The Sneaky Plan to Subvert the Electoral College for the Next Election

  • Published on Nov 20, 2019
  • Footnote:
    Thank you, my patrons, for making this video possible:
    Special thanks: Amelia Grant, Andrea Di Biagio, Awoo, Bear, Ben Schwab, Bob Kunz, Bobby, Carlin, Chris Amaris, Chris Chapin, Christian Cooper, chrysilis, Colin Millions, Dag Viggo Lokøen, Darcy Morrissey, David F Watson, David Palomares, David Tyler, Derek Bonner, Derek Jackson, Donal Botkin, Elizabeth Keathley, Elliot Lepley, Emil, emptymachine, Erik Parasiuk, Esteban Santana Santana, Everett Knag, Freddi Hørlyck, Fuesu, George Lin, Guillermo, Henry Ng, Hunter S Zimmerman, iulus, James Hoskins, Jason Lewandowski, Jeffrey Podis, John Buchan, John Lee, John Rogers, Jordan Earls, Joshua Jamison, ken mcfarlane, Kermit Norlund, Kevin Costello, Kevin McLain, Kodi, Leon, Maarten van der Blij, Marco Arment, Martin, Maxime Zielony, Michael Mrozek, Michael Reilly, Michael Williams, Mikko, MJ, Nevin Spoljaric, Nick Fish, Nick Gibson, NotGac, سليمان العقل, Orbit_Junkie, Peter Lomax, Phil Gardner, Rhys Parry, Richard Barthel, Richard Jenkins, rictic, Robert Webb, Ron Bowes, Saki Comandao, Shallon Brown, Shantanu Raj, ShiroiYami, Stephen Drollinger, Steven Grimm, Steven Snow, Tómas Ãrni Jónasson, Tex Simon, ThatGuyGW, Thunda Plum, Tijmen van Dien, Tristan Watts-Willis, Tyler Bryant, Veronica Peshterianu
    Music by:

Comments • 16 324

  • Bulwark AC
    Bulwark AC Day ago

    4 worst words in the English language. For the greater good.

  • Bulwark AC
    Bulwark AC Day ago

    I wish all states split by percentage

  • Owen Konsmo
    Owen Konsmo Day ago

    Highly disappointed that no one has said this yet, so I will.

  • BadW01f 2
    BadW01f 2 Day ago

    Nah. I love the electoral college. It keeps the big cities and states with a much larger population from being tyrants to the more rural areas of the country. It's well know that different geological areas have different cultures, principles and needs. The only amendment i would be willing to vote for is that the state can divide its votes proportionally to the way its citizens voted and never vote against its cutizens. Even proportional voting would be risking that big left leaning cities would out vote the majority right leaning part of a state. (Virginia for example)

  • Tim Combs
    Tim Combs Day ago

    yeah im not a fan of that

  • dd410
    dd410 Day ago

    @CGP Grey How did u animate flag that good at 2:29 ?

  • palindromia
    palindromia Day ago

    All this because of orange man bad. Jesus lefties are pathetic.

    TWINKLE TITS Day ago

    why are people so bent out of shape over the EC?
    if it was a problem then well over half the president's elected would have won the EC but lost popular vote.
    only 5 presidents in history has won the EC and lost popular vote. 3 in the 1800s, 1 in 2000 and 1 in 2016.
    so the EC is not a problem at all its working as intended to allow the minority to have some voice over the majority at times.
    this whole "anti EC" movement is just an "orange man bad" movement because their arguement is relies on a "maybe."
    if anything the EC has had little impact on who was chosen considering the ratio.

  • bob smith
    bob smith Day ago

    So there trying to go from a republic to a democracy ,because history shows that's a good idea right (just so you know that's sarcasm democracy is a terrible idea it's called mob rules for a reason)

  • Al Foster
    Al Foster Day ago +1

    Get ready for the B list actors to do another plea to the Electors.... 🧐 they could use the work. 🤷🏻‍♂️

  • MisterHughes
    MisterHughes Day ago +1

    Difficult balancing act between preventing city-dwellers occupying tiny amounts of the country, but in high-densities, who know little of life outside cities forcing policy on people living difficult realities usually made worse by statist interventions, and people feeling their vote doesn't count because the focus is always on swing-states (or here in the UK, marginal seats), meaning they have no faith at all in democracy.

