If she only focuses on New York State, California, and Chicago, like Clinton did, she will indeed likely lose.

If they change to a straight popular vote the left will win every
election, and need only carry the Washington-Boston corridor, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles - all of which are bastions of Corruptocrats

Perfect example of how the Electoral College does work. Back then, I guess it would have been NYC and Philly. It is set up, in part, so that the candidates cannot ignore large swaths of the country. HRC did that and the Electoral College did its job by keeping her out of office.

People don't understand that the president/veep are elected by the
states, not by the people. I think that the states that now require that
their electors vote for the candidate with the highest *nationwide* vote
total - even if that candidate received precisely zero votes in their
state - are dumber than the proverbial box of rocks - and, of course,
they're defeating the purpose of the EC. The Founders didn't trust the
voters - at the time rich, property owning, white males - to directly
elect the president
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fido Since 1991 | QWK by Web | BBS.FIDOSYSOP.ORG (1:123/140)

The Corruptocrats screamed bloody murder - and, of course, wanted

to do

away with the Electoral College (the left has wanted to do that for at least thirty years).

That sounds like their style.

What do you think about the electoral college?

It's the method the Founders decided upon that allows the STATES to elect
the president/veep.

What would be the drawback of

erasing it? (Besides swamp-monsters becoming commanders?)

The president/veep would be elected by the Boston-DC corridor, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco (Bay Area), Los Angeles and, maybe, Dallas.
Everyplace else in the country safely could be ignored. All of those
places (except, maybe, Dallas) are bastions of the Corruptocrats
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
* Origin: Fido Since 1991 | QWK by Web | BBS.FIDOSYSOP.ORG (1:123/140)

People don't understand that the president/veep are elected by the
states, not by the people. I think that the states that now require that their electors vote for the candidate with the highest *nationwide* vote total - even if that candidate received precisely zero votes in their
state - are dumber than the proverbial box of rocks - and, of course,
they're defeating the purpose of the EC. The Founders didn't trust the voters - at the time rich, property owning, white males - to directly
elect the president

I have not paid too much attention but it was my impression that most of
the states that are doing that are states that the Democrats usually win anyway. They are assuming that because it happened this last time, that
the Democrats will always win the popular vote. Seeing as how assuming
makes an ass out of the person doing it... if those states had that law in 2004, 1988, 1984, 1980, etc., they'd would have been forced to cast their
state votes for the Republicans instead. So, yeah, in those instances it will really screw their state voters.

Otherwise, their state voters won't notice much of a difference, and
neither would we, because their state will likely vote for the Democrat.

Mike

---
* SLMR 2.1a * Suicidal dyslexic jumps behind train - film at 11
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Re: Re: Peurto Rico
By: BOB ACKLEY to AARON THOMAS on Mon May 13 2019 04:27 pm

The Corruptocrats screamed bloody murder - and, of course, wanted

to do

away with the Electoral College (the left has wanted to do that
for at least thirty years).

What do you think about the electoral college?

It's the method the Founders decided upon that allows the STATES to elect the president/veep.

What would be the drawback of

erasing it? (Besides swamp-monsters becoming commanders?)

The president/veep would be elected by the Boston-DC corridor, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco (Bay Area), Los Angeles and, maybe, Dallas. Everyplace else in the country safely could be ignored. All of those

Nah New York would be the Major player for the Dems.The state would cast a dark shadow over any of the surrounding states.
Regards,
Steve Wolf
HusTler/Heliarc SysOp
Havens BBS *havens.synchro.net (1:267/160)*
--- SBBSecho 3.07-Win32
* Origin: Diamond Mine Online BBS bbs.dmine.net:24 1:275/89 (1:275/89)

Hello Bob,

The Corruptocrats screamed bloody murder - and, of course, wanted

to do

away with the Electoral College (the left has wanted to do that for

at

least thirty years).

That sounds like their style.

What do you think about the electoral college?

It's the method the Founders decided upon that allows the STATES to elect
the president/veep.

If no candidate receives a majority of electoral votes, then
the House of Representatives chooses the president with each state
having 1 vote, and the Senate chooses the vice president with each
senator having 1 vote.

What would be the drawback of

erasing it? (Besides swamp-monsters becoming commanders?)

The president/veep would be elected by the Boston-DC corridor, Chicago, >Seattle, San Francisco (Bay Area), Los Angeles and, maybe, Dallas.
Everyplace else in the country safely could be ignored. All of those
places (except, maybe, Dallas) are bastions of the Corruptocrats

The candidates would campaign differently, and visit more places.
The electoral college process is far more limiting, resulting in
much fewer campaign stops for candidates.

IOW, the electoral college process is nothing more than a polite
fiction. A means to con the electorate into believing it is taking
part in a fair election.

--Lee

--
We're Great In Bed

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)

The candidates would campaign differently, and visit more places.
The electoral college process is far more limiting, resulting in
much fewer campaign stops for candidates.

