Home | About | Donate

'We Have a President Who Lost the Popular Vote by 3 Million': Sanders Backs Abolishing the Electoral College

6 Likes

And you know this how?? Trump said so? Given his track record of serially lying he is not credible.

7 Likes

Can’t go with you on this one buddy. EC needs to die fast. (The Super Delegates system too)

For example, Have a look at the Senator to constituent ratio of Wyoming or Montana and California. The spread is insane and unmanageable making the system less than useless. It’s dangerous for Democracy.

https://www.fairvote.org/population_vs_electoral_votes

5 Likes

Actually what they had in mind was the racist slave southern states to have overwhelming power and actually codified it no small thanks to the coward Thomas Jefferson as the 3/5 clause where black slaves were counted as 3/5 of a person so as to inflate their population numbers. After the South “lost” the Civil War and the North which abandoned the Reconstruction to them ( the North also profited by the slave trade) the South enacted their Jim Crow Laws and lynchings to keep blacks from the polling stations.

8 Likes

While I’m all for abolishing the Electoral College, that should only prove as step one in a movement to completely reorganize how we govern ourselves.
The second step in making the USA an actual democracy would be the abolition of the Senate. The only American institution that is less democratic than the Senate is the SCOTUS. And it needs to go as well.
The ability of a president to govern through signing statements needs to removed. Our POTUS has become a monarch. Just what Jefferson warned us about.
The attorney general of the US needs to become an elected position, or eliminated altogether.
And of course, to be a true democracy, we need a system where major issues can be put to a national referendum. If we had a national referendum system in place, there would be no need for the Senate, very little need for the House, and would turn the office of POTUS into what it was supposed to be all along, a figurehead. Someone to be there just in case there’s an emergency. The SCOTUS would disappear, as the voters of the nation decide whether or not abortion and marijuana are legal, and whether or not re would be a single payer healthcare system. And how high tax rates are.
It may prove to be messy at times, but it would be democracy. Face it, could it possibly be worse than the fascist nation we have become?

12 Likes

Now we need to urge state legislators, in states with the 74 more electoral votes needed, to enact the National Popular Vote bill.

There have been hundreds of unsuccessful proposed amendments to modify or abolish the Electoral College - more than any other subject of Constitutional reform.
To abolish the Electoral College would need a constitutional amendment, and could be stopped by states with as little as 3% of the U.S. population.

Instead, state legislation, The National Popular Vote bill is 73% of the way to guaranteeing the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country, by changing state winner-take-all laws (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), without changing anything in the Constitution, using the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes.

It requires enacting states with 270 electoral votes to award their electoral votes to the winner of the most national popular votes.

All voters would be valued equally in presidential elections, no matter where they live.
Candidates, as in other elections, would allocate their time, money, polling, organizing, and ad buys roughly in proportion to the population

Every vote, everywhere, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election.
No more distorting, crude, and divisive and red and blue state maps of predictable outcomes, that don’t represent any minority party voters within each state.
No more handful of ‘battleground’ states (where the two major political parties happen to have similar levels of support) where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 38+ predictable winner states that have just been ‘spectators’ and ignored after the conventions.
We can limit the power and influence of a few battleground states in order to better serve our nation.

The bill would take effect when enacted by states with a majority of the electoral votes—270 of 538.
All of the presidential electors from the enacting states will be supporters of the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes among all 50 states (and DC)—thereby guaranteeing that candidate with an Electoral College majority.

The bill was approved in 2016 by a unanimous bipartisan House committee vote in both Georgia (16 electoral votes) and Missouri (10).
Since 2006, the bill has passed 40 state legislative chambers in 24 rural, small, medium, large, red, blue, and purple states with 271 electoral votes.
The bill has been enacted by 16 small, medium, and large jurisdictions with 196 electoral votes – 73% of the way to guaranteeing the presidency to the candidate with the most popular votes in the country

NationalPopularVote

2 Likes

Democrats on the coasts do not outnumber Republicans in the country.

In 2016, New York state and California Democrats together cast 9.7% of the total national popular vote.

In total New York state and California cast 16% of the total national popular vote

In total, Florida, Texas, and Pennsylvania cast 18% of the total national popular vote.
Trump won those states.

With statewide winner-take-all laws, a presidential candidate could lose despite winning 78%+ of the popular vote and 39 smaller states.

With the current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), it could only take winning a bare plurality of popular votes in only the 11 most populous states, containing 56% of the population of the United States, for a candidate to win the Presidency with less than 22% of the nation’s votes!

But the political reality is that the 11 largest states, with a majority of the U.S. population and electoral votes, rarely agree on any political candidate. In 2016, among the 11 largest states: 7 voted Republican(Texas, Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Georgia) and 4 voted Democratic (California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey). The big states are just about as closely divided as the rest of the country. For example, among the four largest states, the two largest Republican states (Texas and Florida) generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Bush, while the two largest Democratic states generated a total margin of 2.1 million votes for Kerry.