  • master of none - quick tips for better gaming

    So the plan is to hope politicians work together for the good of the citizens instead of, say, taking a fat bonus check to the bank? Sure, good luck with that. In the mean time I’m going to not vote because it still seems pointless to bother trying. Also this plan pretty much makes it so nobody running outside of R or D parties will ever get elected as those are the only two parties the majority of the country would vote for. That would kill every other party.

  • Adam Lacy
    Adam Lacy Day ago

    Top ten anime votes.

  • Randall Martin
    Randall Martin 2 days ago +2

    Should have Electoral college in each state. That would eliminate the mob rule and tyranny of the large cities. Over 90% of all counties in the presidential elections vote Republican, yet the large brainwashed cities vote democrat. Electoral college in each state would combat that.

  • Shadepariah
    Shadepariah 2 days ago

    Even more amusing would be if the individual electors, appointed by the state, just ignored the compact and voted with their state's populous. Of course, as soon as this happens it would probably trigger another Civil War.

  • nycholaus
    nycholaus 2 days ago

    The Electors themselves can still vote however they want.

  • z0ro_
    z0ro_ 2 days ago +3

    The electoral college is great

  • mathmaniac43
    mathmaniac43 2 days ago

    Great video! I think I found an unlikely loophole.
    If this agreement were to go into effect, couldn't more states (that may not agree to the terms) be created, giving the dissenters enough power to "turn off" the agreement by going below the required 50% acceptance?
    Then the states that want the agreement could split and sway the agreement back into effect! We will end up with thousands of microstates!

  • Dionaea floridensis
    Dionaea floridensis 2 days ago +1

    Mass immigration + popular vote = dissolution

  • Wraith Gear
    Wraith Gear 2 days ago

    that 2%... you know, if they were REALLY that clever they would assign a group of sympathetic states to vehemently oppose the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. because it is so easy to agree with something with huge consequences down the road, you can lure the actual last states into the pact then BAM! those with cold feet are left holding the potato. though there would have to be some sort of punishment for backing out of the deal. i assume there is one or else the whole point of making the pact is toothless.

  • Jacob Bielski
    Jacob Bielski 2 days ago


  • Peter
    Peter 2 days ago

    Why do I just see a bunch of states who signed up for that thing vote the other way... there leaders would have to have balls of steel to vote against their own state citizens. Plus this is the kind of thing if you went hard against the citizens of your state riots are always potential.

  • MadCowProductions
    MadCowProductions 2 days ago

    wont happen.

  • anthony johnson
    anthony johnson 2 days ago


  • UM536 Vids
    UM536 Vids 2 days ago

    Point 4 is functionally useless. If a NaPoVo block forms and votes against one of its constituent members choice, what is the mechanism for no-take-backsies on membership in the NaPoVo coalition? The coalition will only last 1 election until the disgruntled states withdraw from the compact. If you want to change the system you have to go through either the front gate, or reach natural mathematical tipping points where population is soo disproportionate that the absolute advantage of the proportional body gives power to a handful of populous states anyway.

  • Cedric LM
    Cedric LM 2 days ago

    What prime democracy, instead of asking the people if they want it changed....

  • Wayne Robinson
    Wayne Robinson 2 days ago

    Problem is not all the people vote for the truth election doesn't vote during the popular vote

  • ads1021
    ads1021 2 days ago

    If only you had posted this a few weeks earlier I could have just sent it to my dad instead of having to explain it myself.
    An interesting observation is that most of the state's that have signed are solidly Democrat. If I recall correctly, about half of the state's signed during the Obama administration.

  • Elevator Eleven
    Elevator Eleven 3 days ago

    The concept of giving slightly more power to the "learned elite" or whoever who is in charge of a less populated state makes sense, and I would otherwise support giving slightly more power to the people who know what the hell they're doing, but the problem is the Founding Fathers didn't study evolution and so never got their heads around the concept of a Really Long Time. In one election it can perhaps be assumed that a person who is running a state is probably smarter than all the random hicks who populate their less populated state, but after many many many elections the random hicks will eventually elect hicks to run their states instead of people who know what the hell they're doing, and this happens faster in places with more hicks than non-hicks, IE less populated rural areas, and now we have come to the tipping point where literally every Republican Senator and Congressperson is a fraud, an idiot, or both. Oops.

