Proglodytes wants to know when the others will start the fight

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

kennetha (3,117 posts)

How Big of a Divergence between EC winner and Popular Vote winner will we tolerate?

Ask yourself this question. How much of a divergence between the electoral college and the popular vote are Americans willing to tolerate. Gore beat Bush by 500,000 votes and almost certainly would have won the EC if the Florida vote had not been stopped by the Supremes. But the people accepted the outcome. Clinton beat Trump by nearly three million votes, but lost the EC. And the people have more or less accepted the outcome. Theoretically, the EC winner can lose the popular vote by a 4-1 margin. Would the people accept such an outcome? One would think not. So what's the tipping point? IF 10-15 million more people vote for the EC loser than the EC winner, would we accept that? What would the people DO in such a case? Would it matter if it was a democrat or a republican on the "losing" end?

sarah FAILIN (1,867 posts)
2. It won't matter till it happens to a republican.

We all know it.

kennetha (3,117 posts)
3. And why exactly is that?

Because they are more determine and less principled than we?

BzaDem (11,136 posts)
15. Because changing the Constitution requires the agreement of Republicans?

You don't get 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states, without the agreement of Republicans. (Along with the agreement of the small states that benefit disproportionately from the current system.)

kennetha (3,117 posts)
19. Did throwing off British Rule require the agreement of the Crown?

Sometimes revolutionary resistance is called for.

Did throwing off Jim Crow require the agreement of the South?

Did throwing off Slavery require the agreement of the South?

Sometimes you just have to say no more.

On the flip side, you do realize that after the Civil War and the passage of the 13, 14, and 15 amendments to the Constitution -- which only passed because the South had no say in the matter -- that the South basically nullified those amendments in practice for about the next 100 years.

Politics in America has never been played by Marquis of Queensbury Rules. It's a blood sport. Much blood, sweat and tears, have been spent trying to perfect the Union. Getting us to a place where we respect the principle of one person-one vote more fully will require similar blood, sweat and tears, a long twilight struggle. But a struggle very much worth the effort.

BzaDem (11,136 posts)
20. Seriously? A violent revolution because you don't like the current electoral system?

Plenty of democratic countries do not have a popular-vote system for electing their chief executive, or anything close. You bring up Great Britain. Do you know anything about their electoral system? The more liberal parties routinely get far more votes than the conservative parties, while still losing the election.

There will be no violent revolution over the electoral college, and anyone proposing such an absurd idea would not be taken seriously. Your examples are instructive, but not for the reasons you may think:

* Since the very people who overthrew the crown were the people that set up our current system, I'm not sure much more needs to be said about your first example.

* The Civil War occurred because one segment of the country decided not to abide by the laws of our current system that elected Abraham Lincoln as president. The side that revolted was the side that lost.

* Ending Jim Crow did not require a constitutional amendment. It was done completely within the current system, with an assist from a unanimous Supreme Court. Do you think there will ever be a Supreme Court that rules the electoral college -- created entirely by the Constitution itself -- is somehow unconstitutional? If so, do you think anyone would take such a court seriously, or follow their ruling?

kennetha (3,117 posts)
24. Your history is completely rose-colored history.

and you apparently have no idea about the principle of one-person one vote.

BzaDem (11,136 posts)
21. No one will ever win the EC while losing the popular vote 77%-23%.

Just because something can mathematically happen does not mean it ever will. The maximum divergence will likely be in the low single digits, which is far less than the divergence between the popular vote and outcome in many other democratic countries.

lagomorph777 (no relation) (3,590 posts)
31. No one will ever hack the election from a foreign country.

oh wait..

pnwmom (87,696 posts)
27. It wouldn't have to be amended, if states with 270 electoral votes all agreed

to vote for the popular vote winner.

Or if all states assigned their votes proportionately, rather than winner-take-all.

States cannot enter into compacts without the consent of Congress, dip wad.

kennetha (3,117 posts)
11. The EC is not some inviolable god given fixity of our politics

What was made, can be unmade

The same goes for every Proglodyte policy.

Demsrule86 (19,113 posts)
12. Not without an amendment to the constitution and that isn't going to happen.

kennetha (3,117 posts)
13. Don't bet on it

I'll take that bet.

