- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Does this election prove the great forethought of the Electoral College?
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:02 am
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:02 am
The country map is ruby red, and Trump could still possibly win enough states to get 300+... yet Hillary won the popular vote thanks to the big cities like NYC, L.A., et al
This, even more than 2000, shows the electoral college actually does work
This, even more than 2000, shows the electoral college actually does work
10
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:04 am to rt3
Yep.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:07 am to rt3
It's flawed but nothing will be perfect.
I could see maybe awarding some EVs for winning the popular vote.
I could see maybe awarding some EVs for winning the popular vote.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:07 am to rt3
Yep, the Electoral Collage forces the Presidents to campaign across the entire country.
Without it all you would have to do is hit the big cities.
Without it all you would have to do is hit the big cities.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:08 am to rt3
Should land decide and not people?
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:08 am to rt3
They work but the need to be able to split. Too much power in major cities that undermine rural voting.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:10 am to rt3
I think you could argue the same way that the EC doesn't work. I'm generally against it, but I'll take the win. Was hoping Trump would win the popular vote so this wouldn't be an issue though
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:11 am to SammyTiger
quote:
Should land decide and not people?
it's not land, but states, he won the STATES
the people of enough states across the country said "we want Trump"
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:12 am to SammyTiger
quote:
Should land decide and not people?
should be some combination.
what's good for New York City ain't necessarily good for the entire rest of the country.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:13 am to IAmReality
quote:
Without it all you would have to do is hit the big cities.
Even now voters in big cities drown out the voices in the rest of the state.
I'd much rather see EC votes within a state distributed by percentage of vote or by congressional district/with the popular vote winner within the state getting a +2 for the senate seats.
This post was edited on 11/9/16 at 10:14 am
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:13 am to Nutriaitch
also... Trump maintained about a 2% popular lead all night until the left coast (CA, OR, WA) came in
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:14 am to rt3
Should be one vote per state.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:15 am to LSUGrad00
quote:
Even now voters in big cities drown out the voices in the rest of the state.
I'd much rather see EC votes within a state distributed by percentage of vote or by congressional district/with the popular vote winner getting a +2 for the senate seats.
I'd liken it to penalty kicks to win the World Cup (yes I just brought in soccer)
it's the perfectly imperfect way to do it
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:15 am to LSUGrad00
yeah I am not crazy about the winner take all attitude.
but happy this worked in my favor for once.
but happy this worked in my favor for once.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:15 am to rt3
If not for the electoral college, campaigning would be done exclusively in NYC, Chicago, Detroit, etc. A brilliant system.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:16 am to IAmReality
quote:
Without it all you would have to do is hit the big cities.
True, then they could also push for population increases in these areas and tend to their needs above others.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:17 am to airfernando
quote:No way. The EC is the best way to balance the popular vote with the needs of the states. One vote per state would swing too far toward giving control to a small share of the US population. Abolishing the EC would swing too far toward giving control to densely populated cities who are out of touch with suburban and rural Americans.
Should be one vote per state.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:18 am to rt3
Yes, Indeed. The EC is the only way rural america gets representation in government. Without it, we have mob rule.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:18 am to rpg37
quote:Agreed. It would be unjust for only citizens of large cities to have a say in who leads the country.
If not for the electoral college, campaigning would be done exclusively in NYC, Chicago, Detroit, etc. A brilliant system.
I don't like the outcome, but it was the "right" outcome and is in keeping with the ideals of American democratic republicanism.
Posted on 11/9/16 at 10:19 am to rt3
But didn't Trump want to get rid of it not too long ago?
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News