    Democracy either needs supervision from more powerful smarter people at every level, or it must be equal so that smarter people in aggregate cannot be so easily overpowered by the stupid in aggregate taking advantage of a stupid system.

    • Eric M
      Eric M 2 days ago

      big shocker that the very learned men drafting the government constitution in 1776 didn't know about a theory of biology that was developed in 1809. even bigger shocker that you somehow use that theory to create a strawman argument about a completely different subject matter. have you ever considered that just possibly, those hicks are voting in their own best interest? if the "learned elite" want more buses in huge urban areas at the expense of higher taxes on people living in rural areas, it is necessarily in the rural voter's best interest to not go into poverty paying for a whole fleet of new buses that they will never ride? is it at all possible that the small business owner in the rustbelt wants fewer regulations on business because they would be unable to operate at a higher cost on the slim margins of being a rural small business owner? while a $15 minimum wage might sound necessary to live in a city like chicago where a cheeseburger can run you upwards of $14 bucks, a $15 minimum wage would sink the local economy of nebraska, where the cost of living is 12% lower than the national average.

      literally every democratic senator and congressperson is also a fraud and idiot. your government representatives do not have your best interests at heart. if they did, they would be spending less of your hard-earned money on bombing hospitals, selling guns to the cartel, and giving huge amounts of "aid" to the countries they think they can score oil and capital gains from. get your head out of your ass: the kind of people who think they are qualified to lead this country are the exact people who should be kept as far away from power as possible.

  • Sam1370
    Sam1370 3 days ago

    cringe BIMMY

  • David Melgar
    David Melgar 3 days ago

    All the legally illiterate losers mad and tryna say this is illegal are laughable. Aren't you all still mad about the 17th Amendment too?

  • Umang Malik
    Umang Malik 3 days ago

    Okay, this is genius.

  • Fabian Lohrmann
    Fabian Lohrmann 3 days ago

    conservatives claim the electoral college protects rural people from the tyranny of the masses that are urban citizens. But by that logic they should also want giving black people more votes to protect them from the tyranny of the masses that are white people.

    • Fabian Lohrmann
      Fabian Lohrmann Day ago

      @Joseph Rosario yeah i'm not saying that every vote until now is rigged or something. Just that 4 times already a president was elected who didn't got most votes, which regardless of his party association is anti-democratic. And we don't even know how many democrats or republicans are just never voting because the electoral college makes their vote irrelevant

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario Day ago

      @Fabian Lohrmann
      Not all of the small states are Republican in fact many of the states are actually purple with a mixture of Republican and Democrat getting rid of the college will actually make big cities and larger States actually have a chance to turn either purple or even red as there are conservatives Republicans as well as Independence living in majority blue States.
      Yes those two lost popular vote but won the Electoral just as every other president in history other than George Washington was voted in by the Electoral College.

    • Fabian Lohrmann
      Fabian Lohrmann Day ago

      @Joseph Rosario in recent history there were 2 times where a president lost the popular vote but still won because of the electoral college. George Bush in 2000 and Trump in 2016.

    • Fabian Lohrmann
      Fabian Lohrmann Day ago

      @Joseph Rosario ever state gets 2 votes by default, that makes small population states more powerful per person. Most small states vote republican

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario Day ago

      @Fabian Lohrmann
      How does it only benefit conservatives??
      Do you think there are no conservatives in ny or Cali?

  • Alexis Williams
    Alexis Williams 3 days ago

    What I'm getting from this presentation is that the Electoral College system is fundamental to our republic because it was a useful compromise that has stood the test of time. That seems to cast it in a positive light. But you fail to mention what it was a compromise for--which was to give slave states more relative power. Since we no longer have slavery, why do we need this compromise? And you characterize the plan to subvert the EC as "sneaky," which casts it in a negative light. But is an effort to ultimately make everyone's vote count equally a bad thing? It would be way more democratic, which would be a good thing.

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario Day ago

      As well it forces leadership to have policies that is as diverse and has widespread support as possible.
      Can't have policies that the big city's just like, you need polices that smaller city's and rural areas like as well.

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario Day ago

      Its to fight against political mob rule.
      Where the larger population states have more voting power than smaller less population states.
      If we got rid of the collage then the us will controlled by mainly ny and California and no state will be able to challenge then in voting power.

