is 38 million the number is not overwhelming. You used an election that was one of the biggest landslides ever with a extremely popular Californian running.

No one checks on who is voting in California and numerous undercover videos have been published showing how easy it is to claim to be someone they are not and still vote with no questions asked.  The only reason  the Democrats don't want any ID checks is obvious.  Smellin believes Black people are so stupid or helpless that if someone asks them to prove who they are at the polls by showing an ID they are being "oppressed."  I posted one video of a Democrat exposing the cheating going on in New York.  Here is another.  Warning!!  They use some foul language.
http://projectveritasaction.com/rigging-election-video-ii-mass-voter-fraud.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDc8PVCvfKs