BzaDem (11,136 posts)
16. Actually, it kind of is.

The amendment process is even more heavily weighted than the electoral college. Changing the Constitution requires those who benefit disproportionately from the current system to nearly-unanimously give up their power. The country could be 2-1 in favor of such an amendment, and it would still be easily shut down without a consensus among both major parties.

It doesn't get much more inviolable than that.

Furthermore, it is naive in the extreme to assume that something can be unmade just because it is made. The borders of all countries have been "made" as well. Good luck trying to "unmake" them just because they were "made".

kennetha (3,117 posts)
18. this is an infantile defeatism

America was a nation born of Revolution. Unfortunately, too many Americans are blind to the real power of their own political agency. If the vast majority of Americans simply say no, the Constitution will change or the Republic will lose all legitimacy.

We are not sheep to submissively bow and scrape before the makers of the world as if they were gods.

Step up, buttercup.

Atman (30,946 posts)
29. Democrats never fight back because we're afraid we'll look like them.

Sad truth. If the tables were turned, Republicans would fight like hell and eliminate the Electoral College. Democrats sigh and say "Well, those are the rules." Republicans don't care about the rules, they never have. Unless it's a rule that benefits them personally. Republicans are all about "ME." Democrats are about the greater good, and get roundly ridiculed for it. As such, we seem to be afraid to stand up and fight, because Democrats don't fight. We have picnics and try to find the good in people. Meanwhile, Republicans laugh at use and kick sand into our picnic baskets as the march off to the halls of power.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210100050


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55fqjw2J1vI

[Old n Grumpy]

Enough said!

[DLR Pyro]

You DUmmies want a fight?   Bring it bitches. 

[Maverick1987]

You DUmmies want a fight?   Bring it bitches.

Some douchebag over at DI was giddy about the prospect of a 2nd civil war since he believes the first one went his way.  I let him know that he really didn't want that.

[SVPete]

Some douchebag over at DI was giddy about the prospect of a 2nd civil war since he believes the first one went his way.  I let him know that he really didn't want that.

The population of the US in 1860 was about 31M; on the order of 650K men died in the ensuing war. Were his dream-war proportional, that would be 6.5M dead.

If this DU-moron OP'er got his wish, he'd quickly learn the practical difference between subsistence farming and market farming. The people he wants to screw over and exploit have the means to do the former, while he does not.

[FiddyBeowulf]

kennetha (3,117 posts)
19. Did throwing off British Rule require the agreement of the Crown?

Sometimes revolutionary resistance is called for.

Did throwing off Jim Crow require the agreement of the Southern democrats?

Did throwing off Slavery require the agreement of the Southern democrats?

Sometimes you just have to say no more.

On the flip side, you do realize that after the Civil War and the passage of the 13, 14, and 15 amendments to the Constitution -- which only passed because the Southern democrats had no say in the matter -- that the Southern democrats basically nullified those amendments in practice for about the next 100 years.

Fixed for accuracy.

[YupItsMe]

The forefathers were lightyears ahead of the thinking of you idiots.  At some point the founders of the electoral college said that if in 2016  there are actually people stupid enough to pay $2,000/mo for a 500 Sq ft apt.   $20/day to park their car and $6.50 for a cup of coffee they are just too stupid to decide who runs our country.  So they devised a system that would allow people with a little more common sense a little bit more of a voice in the outcome.  It was brilliant thinking back then, even more brilliant now.

[Maverick1987]

The population of the US in 1860 was about 31M; on the order of 650K men died in the ensuing war. Were his dream-war proportional, that would be 6.5M dead.

If this DU-moron OP'er got his wish, he'd quickly learn the practical difference between subsistence farming and market farming. The people he wants to screw over and exploit have the means to do the former, while he does not.

Why farm when you can just head down to the grocery store, duh!?!   

[SVPete]

The forefathers were lightyears ahead of the thinking of you idiots.  At some point the founders of the electoral college said that if in 2016  there are actually people stupid enough to pay $2,000/mo for a 500 Sq ft apt.   $20/day to park their car and $6.50 for a cup of coffee they are just too stupid to decide who runs our country.  So they devised a system that would allow people with a little more common sense a little bit more of a voice in the outcome.  It was brilliant thinking back then, even more brilliant now.

earned and issued, though I think you underestimated SF parking fees by about 100%.