  • Dyllon McDonald
    Dyllon McDonald 3 days ago

    This would fuck the country over.

  • Yang Gang
    Yang Gang 3 days ago

    Have you considered the arbitrary capping of the congressional seat at 435 last century? The EC would be much more proportional if the cap was higher or was never capped.

  • Spike .Strat13
    Spike .Strat13 3 days ago +1

    All the states hot for this will lose interest if:
    1. Trump wind the popular vote in 2020.
    2. If the democratic party loses its larger member base.
    Short sighted thinking seems to be the popular thing these days. ( forgetting that the quick solution today, may make a rod for your own back tomorrow) both parties do this with uncomfortable regularity.

  • MultiVigarista
    MultiVigarista 3 days ago

    This is all needlessly complicated, WHY DON'T THE STATES JUST VOTE IN PROPORTION TO THEIR OWN (IN-STATE) POPULAR VOTE? That would solve everything!

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario 3 days ago

      Because as I just explained then that would make every single state the hold into the population of the larger more populous states so you would have California New York and maybe Seattle be in complete charge and power over the rest of the country.

  • Joshua Roberts
    Joshua Roberts 3 days ago +1

    Your failure to grasp the ingeniousness of this system has been noted.
    Enjoy your thumbs down sir, you have earned it.

    • Joshua Roberts
      Joshua Roberts 3 days ago

      Thank you patrons, for paying a man to brainwash you.
      This homage to the public education system is lighthearted and delightful.

  • Javen King
    Javen King 3 days ago

    Ok, all I wanna know is if President Trump will be re-elected or not.

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario 3 days ago

      According to the latest aggregate polls there's a good chance he will the only thing that could possibly hurt him now is if the economy goes bad very quickly which I very much doubt as well if he does something really really bad

  • Scott Molnar
    Scott Molnar 3 days ago +3

    A little disappointed that he did not point out the major flaw in the idea. Namely that inter-state compacts cannot legally be enforced unless they are approved by Congress. Thus, the first time a state/governor has the option to pick a president to match the party of their choosing rather than the national majority, I bet they will and the whole idea implodes.

  • Yonatan Huber
    Yonatan Huber 3 days ago +2

    This plan would make the angry small-states USA even more angry, and rightfully so. The whole POINT of the EC was to avoid a couple of huge states determining the president for all the other smaller, mostly rural, states.
    In this system, where an entire state voted to a *single* candidate, you only really need to win around 12 states. Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, the Dakotas, you can just IGNORE them. This is why this system was in place, to prevent large urban economic powerhouses to dominate over the rest of the population.

    • palindromia
      palindromia Day ago

      Nah bro someone else gets to vote your life away. Its only fair.

    • gimmethegepgun
      gimmethegepgun 2 days ago +1

      Except it makes it easier for the large states to dominate because it treats them as monolithic voting blocks even though they aren't. The only reason it resembles anything else is because Texas and Florida don't agree with the other large states.

  • Mitchell Holladay
    Mitchell Holladay 3 days ago

    fucking dems...

  • phatpigeonii
    phatpigeonii 3 days ago +1

    Excellent summation. I first learned about this travesty a couple years ago, and have been trying to spread the news of the dangers it represents ever since. If it is ever implemented, the presidency will effectively become a single-party thing, decided by a few super-populous, and to hell with the rest of the country. Just one more potential way to tear the country apart.

    • drewwillsey
      drewwillsey 23 hours ago

      phatpigeonii dude, you clearly haven’t seen any of his other videos. He does one on why the college should be abolished.

    • Michael Baldwin
      Michael Baldwin Day ago


    KEK-ASS 4 days ago +5

    So basically, the Democrats are bad and want to tear apart the Constitutional Republic. Tell me something I don't know.

    • Charistoph
      Charistoph 2 days ago

      @VV R, indeed. It might convince the Republicans who normally stay at home in their state to actually show up and vote! While they may not turn California, there are enough conservative Californians and New Yorkers that it could make up the difference.

    • VV R
      VV R 2 days ago

      They are also stupid and this might bite them in the ass later. But again communist don't like to think that far

  • War Of Noise
    War Of Noise 4 days ago +1

    another way the electoral college is being undermined: the census including non-citizens, all of which will be assumed to vote democrat. and then when those new people are included, then the dems will say they need more EC votes to represent those non-citizens.... therefore establishing a majority EC voting system, rigidly conforming to tribal lines.

