Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No it wouldn't. The election wasn't decided differently because Montana had 0.2% more sway per capita (or whatever the difference was). It was decided because all of the votes in a couple key bigger states went to one side. I got the big boy pants on and am not complaining about the outcome, but the EC isn't doing what it was supposed to do.This is right on. Eliminating the electoral college would shift political power to the big cities. I would bet that large numbers of the people in them would only look to public land as a source of revenue to support a life stile much different than we on this forum. Eliminating the electoral college may help elect democrats in the short term but likely would effect public land negatively long term.
Did giving women the right to vote or American Indians or freeing the slave fundamentally change the way we elect our presidents? Would you be singing a different tune if the results were reversed and Hillary carried the EC and Trump won the popular? Also how would your vote count more or less if it went to a popular election? There are still precincts counting votes right now today imagine the chaos of a very tight election and the counting went on for weeks? Remember Gore V. Bush in 2000, multiply that by 50 states.
Same here in Idaho, bucks are moving but I'm in a t shirt by 9 am damn global warming.... Thanks ObamaThe deer are rutting in South Central Montana but its hotter than a Saudi Prince after Hillary's loss. I went out yesterday. I hiked 2 hours in the dark, wearing a tee-shirt and had all the pockets and vents on my pants open.
You should not be able to hike long before sun up in mid november in the Beartooth in a Tee-shirt.
No it wouldn't. The election wasn't decided differently because Montana had 0.2% more sway per capita (or whatever the difference was). It was decided because all of the votes in a couple key bigger states went to one side. I got the big boy pants on and am not complaining about the outcome, but the EC isn't doing what it was supposed to do.
Come on, go back to high school and pay attention! The Electoral College is doing EXACTLY what it is supposed to do and preserving our republic. The founders of this GREAT country were wise far beyond their years, checks and balances work. How come every time the Democrats lose they decry the 'old-fashioned' electoral college, but when they win two in a row there is no problem with it?
At the end of our September conversation, Lichtman made another call: that if elected, Trump would eventually be impeached by a Republican Congress that would prefer a President Mike Pence — someone whom establishment Republicans know and trust.
“I'm going to make another prediction,” he said. “This one is not based on a system; it's just my gut. They don't want Trump as president, because they can't control him. He's unpredictable. They'd love to have Pence — an absolutely down-the-line, conservative, controllable Republican. And I'm quite certain Trump will give someone grounds for impeachment, either by doing something that endangers national security or because it helps his pocketbook.”
So what's the real answer? In my view, it's slavery. In a direct election system, the South would have lost every time because a huge percentage of its population was slaves, and slaves couldn't vote. But an Electoral College allows states to count slaves, albeit at a discount (the three-fifths clause), and that's what gave the South the inside track in presidential elections. And thus it's no surprise that eight of the first nine presidents come from Virginia (the most populous state at the time).
This pro-slavery compromise was not clear to everyone when the Constitution was adopted, but it was clearly evident to everyone when the Electoral College was amended after the Jefferson-Adams contest of 1796 and 1800. These elections were decided, in large part, by the extra electoral votes created by slavery. Without the 13 extra electoral votes created by Southern slavery, John Adams would've won even in 1800, and every federalist knows that after the election.
And yet when the Constitution is amended, the slavery bias is preserved.
Really? The republicans didn't cry?
You didn't see the leaders of the Democratic Party come out and say they would do everything possible to make sure the new President fails like the republcans did after Obama was elected.
In that she lost, yes. But the data suggests that it is not a mandate for Trump, and the votes show that the majority of Americans still voted for her.
Steve Bannon....really? I don't care if you are a major Trump supporter, it's despicable and is already showing me I won't stand by where Trump is going if Steve Bannon is a major part of his team. Obama went to far left, if Trump try's to run even harder right, he will lose in 4 years to an even bigger liberal progressive than Obama or Hillary Clinton. Thats not where the country is, and Trumps presidency could destroy conservatism and the Republican Party if he starts propping up discussing people like Steve Bannon.