| Political Talk |
| Return to Board • Menu • Bottom | Page 1 of 4  |
| Message |
 Tancredo: Elect POTUS by popular votePosted by moneybadger LINK  on 4/7 at 11:46 amNever thought I'd agree with this guy.  This post was edited on 4/7 at 12:02 pm Reply • Back to Top |
| Good luck ever seeing the president in about 40 states if that was the case. Reply • Back to Top |
| F Dat. Three or so states would have all of the control over the process. Have you seen the images of how the country has voted by county over the last three electoral cycles? The Florida vote with all of its BS was decided correctly. The number of recounts (37 by the media) of the state ALL said GWB WON, but that hasn't stopped the bitch fest in 12 years This post was edited on 4/7 at 11:57 am Reply • Back to Top |
| DOA. No way 3/4 of the States would go for it. Reply • Back to Top |
| Did you not read your own link? Your thread's title is incorrect. From your link: quote: Reply • Back to Top |
quote: You're right, lost presidential photo ops would be a much bigger problem than, say, using a system that can result in Candidate A winning the presidency over Candidate B, despite receiving fewer votes. Reply • Back to Top |
| Adolph won the popular vote in his day, how well did that concept work? Reply • Back to Top |
quote: If they are that disproportionately larger than the other states, they deserve that control. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: Obviously you don't understand the real issue and why it exists. You should probably read about the reason the Electoral College is there before you advocate dismantling it. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: You're right. While we're at it, let's ban sex. After all, if his parents had never copulated, the Holocaust would have never happened. This post was edited on 4/7 at 12:12 pm Reply • Back to Top |
quote: Aren't you a liberal? Why are you advocating Social Darwinism then? I thought that was a No-No. If you aren't a liberal, then the above doesn't apply. I'm actually curious. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: I know why the founders thought we needed it. But half of them owned slaves, too. I think it's fair to assume there is a good possibility some of their positions are a little out of date. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: So why would you advocate a system that concentrates power in a few states that will greatly increase the chances of another dissolution of the Union? These things (Civil wars, countries literally falling apart) can and do happen. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: Now THAT'S funny right there, I don't care who you are....  Reply • Back to Top |
quote: Reading it "Halo-Caust" really does make me laugh. I feel guilty doing so though. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: My political beliefs aren't easily summarized by one word. quote: I don't put a lot of stake in that term. I think it's rather meaningless and can just as easily be applied to the electoral college. This post was edited on 4/7 at 12:13 pm Reply • Back to Top |
quote: I believe over states have already agreed to go by popular vote. These include small and large states. The overwhelming majority of people in this country want the presidency decided by popular vote. Reply • Back to Top |
| It was an unintentional typo kids, settle down. Reply • Back to Top |
| Read the Constitution. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: A funny unintentional typo. Not making fun of you. But really, IMO, show me 5 states getting all the love during presidential elections (and obviously, in the white house after the elections) and I show you 45 states who say "frick this noise." Reply • Back to Top • Refresh |
| Return to Board | ||
  Page 1 of 4  | ||
on 4/7 at 11:57 am to 
on 4/7 at 12:12 pm to