  • cliff knight
    cliff knight 4 days ago +3

    The left is so damned childish for wanting to abolish the electoral college. Only 5 year old brains want to change a rule to fit their outcome. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

  • Osama care
    Osama care 4 days ago +1

    Still political suicide if you think about it for example 5 states are in the Napa thing well what happens when 3 states go against the vote in their state. Well there you go you’ve just killed 3 states and plunged them into possible civil war or just political turmoil.

  • Trackstar35
    Trackstar35 4 days ago +1

    If this happens, then I guess voter turnout would increase. Right now your vote for president only matters in about a dozen states.

    • Eric M
      Eric M 2 days ago

      a dozen states is better than 2

      - a guy living in one of those dozen states

  • Judeau Tenebrae
    Judeau Tenebrae 4 days ago +1

    I don't understand why conservatives complain that removing the electoral college would disproportionately help democrats. If the system becomes one citizen one vote, is it to be taken as an admission that they're unable to win the popular vote? Am I to accept it as a confession of the minority's dreams of governing the majority? If so, that sounds like a personal problem. In the 2000 election George Bush won Florida with Jeb's help. In 2016 Trump won the electoral college with a crushing defeat in the popular vote (and Hillary, with her odd style of campaigning, contributed more to his win than anything he said or did given his complete absence of knowledge on the issues and inability to take professional advice in any field). If conservatives are worried about unpopularity, quit complaining. Raise your numbers. Work on behalf of the public as opposed to working on behalf of your wallet. It isn't rocket science.

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario 3 days ago

      Another reason is because...
      It keeps larger States from taking advantage of smaller less populous states.
      For example that happened either in 2019 or in 2018 California was hitting me with a very big trout so they were actually going to take the water from Michigan they were going to use political votes inside their own state to authorize it but because we live in a constitutional republic a larger populous state cannot just enter a smaller State because they voted yes to take the water from the small state.

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario 3 days ago

      It's not because of conservatism but it also hurt Democrats as well and I will actually fracture the country.
      First it get rid of political mob rule..
      What it is is it forces presidential or leadership candidates who have as much wide political and opinion policies possible that gets to all political groups Republican, Democrat, independent, green whatever...
      But let's say we got rid of the Electoral College so what happened now is Democrats hold the largest population in the country and they are essentially only in three to four states out of the 51 states that's New York California and maybe Seattle.
      So if we were doing by popular vote anybody who's running for president with never father leaving those three states they will never bother heading to the other states they will only stay in Seattle New York and California because that is where the largest population of the country lives.
      so none of those States will ever be able to have their needs and request heard by any of the presidential candidates because their population is so low nobody would bother ever going out there.
      and you're probably saying" well it's probably because the candidate does not have good ideas that will get Democrats on his side"...
      not really because one of the big problems with people is that people will form tribes and will follow that tribe so we have both Republican and Democrat tried to vote for their side not because of ideas but because they are of the same tribe that's another good example of political mob rule.

  • Honorius
    Honorius 4 days ago

    I am emperor Hillary Clinton

  • Sailor Barsoom
    Sailor Barsoom 4 days ago

    You left a little bit of the conversation with the time traveler out (or maybe it's what would have been said next if the TT were a land-owner).
    "Well you see, if we don't do something to strengthen the influence of the less-populous Southern (cough-slave-cough) states compared to the more-populous Northern (cough-not slave-cough) states, the Southern states are going to leave. Turns out they're terrified of the North taking their slaves away."
    Really, the EC has failed in everything it was meant to do.
    It was to protect us against the rise of a populist demagogue. How'd that work out?
    It was to prevent a foreign power from injecting their preferred candidate. Um, yeah.
    It was *not* supposed to be a winner-take-all system, but now it is.
    It was supposed to mollify the Southern, slave-holding states so that the nation would stick together and not split up. Oops.
    Utter failure. Should have been abolished along with the slavery it was meant to protect. If it can be legally subverted, good. It's time for PEOPLE to vote, not STATES.

  • Tom Ashley
    Tom Ashley 4 days ago +2

    Allowing major population centers to decide a national election is a terrible idea. The people in the middle of the country aren't stupid.

