The electoral college needs to go, its broken and only serves to disenfranchise voters

It doesn't even matter if he agreed to campaign on the system we have.

 

This is objectively false...

 

Really ??? When ???

 

He won campaigning based on the electoral college system.

 

If he didn't like it, it could have lobbied to change it or decide not to run at all.

Regardless, if we all decide to play by the rules, then we can't complain about it.

 

Yes... but the system does not depend in any way on his agreement to use it -- we have the system we have, period.
He chose to run his campaign with that system in mind.

 

65NATIONS elect their leadership by popular vote!!!!PERIOD!!!

 

Exactly ZERO Western democracies elect their head government though a popular vote of the people.
Zero.
UK? Nope.
France? Nope.
Germany? Nope.
Canada? Nope.
Japan? Nope.
Israel? Nope.
Norway? Nope.
Sweden? Nope
ad nauseam.

Period.

 

The electoral college saved us in 2000 and 2016.

The founding fathers were some smart dudes.

 

You assume flyover states always vote opposite those 20 counties.

 

Obama did not collude with Russia, we told them no, maybe later...

that woudl be like you asking a girl on a date and she said, no, maybe later and she never does... she was just being nice, not colluding with you

 

You do realize that the rules in place are to win the Electoral College, and that both campaigns devise their strategy with that aim in mind, do you not?

Your complaint is akin to a football team trying to claim that they are the legitimate winner because they gained more yards despite the fact that they lost on the scoreboard. According to the rules, the team with the highest score wins; yards gained are irrelevant. It's great that they gained more yards, but at the end of the day, that is a truly meaningless statistic.

 

you must of missed the post above

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ranchise-voters.558525/page-2#post-1070756197

 

Mob rule.

 

Wrong on several counts

Bush won the popular vote when he was reelected to his second term.

In addition trump very well could win the popular vote for his second term as bush did.

You are out of touch with reality

Just as all progressives are

 

Trump called for a revolution over the electoral college when he thought Obama won with less votes.. Sad! <or sick> guy!

 

STATE:
"As a noun, a people permanently occupying a fixed territory bound together by common habits and custom into one body politic exercising, through the medium of an organized government, independent sovereignty and control over all persons and things within its boundaries, capable of making war and peace and of entering into international relations with other states. The section of territory occupied by one of the United States. "

States don't vote; people do.

 

Cool. However, Trump failed to do anything about it. If you decide to become complacent, you need to take what comes with operating under a broken system.

 

If you voted, you voted knowing full well that the EC was in play, but you thought for sure crooked Hillary was going to win and you said nothing. Now after losing, you want to change the rules.

 

States are merely territories occupied by inhabitants within a given vicinity. Put simply; states consist of people.

I don't understand what point you are trying to convey by arguing semantics.

 

That's how they roll.

They're all hepped up about this "popular vote compact" where a bunch of states agree to give their electoral votes to whoever gets the most popular votes; their support for this will last right up to the point where CA and NY electoral votes are given to a Republican.

 

It doesn't matter what Trump called for in regards to the EC. He doesn't doesn't get to change the Constitution.

 

Nope.

 

Do you have a link to this claim or did you just manufacture it out of thin air?

 

If you want the EC to work like founders intended the president should be unaffiliated. Everyone cool with that?