Agree 100%. But her comments and whining do erode the very trust that democrats have been parading around that they care about so much, so it is 100% part of the topic here.
And don't you think it's unfair that very sparsely populated states should play a disproportionate role in the selection of the president than states with much larger populations? The Electoral College is an anachronism that never operated as the Founders intended (read Federalist paper #68 for the rationale behind the EC). Under the EC as proposed by Hamilton a body of wise men selected by state legislatures would use their independent judgment in the selection of the president. One of Hamilton's concerns was that the popular vote could result in the election of a charismatic demagogue and that the EC as proposed by him would prevent that possibility. Ironically that's what happened in 2016 as the result of the EC. What's theoretically scary is that if state legislatures actually selected the electors the situation would be far worse than the current system of winner-take-all (with a very limited number of exceptions) based on the popular vote in the state. Given the opportunity heavily gerrymandered state legislatures would select electors who would vote for the candidate of their political party regardless of the popular vote not electors who would use their independent judgment as envisioned by Hamilton.
Agreed. Much of our federal government is structured as political affirmative action for white people. It is not the product of elegant design, but of political compromise and accidents of history and geography. And still they whine. They must have absolute power or they get violent. And they aren’t willing to compromise to obtain power legitimately
In a popular vote system, a state couldn't possibly do that, as they wouldn't vote. Only people vote. States would not. In fact, you just described the current system, in which only a few states matter while most do not. Now please explain why a person should matter based only on their position relative to a river in a fair system.
When everyone picks you to win and you lose, you lost BIGLY. Pure democracies don't work, which is why we are a republic. You cannot win 270 electoral votes if only one part of the country is supporting you. The electoral college protects against the tyranny of the majority. Look at our major cities that vote blue. The elected leaders are failing their residents. The corruption is so bad, their residents are fleeing to a more stable place to live and most likely done voting blue if they did in the first place. Hillary lost because she was an awful candidate. She lost because she was unlikable to independents. She lost to a man that the NYT's said only had a 9% chance. If you want fairness, I propose paper ballots and a national holiday of one day to vote. If you want fairness, let's run the bureaucrats out of DC. You want fairness, vote for servants and not career politicians. You don't really want fairness though.
We are the only country in the world, democratic or not, that has this relic of a system to pick the president. It needs to be scrapped. Since the majority of the American public has seen through the right's BS and understand that they only exist to meet the needs of giant corporations and billionaires, they are better served trying to rig elections through extreme gerrymandering and other dirty tricks like alternate electors than coming up with policy proposals that could win a national majority vote.
It's not the right or the left silly. The right and left are run by private entities. They act as one party and keep each other in power. They keep the billionaires happy and they fatten their bank accounts while "serving" at a $140-$190,000 a year salary . The billionaires run our country. Example : The Rockefeller Foundation. Almost half of the country follows the advice of the mainstream media (owned by the billionaires), which does not have your best interests in mind. Your talking points are sophomoric at best, which is a theme for you and the media talking heads.
You never post anything here but garbage from Gateway Pundit and the like. You are a right wing disinformation machine droogie. You believe populist dreck spoon-fed to you by mostly overseas billionaires.
Kerry lost both the popular vote and EC, so a fair result. No complaints. The problem occurs when they split. EC can lead to minority rule which is a problem in my book and it says that if u are a D in a solid red state or an R in a solid blue state ur presidential vote doesn't really matter. That seems unAmerican to me.
Yep. One of the core ideas behind the American Revolution was taxation without representation. Yes we are taxed, but are we represented? A minority has a disproportionate amount of power and is using that to ignore the will of the majority of the American population on a number of issues. That is a problem that flies in the face of the idea of having a constitutional republic in the first place.
Kerry almost won Ohio and would have won the EC with a lower popular vote. In fact RFK Jr asserted that Kerry actually did win, for those who now seem to think RFK Jr is some sort of visionary.
So I looked it up since it seems to be a point of discussion for you. Kerry lost by over 100K votes in Ohio. That's not really close in my book.
A Benghazi committee subpoena for emails in early March 2016. The HDD was bleached sometime in late March. In regards to FBI and Comey, he said she was extremely careless but recommended no charges. It stinks but we are used to DC politicians not facing any crimes, unfortunately. So if we are going by that standard, Trump should face zero charges for having the documents. Now to be fair, they are also charging him for obstruction which they will get a chance to prove in court.
Looking forward to the general election campaign. Assuming that Trump is the Republican nominee as seems very likely the Democrats already have a treasure trove of campaign material using Trump's own words. At multiple MAGA rallies during the 2016 campaign Trump talked about the sanctity of classified documents and on more the one occasion promised to support serious criminal sanctions against persons who have mishandled classified documents if he was elected. Similarly, on at least occasion Trump told his adoring fans that only the guilty invoke their right against self-incrimination under the 5th Amendment. Given that Trump will almost certainly not testify at any of his trials his failure to do so accentuated by his own words will provide great material for political ads.
Yeah, like I said, the server was ordered to be decommissioned before the subpoena, but wasn't actually cleared until after the subpoena due the companies slow processing. I don't agree ... Hillary handed over her government related emails in accordance with the laws and rules. Trump clearly intended to keep many high level classified documents, even admitted on tape that he knew he shouldn't have them as he illegally showed them to other unathorized people, tried to play whack-a-mole with the FBI by moving the boxes around, had communications with his lawyers where he stated it would be better for him (politically, I assume) to just ignore the requests, etc., etc. Like I said before, Trump isn't being charged for any of the documents he handed back, he's being charged for the ones he willingly and intentionally kept. Same is true for Biden, Pense, Hillary, Rice, Powell ... they are not charged because they were proactive at searching and fully complied with requests to send the documents back once they were discovered.