[BattleHymn]

earned and issued, though I think you underestimated SF parking fees by about 100%.

How much extra is it to park your car somewhere that a homeless dipshit doesn't have the opportunity to piss on it?

[Texacon]

BzaDem (11,136 posts)
15. Because changing the Constitution requires the agreement of Republicans?

You don't get 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states, without the agreement of Republicans. (Along with the agreement of the small states that benefit disproportionately from the current system.)

I hate when they say that.  I don't see how they get that.  It's a state.  I don't care how many people live in it.  The peoples house is congress, the states house is the senate.  How ingenious was it to come up with that system?

The electoral college is so each state can have some say in what's going on in THEIR country.  The only time these idiots think about the minority is when you're talking about some abomination of a person who has decided they know better than God what kind of hardware they should have been born with.  THEN all of a sudden it's all about protecting the minority.

DUmmies, those who live in low population states are minorities and don't have the problems you do in the big city.  Nor do you have the problems they do.  Get over it.  Learn to get more people to vote for your ideas.  If you keep doing what you're doing, you're going to keep getting what you've been getting.

KC

[Zathras]

How much extra is it to park your car somewhere that a homeless dipshit doesn't have the opportunity to piss on it?

That place doesn't exist in San Francesspool.

[Old n Grumpy]

It's not so bad when they piss on it, it is when they break the window and piss in it.

[Adam Wood]

I hate when they say that.  I don't see how they get that.  It's a state.  I don't care how many people live in it.  The peoples house is congress, the states house is the senate.  How ingenious was it to come up with that system?

The electoral college is so each state can have some say in what's going on in THEIR country.  The only time these idiots think about the minority is when you're talking about some abomination of a person who has decided they know better than God what kind of hardware they should have been born with.  THEN all of a sudden it's all about protecting the minority.

DUmmies, those who live in low population states are minorities and don't have the problems you do in the big city.  Nor do you have the problems they do.  Get over it.  Learn to get more people to vote for your ideas.  If you keep doing what you're doing, you're going to keep getting what you've been getting.

KC

If there were any Amendment that needs to get passed, it is one repealing Amendment XVII.  The DUmmies would completely lose their minds (even more than normal) if that glorious day comes.

[Wineslob]

I hate when they say that.  I don't see how they get that.  It's a state.  I don't care how many people live in it.  The peoples house is congress, the states house is the senate.  How ingenious was it to come up with that system?

The electoral college is so each state can have some say in what's going on in THEIR country.  The only time these idiots think about the minority is when you're talking about some abomination of a person who has decided they know better than God what kind of hardware they should have been born with.  THEN all of a sudden it's all about protecting the minority.

DUmmies, those who live in low population states are minorities and don't have the problems you do in the big city.  Nor do you have the problems they do.  Get over it.  Learn to get more people to vote for your ideas.  If you keep doing what you're doing, you're going to keep getting what you've been getting.

KC

Oh, the DUmmies get it alright. They know that with a Popular Vote the Blue Run hellhole cities will ensure Dems will rule forever.

DUmmies, amazing how smart those "old guys" were, eh?

[SVPete]

Improving accuracy:

Oh, the DUmmies get it alright. They know that with a Popular Vote the Blue Run hellhole cities will ensure Dems will oppress and exploit forever.

DUmmies, amazing how smart those "old guys" were, eh?

[Old n Grumpy]

President Trump just threw a monkey wrench into your long term plans to create a new voting block with the hispanics. You really need them because tha AA's are coming to thier sences and not voting for you as much any more. You are on a slow slide into irrelevancy.

[DUmpDiver]

If Hillary wasn't smart enough to try to win the EC then she's not smart enough to be president.

[docstew]

The population of the US in 1860 was about 31M; on the order of 650K men died in the ensuing war. Were his dream-war proportional, that would be 6.5M dead.

You and I both know that the death toll would not be proportional. It would be over after one skirmish where the revolutionaries were routed because us rascally conservatives didn't fight fair ("They brought guns!"). As dedicated as they are to their "cause", they are more dedicated to their lives of leisure at the expense of taxpayers.