No, you have that wrong. Remember, that is what Hilarious tried (fewer
stops) and it DID NOT WORK. If there was no electoral college, what she did would have worked. She would only need to campaign and play to the areas
that Bob listed. She'd never visit Kentucky or any state that surrounds it (except maybe Northern Virginia). She'd certainly have gotten away with ignoring Wisconsin and Michigan.

IOW, the electoral college process is nothing more than a polite
fiction. A means to con the electorate into believing it is taking
part in a fair election.

The only times it has been "unfair" is when a Democrat has not managed to
win it.

Mike

---
* SLMR 2.1a * Visit Scenic Melnibon
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

The only times it has been "unfair" is when a Democrat has not managed to win it.

When put in its proper perspective, i,e, the President is chosen by the States and not by the people, it makes perfect sense.

Our head of government, i.e. the Prime Minister, is not elected either and I think that's true for about every other country around here.

The difference, I think, lies in the amount of power the head of state gets.

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

IOW, the electoral college process is nothing more than a polite
fiction. A means to con the electorate into believing it is taking
part in a fair election.

But it works great when it gets Indonesians elected :)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Alcoholiday / Est. 1995 / alco.bbs.io (1:123/525)

When put in its proper perspective, i,e, the President is chosen by the States >and not by the people, it makes perfect sense.

Correct.

Our head of government, i.e. the Prime Minister, is not elected either and I >think that's true for about every other country around here.

The difference, I think, lies in the amount of power the head of state gets.

Or maybe the perceived amount of power. I don't think that the President
has as much power as we citizens perceive the position to have. They get blamed, and credited, for a lot of things they don't really have much true participation in.

Mike

---
* SLMR 2.1a * If you believe in telekinesis, please raise my hand.
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Hello Mike,

The candidates would campaign differently, and visit more places.
The electoral college process is far more limiting, resulting in
much fewer campaign stops for candidates.

No, you have that wrong. Remember, that is what Hilarious tried (fewer >stops) and it DID NOT WORK. If there was no electoral college, what she did >would have worked. She would only need to campaign and play to the areas >that Bob listed. She'd never visit Kentucky or any state that surrounds it >(except maybe Northern Virginia). She'd certainly have gotten away with >ignoring Wisconsin and Michigan.

Both candidates would have played the game far differently had
there been no electoral college process. Who would have won under
those conditions is anybody's guess. Some would say Clinton, based
on her results from the election held under electoral college rules.
But that is speculative.

Before the election, Donald Trump said publicly he would prefer
a popular vote than the current electoral college process. After
the election, he changed his mind. As for who would have won had
it been a popular vote, Trump admitted the race would have been
contested by both candidates differently.

Trump also claimed the election was rigged, with lots of "fake"
votes having been counted for his opponent. Meaning he was the
one who got the most popular votes. After all, he counted those
votes himself ...

IOW, the electoral college process is nothing more than a polite
fiction. A means to con the electorate into believing it is taking
part in a fair election.

The only times it has been "unfair" is when a Democrat has not managed to
win it.

Gore v. Bush

Total votes cast - 9

GWB - 5
Al Gore 4

The closest election in US history.

--Lee

--
Everybody Loves Our Buns

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)

Hello Aaron,

IOW, the electoral college process is nothing more than a polite >LL>fiction. A means to con the electorate into believing it is taking >LL>part in a fair election.

But it works great when it gets Indonesians elected :)

I haven't seen many Indonesians with orange hair.
Except for Clyde the Orangatun, who starred in some
of Clint Eastwood's finest films ...

--Lee

--
Your Hole Is Our Goal

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)

Hello Mike,

When put in its proper perspective, i,e, the President is chosen by the
States
and not by the people, it makes perfect sense.

Correct.

Our head of government, i.e. the Prime Minister, is not elected either and
I
think that's true for about every other country around here.

The difference, I think, lies in the amount of power the head of state
gets.

Or maybe the perceived amount of power. I don't think that the President
has as much power as we citizens perceive the position to have. They get >blamed, and credited, for a lot of things they don't really have much true >participation in.

Which is the reality? Power, or the perception of power?

Is power a reality, or is it a perception? Trump tries to
give everybody the impression that he is the wealthiest person
on the face of this planet. Not that he is.

I'll agree with that. The presidency is a weak office, as given
in the US Constitution. Article I is about the Congress, noting
the office of US Representative first. Article II is about the
Executive Branch, noting the office of President sixth. Pretty
low in order of importance (amount of power), in my opinion.
Article III is about the Judicial Branch, whose members are
appointed rather than elected.

--Lee

--
It Ain't Payday If It Ain't Nuts In Your Mouth

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)

Your Hole Is Our Goal

You're QWK reader does Democrat taglines? :)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Alcoholiday / Est. 1995 / alco.bbs.io (1:123/525)

Hello Aaron,

Your Hole Is Our Goal

You're QWK reader does Democrat taglines? :)

I'll have to update them. Last time I did was after
the women's march in DC. Not sure if they were Democrats
or Republicans. But Madonna was there, and we all know
what she wanted to do with the White House. :)

--Lee

--
As Good As It Looks

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)