If you've ever lived in NY, IL, or CA, you know this.

How's it work in Canada?

The PM?

I wasn't sure on account of what you said to Sew earlier, whether it was via party or directly voting for him.

Well that line of thought definitely proves me wrong.

i get it....like in NY....which has been mostly republican in the past...New York City which is 78% democratic....if the city voters which has almost 19,000,000 one way, it wins the whole state. But this is a Republic...and wouldnt want it any other way. the electoral college makes it fair for all the middle states to have a say in who is elected. This is why illegal aliens shpuld never be counted on census...and we should not have sanctuary cities..because it leads to more congressional seats and higher electoral votes for the state

So you’re totally cool with majority rule in state, senate, and congressional races, but not for president.

i can move out of district...but i wont move out of this country

That seems reasonable, except that moving to where you’re a member of the majority just creates echo chambers and enemies. It also assumes that everyone who wants their vote to matter has the ability to uproot themselves.

Being from California I get what you are saying. Republicans can’t wil California so in effect they are not represented in the presidential vote. The problem isn’t the electoral college. The problem In California is the electors are decided by majority instead of apportioned. If apportioned about 25% of California’s electors would be Republican. That would change some things.

It would indeed. I’m not opposed to the idea.

The Democrats are

Apparently not all Democrats. I’m not opposed to the idea because it would be an incremental change toward the end goal of phasing out the electoral college. If you’re voting for an office who is supposed to act in the best interests of the nation as a whole, the nation as a whole should decide who occupies that office. A person in Wyoming’s opinion should not carry more weight than a person in NYC. The senate has checks and balances to keep the president in line; that’s where each state has equal power, so states with smaller populations have plenty of representation.

The Electoral college is there for a reason. It is there to prevent just what you are proposing. It’s about the country not being dominated by NY and California or any large population center which tend to be left leaning. All the people in New York and California should not be able to ride roughshod over all the other states. Simple majority leads to tyranny over the minority. The House is already structured to allow the larger population centers to have more representation. The electoral College has worked fine since the countries inception until Hillary lost. So now we need to change it? I’m not buying it.

Laws have to pass both the House and Senate. Presidential nominations have to be approved by the Senate. As such, the House and the President have to make decisions that will appease the Senate in order to accomplish anything. With the immense power the Senate wields, there is no need for the electoral college.

And this has happened before, not just in 2016.

It only became a problem for liberals when they lose, never hear anyone else complain about it when they lose

I’ve been hearing arguments against the electoral college since high school, from people on both sides. It’s a system that removes power from the people and gives it to politicians. Funny how Republicans are opposed to that.

Again it is there to deter majority tyranny. New York and California shouldn’t decide what’s best for Lincoln, Nebraska Or Reno, Nevada. The people are represented proportionally in the house and is why California and New York senators are prevalent. The change that may need to happen would be to the electors sent being proportional to the percentage of voters. No red states and blue states as all states would be divided in electors.

Huh. Clever reasoning.

A compelling argument.

“I’m right and don’t have to justify my answer because you’re wrong.”

If you’ve ever wondered how anyone could lean toward authoritarianism, here you have it.

I didn’t attach an ideology to the statement. People on both sides have the ability to lean toward authoritarianism. It’s just easier when it’s your person in power.

Repetition doesn’t create truth. I’m done with you.

Stunning rebuttal there.

Increasing the clout of small rural states is what the Senate is for. The electoral college negates tens of millions of minority-party votes and creates a power imbalance, where battleground states have an unfair share of the President’s attention during election season (which begins earlier every year).

clearly akeller has never lived in rural America. He probably calls it "flyover country" which is why we will have Trump another 4 years.

You are presumptuous. I grew up in rural America, and my first three election cycles were counted there. I hate that the only votes I cast that mattered were in local races. And yes, I voted Republican in all three of them.

Explain how a popular vote takes power away from the people.

I rarely pay attention when you talk nonsense. The tyranny of the majority is only something to be afraid of when there are no checks and balances in place. Are you saying each state should have an electoral college when it chooses a governor? How far down the line are you willing to go in taking power from the individual?

You’re using the Supreme Court as an example of the tyranny of the majority? The American people don’t have any direct say in who sits on the Supreme Court. They’re nominated by the President (who earns that place in a system that favors smaller states) and confirmed by the Senate (which very intentionally gives each state equal representation). So favoring small states (which were, at the time, mostly southern) created that majority.

You said yourself that your votes for President have never mattered. The EC takes that power away from you.

Your idea of what makes an extremist is ridiculous if you think I am one.

See, this is why I usually try not to listen to nonsense. I lose faith in the education system you came out of.

It’s a sacrifice you’ll happily make because it keeps your people in the White House. That’s it. If the popular vote favored Trump but Hillary was elected (and the same had happened in 2000 to Bush), you’d feel differently. You’d certainly not be willing to sacrifice your vote to help Democrats win.

The makeup of the Supreme Court is controlled completely by the states (Senate and a president elected by the electoral college). The House has almost no power without cooperation with the Senate. The President can’t appoint members of the Cabinet, SCOTUS justices, or Agency heads without Senate approval. In short, the states have immense (and each has equal) power without the electoral college. Do you even know how this government works?

I think I had a better understanding of the political process on my first day of middle school than you do now. Do yourself and the candidate you would be supporting a favor and don’t volunteer to phone bank during any election season.