Getting rid of the EC requires a Constitutional Amendment. And that means that a 2/3 vote from both the House and Senate are required, along with consent of 3/4 of the states. That will NEVER happen.

(12-02-2019 04:26 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  Getting rid of the EC requires a Constitutional Amendment. And that means that a 2/3 vote from both the House and Senate are required, along with consent of 3/4 of the states. That will NEVER happen.

She doesn't expect people that actually think there is a national popular vote to think too deeply about what she said. It's a talking point, nothing more.

that'll work...lmmfao....

#ding-dongsRealized

If the leftists had their way, this is how elections would be decided in this country

(12-02-2019 04:36 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  If the leftists had their way, this is how elections would be decided in this country

that's a perfect summary that runs in tandem with sig line 1b)....

If her supporters had an ounce of sense they'd switch camps. She is either very ignorant of the process required or she's just spewing garbage for the consumption of the really ignorant part of her base.

(12-02-2019 07:17 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  If her supporters had an ounce of sense they'd switch camps. She is either very ignorant of the process required or she's just spewing garbage for the consumption of the really ignorant part of her base.

Nailed it.

So long as the Constitution is in place, the Electoral College will not go away or be changed. As an institution, it is as permanent as the Presidency itself. If you get rid of one, you get rid of the other.

She can promise that until her she sprouts feathers from her head and does a rain dance while riding a painted pony. The POTUS has no control over changing the damn Constitution. The sad thing is her sycophantic young followers know NOTHING about the Constitution and how HARD it is to change and will slobber over this.
NO FCKING WAY is EC going to EVER be changed. You can mark it down.

(12-02-2019 09:19 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  She can promise that until her she sprouts feathers from her head and does a rain dance while riding a painted pony. The POTUS has no control over changing the damn Constitution. The sad thing is her sycophantic young followers know NOTHING about the Constitution and how HARD it is to change and will slobber over this.
NO FCKING WAY is EC going to EVER be changed. You can mark it down.

her future campaign banner...

The candidate with the most votes already wins the presidency, it's just that we hold 52 separate and independent state elections (Maine and Nebraska notwithstanding). This prevents NY, TX, and CA from being tyrants who dictate to states with lower populations.

Also here's a good rebuttal from anyone who takes the logistics of changing it seriously, from NPR no less.

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/22/705627996...t-may-seem

She was ahead and now she’s behind. She knows she’s toast so throw a turd against the wall and see if it sticks. It will but it will smell really bad.
I’m over 60 and I have never seen a political party in so much disarray.

(12-02-2019 11:13 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  She was ahead and now she’s behind. She knows she’s toast so throw a turd against the wall and see if it sticks. It will but it will smell really bad.
I’m over 60 and I have never seen a political party in so much disarray.

be thankful for that....

again, ol' boy changed the game....

#monumentallyExposedDemsWithinAnExposé

(12-02-2019 09:28 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  The candidate with the most votes already wins the presidency, it's just that we hold 52 separate and independent state elections (Maine and Nebraska notwithstanding). This prevents NY, TX, and CA from being tyrants who dictate to states with lower populations.

Also here's a good rebuttal from anyone who takes the logistics of changing it seriously, from NPR no less.

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/22/705627996...t-may-seem

Rather, the states with lower populations should dictate to the rest... makes sense.

(12-03-2019 05:20 AM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(12-02-2019 09:28 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  The candidate with the most votes already wins the presidency, it's just that we hold 52 separate and independent state elections (Maine and Nebraska notwithstanding). This prevents NY, TX, and CA from being tyrants who dictate to states with lower populations.

Also here's a good rebuttal from anyone who takes the logistics of changing it seriously, from NPR no less.

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/22/705627996...t-may-seem

Rather, the states with lower populations should dictate to the rest... makes sense.

hey ding dong....ewe do realize anyone that runs on the right starts with an 84 electoral deficit out the gate (CA/NY)....

yep, the dippos shine once again with their best and brightest....

(12-02-2019 11:13 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  She was ahead and now she’s behind. She knows she’s toast so throw a turd against the wall and see if it sticks. It will but it will smell really bad.
I’m over 60 and I have never seen a political party in so much disarray.

I was hoping they'd be stupid enough to nominate her... oh wells. Sad that their best candidate is mayor Pete.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(12-03-2019 06:30 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-02-2019 11:13 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  She was ahead and now she’s behind. She knows she’s toast so throw a turd against the wall and see if it sticks. It will but it will smell really bad.
I’m over 60 and I have never seen a political party in so much disarray.

I was hoping they'd be stupid enough to nominate her... oh wells. Sad that their best candidate is mayor Pete.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

lmfao....there's no fk'n way eddie munster makes it past super tuesday....

it's too funny how IA,NH and the other wannabes think they're relevant in the age of the internutz.....

#henceDJT showed how that is no longer valid....

we already know the dippos carry water with zero value....

this is why bloomjew is pouring money into super tuesday....

what's getting ready to happen is a donk nominee cherry picked by the DNC at the convention....and even then, it won't mean dick by november....

in debate, DJT is going to wipe his arse with the 'residue' going into the fall...

(12-02-2019 09:28 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  The candidate with the most votes already wins the presidency, it's just that we hold 52 separate and independent state elections (Maine and Nebraska notwithstanding). This prevents NY, TX, and CA from being tyrants who dictate to states with lower populations.

Also here's a good rebuttal from anyone who takes the logistics of changing it seriously, from NPR no less.

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/22/705627996...t-may-seem

I'm unsure if you were here a year or so ago, but we've re-hashed this many times because some of the libs would say Trump didn't win because Side O'Beef had more votes.. Then you'd have to explain how this works and they of course scream and cry and say it isn't fair..

(12-03-2019 05:20 AM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(12-02-2019 09:28 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  The candidate with the most votes already wins the presidency, it's just that we hold 52 separate and independent state elections (Maine and Nebraska notwithstanding). This prevents NY, TX, and CA from being tyrants who dictate to states with lower populations.

Also here's a good rebuttal from anyone who takes the logistics of changing it seriously, from NPR no less.

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/22/705627996...t-may-seem

Rather, the states with lower populations should dictate to the rest... makes sense.

I thought you prog filth were for the little guy? Oh well....
What you are for is mob rule. Something the founding fathers tried their best to defend against while still giving us freedom. They did an incredible job of doing just that but idiots always think they know better. Especially when they don’t get their way.

(12-03-2019 05:20 AM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(12-02-2019 09:28 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  The candidate with the most votes already wins the presidency, it's just that we hold 52 separate and independent state elections (Maine and Nebraska notwithstanding). This prevents NY, TX, and CA from being tyrants who dictate to states with lower populations.

Also here's a good rebuttal from anyone who takes the logistics of changing it seriously, from NPR no less.

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/22/705627996...t-may-seem

Rather, the states with lower populations should dictate to the rest... makes sense.

Except they don't.

We ALL know if the EC had went their way last time they ALL would LOVE the EC. The EC did exactly what it was supposed to do and limit the power of the urban centers dictating what's best for the enter country. It worked perfectly.