With National Popular Vote, it’s not the size of any given state, it’s the size of their “margin” that will matter. Under a national popular vote, the margin of your loss within a state matters as much as the size of your win.

In 2004, among the 11 most populous states, in the seven non-battleground states, % of winning party, and margin of “wasted” popular votes, from among the total 122 Million votes cast nationally:

  • Texas (62% R), 1,691,267
  • New York (59% D), 1,192,436
  • Georgia (58% R), 544,634
  • North Carolina (56% R), 426,778
  • California (55% D), 1,023,560
  • Illinois (55% D), 513,342
  • New Jersey (53% D), 211,826

To put these numbers in perspective,
Oklahoma (7 electoral votes) generated a margin of 455,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004 – larger than the margin generated by the 9th and 10th largest states, namely New Jersey and North Carolina (each with 15 electoral votes).
Utah (5 electoral votes) generated a margin of 385,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004.
8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).

4 Likes

mminlameo, why not denigrate you? your post practically begs to be denigrated!

2 Likes

How long will the US accept the fixed voting system the GOP has put in place. The Electoral College was done to give power to small states coming out of slavery and into segregation. They are mostly the red states controlled by big money and fixed votes. My vote in CA is not counted. Of course in CA we know the GOP and voted Dem. Pretend we will sit quietly for another round of the carnage of the GOP/Trump/fat cat carnage? Not a good idea.

3 Likes

So writing a book is not ‘in the real world’? That is how he made the money - not by some bullshit bribery scheme beign paid ridiculous amounts of money for nonsense speeches as too many other politicians (famously Democrats but I’m sure many Republicans too) do. Do you feel people who are sucessul authors and never make anything are not doing work in the real world?

To a certain extent, I like the idea of politicians having some experience beforehand which I feel is useful and this does NOT include being a lawyer - they make the very worst politicians if you ask me. I’d want doctors, engineers, scientists, artists, writers, and even the better among the businessmen. Bernie isn’t that but he has so many positives that I’m certainly not going against him because he is a career politician.

Yes, really he has a winning platform.

The EC has been hashed out here many times before - you are in the 1/3 obviously and you will continue to think of it as genius. The rest of us will conitnue to think of it as absolutely the dumbest thing about the US compared to any other country. The funny thing is that plenty of conservative voters are completely ignored as well - any conservative in a blue state doesn’t matter one iota to a republican or a democrat running for president. You’d think that would bug some of them so I’m surprised you even have 1/3 of the people in your camp.

You will lose this one eventually. The sooner the better.

4 Likes

And none wealthier then the Southern states at that time. I am wondering if, at least in part, this loss of wealth explains switching parties as the Republicans always were the stronger wing of the business party. This along with blacks joining the Democratic Party. Racist Southerners idea of “democracy” only meant democracy for the non elite Anglos–not anyone else. Today people do not have friends in either party.

2 Likes

You can’t be serious. The 3/5 compromise was in the original constitution too and it is not used now - how did that happen?

If this system is so great, do you believe the states should use it too - should Governers win county by county with each county having a number of elctoral votes? And should we give small counties a minumum number of votes no matter how many people are in the county? Then rural counties might get this same distorted advantage and republicans in the city can be completely ignored in many states even red ones.

1 Like

Go to he’ll you idiot KKK lynch mobster. Popular vote is totally logical and the correct way to elect anyone. I can’t imagine anyone being against popular vote. Those opposed are the power elites and their stupid cheat leaders who want to rig the election in their favor damn be the votes. Your idiotic assertion about “illegals” is nothing but an excuse to keep on cheating us the majority Americans. The "illegal voting "didn’t actually amount to even 1% of the total votes.

3 Likes

Just this once, Bernie is pushing an issue that will, at best, marginally help the American people.

Issue #1: Does this change give Wyoming the ability to cast 100 million Republican votes, even if they don’t quite have 100 million voters? We can’t add the risk of one state strongly diddling a 50 state election, just as we can’t stand one state’s massive gerrymandering of the House of Representatives.

Issue #2: Here in Rhode Island we just about never see a political candidate, except for fundraising purposes. What if Rhode Island becomes even more insignificant?

You denigrate your self by starting right off with a false statement. Illegals don’t, and can’t vote. Fox shouldn’t be confusing people with false claims. There are a lot of people who soak them up like sponges.

6 Likes

If, as a nation, we are willing to sit silent as the government prosecutes one war after another with little or no cause or reason, what makes us think there is enough awareness or concern for ANYTHING?
Where are the concerned tax payers? The moralists. The anti war movement. And where are the new laws to protect the opportunity to vote on election day?
We are spinning around in a whirlpool and nobody seems to have a rope to toss to us, except maybe Bernie Sanders.

7 Likes

Must be a slow day at Breitbart.

2 Likes

Yes and feel sorry for anyone, if they really believe everything that they have been told by people on the right.

1 Like

The truth is … some people are just plain evil and never verbalize what is really in their heart, if they even have one.