Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier
Not really. They were very wealthy but they fell for the ol communist line that the rich are getting richer garbage. They voted in communist principles. Allowed the government to take their guns and if a very short time this is what happens. Heck even you hate the electoral college and want mob rule in this country and you are trying to say we are a long way from this? Not by a long shot. We are knocking on the door.
|
Yeah, they buddied up to Russia and Putin and look what happens. It's funny you Trumpsters bash Russia out of one side of your mouths, yet you have no problem when Trump says he trusts Putin over Americans.
I really don't think you truly understand the electoral college. Personally, I don't have a problem with the electoral college, but I think it is an outdated and needs adjusting. For one, not all states have laws stating that electors must vote for the candidate that wins the popular vote in their state. Secondly, take TN and WY for example. TN has around 6,000,000 residents and 11 electoral votes. This means that each elector represents ~600,000 voters. WY has around 600,000 residents and 3 electoral votes. That means each WY elector only represents ~200,000 voters. Why should my vote in TN only be worth around 1/3 of what a vote in WY is worth?
The truth is, you and others confuse the electoral college with the Great Compromise. The electoral college was not established to keep large states from controlling elections. It was established because the founding fathers did not trust American electors in the late 1700's.
Hybrid Mode
