Imgflip Logo Icon

The left still whining about how Clinton won the popular vote. I guess they forgot that we're a Constitutional Republic.

The left still whining about how Clinton won the popular vote. I guess they forgot that we're a Constitutional Republic. | HILLARY CLINTON WON THE POPULAR VOTE AND THEREFORE SHOULD BE PRESIDNT RIGHT NOW! AND HOW DID THAT WORK OUT FOR YOU? | image tagged in memes,leonardo dicaprio cheers,screaming liberal | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
867 views 11 upvotes Made by anonymous 5 years ago in politics
8 Comments
1 up, 5y,
1 reply
Why an Electoral College vote that differs widely from the popular vote is important: The voters’ mandate is thwarted. | LOST BY 3 MILLION VOTES AND STILL WON this only happens in dictatorships, ya know | image tagged in roll safe think about it,electoral college,popular vote,democracy,elections,2016 election | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
It is a problem, and we should talk about it.

No other democracy in the world follows a presidential election system like ours. In those countries, if you win the most votes, you win. Not here.

Although curiously, all our other elections are tallied by a simple popular vote: ever since the 17th Amendment established the popular vote for U.S. Senators: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution.

Only the vote for President remains different. Indeed, the Electoral College is specified in our Constitution and hasn't yet been revoked and replaced with a popular vote in a manner similar to the 17th Amendment.

BUT...

There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates states allocate their electoral votes in a "winner-take-all" fashion. Some states apportion their electoral votes differently. More, or all, of them can do the same.

Are any of you aware of writings from our Founding Fathers saying "winner-take-all" is an essential ingredient of our Republic? I'm not.

If states voluntarily discontinue (or if the Supreme Court declares unconstitutional) the winner-take-all apportionment of electoral votes, then you'll get something closely resembling a popular vote overnight.

This is my modest proposal for reform of the Electoral College that would require no constitutional amendment whatsoever.
[deleted]
1 up, 5y,
1 reply
I've already gone into great lengths about why we have the electoral system. I won't do it again.

And no, this is not how dictatorship works. In a dictatorship, there is only one dictator and they either have no election like North Korea where the chosen family stays in power and suppresses its people into submission, or they have a sham election like Russia,where there is a clear winner but they make it look as if there was a fair election and they still suppress the people into submission. No election is won with one candidate winning 98% of the vote (Putin).

If you don't understand how the electoral system works, well then I can't really do anything about that. The Democrats (you included) want majority rules. That's all fine and good, but only one party would stay in power and there wouldn't be any checks and balances.

But again, I'm not going to explain it for the umpteenth time on here so you'll just have to either do some research or just keep believing majority rules is a good thing.
1 up, 5y
Constitutional amendments are tough. This would be an easier path. | Abolish the Electoral College! Reform the Electoral College by abolishing “winner-take-all” | image tagged in drake hotline bling,popular vote,electoral college,elections,2016 election,democracy | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
Every dictatorship is a little different. Some don’t hold elections, some do. Russia is one of those that does, but the outcome is never in doubt.

Russia actually has a sophisticated “democracy theater.” There are loyal “opposition parties” (like the Communist Party, and the “Liberal Democratic Party” which is nothing of the sort) that get all kinds of perks from the ruling party (United Russia). And then you have the genuine opposition (Navalny, etc.) which is routinely arrested and disqualified.

In terms of daily life, Russia is on the whole a bit freer than the completely totalitarian North Korea. But both Russia’s and North Korea’s (officially the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”) claims to being “democracies” can be easily dismissed.

Now...

“Majority rules” is what every other true democracy on earth practices. And it is what we ourselves practice in elections for Senator, Governor, the House of Representatives, and lower offices.

The GOP does just fine.

All a popular vote for President (or its equivalent) would do in practical terms is make the GOP have to move slightly to the left to remain competitive, and make all of us less beholden to the particular whims of those who live in swing states.

Presidential Elections would actually be contested in our largest population centers (NYC, LA, SF, Chicago, Dallas, Houston) rather than completely written off because of the solid red/blue states they’re in — wouldn’t that be something?
[deleted]
1 up, 5y,
2 replies
That was 31/2 years ago, sounds like YOU need to let go.
[deleted]
2 ups, 5y,
1 reply
I only talk about things that are still being shouted.
[deleted]
1 up, 5y,
1 reply
I don't hear or see it on here anymore unless it's some righty like youself running out shit to spew, how about them emails?
[deleted]
2 ups, 5y
I don't spend my entire time on this site.
0 ups, 5y
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
EXTRA IMAGES ADDED: 1
  • Screaming Liberal
  • Leonardo Dicaprio Cheers
  • IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
    HILLARY CLINTON WON THE POPULAR VOTE AND THEREFORE SHOULD BE PRESIDNT RIGHT NOW! AND HOW DID THAT WORK OUT FOR YOU?