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario 2 days ago

      So again answer me this question
      You have four states
      Three of those states have a combined population of 5 million
      One state has the population of 20 million
      Which state will have the greatest effect on popular vote?

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario 2 days ago

      Yes you are right that she disrespected the minority people in the Rust Belt but the majority of the population in the Rust Belt are white people where is the largest percentage of minorities actually live in the cities.
      Second yes you are right she did shut down her operations in the Southern and central states that was only after she was universally disliked and reviled due to the fact of not because her policies but because of her Candor she treated the Southern and Central States as if they were ignorant children.
      3rd people do vote on political monoliths, very few of the time do people actually support policies, majority of time vote on the fact that their leadership is of the same political party.
      like I said all you have to do is look at the popular vote of 2016 the majority of the popular vote going for Hillary Clinton was in democratically majority States while majority of votes for Donald Trump was actually in the Southern and Central States.
      first off you are still sidelining or even ignoring the question and even your response to my question made no sense you melee put the 20 million as if it was divided down the middle of 50/50 nothing there to even indicate what type of policy they were supporting why would they be separated into 1/2 and 1/2 you just added that in the try to actually save your argument but made no sense to the Simplicity of the question.
      and the fact that you say that popular policy is not set by the city's but based on popularity that's where my question was pointing to argue.
      popular is based on population or the number of those who are in support of it it's the cities have the largest population then it doesn't matter what the rest of the country support the cities will always dictate what the country will do because they have the largest population you keep on thinking that everything is going to be down to 50 50 half and half the largest and best argument will win when it's based on a basic math principle which side has the largest population.

    • magiteker
      magiteker 2 days ago

      @Joseph Rosario What you're refusing to get is that popular policy isn't set by cities, towns, or states, popular policy is set by communities and activists organizing and campaigning to populations with similar concerns and problems.

    • magiteker
      magiteker 2 days ago

      @Joseph Rosario First your analysis of 2016 has no basis in historical fact, Trump didn't win that election Hillary lost it by ignoring black and minority communities in the rust belt by relying on Third Way political triangulation. She closed down her ground operations in those states early and pour resources into Iowa instead.
      Second people are less tribal but more responsive to their material concerns (i.e. jobs, health care, and economic mobility) and there is tons of research that shows communities will always vote along those lines even when their "tribe" tells them otherwise.
      Mob mentality is the basis of populist politics yes, but there is populism on both the right wing and left wing of the political spectrum, the difference being the right only gives people scapegoats where as the left addresses political concerns with tangible solutions. People know when there needs are being addressed just as they know when they're being ignored politically, which is why independent non-voters is the largest current bloc in the US followed by Democrats then Republicans, and they will always vote to improve their own lives and the lives of their community.

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario 2 days ago

      Well here's the thing, which state will have the largest effect on the popular policy?
      you now sidelined the question I did say that the states are divided I just asked which state will have the largest effect on the popular vote?
      You are trying to sideline the question.

  • MrStig691
    MrStig691 4 days ago

    The electoral college is not "proportional-ish" it's ridiculous. But being a dumb American CGP Grey incorrectly thinks it's better than the UK system.

  • Sam Maloney
    Sam Maloney 4 days ago


  • Jason Taylor
    Jason Taylor 4 days ago

    I love democracy subverted into a republic!

    • Joseph Rosario
      Joseph Rosario 3 days ago

      The United States has always been a republic

  • Goodknight
    Goodknight 4 days ago +1

    I doubt it would pass a challenge in the Supreme Court, or even before. California tried to force Trump to post his tax returns and that was struck down.

  • Jp Altman
    Jp Altman 4 days ago +2

    Trump is going to win 2020

  • Mark Carter
    Mark Carter 4 days ago

    Where does that fall in line with partisan politics?

  • moonglow630
    moonglow630 4 days ago +1

    This is RIDICULOUS!! CA & NY is ALWAYS gonna run up the popular vote. THAT’S WHY we have the Electoral College. It’s so a few states don’t run the country.
    Ya, let’s just F**k over the citizens cause we can’t find a decent candidate. Funny how before 2016 all we heard was how the electoral college favored the Dems & how there was “no path” for Trump.
    If you can’t win, change the rules. 🤬🤬🤬🤬

    • Noh Buddy
      Noh Buddy 2 days ago

      @moonglow630 Lol tell me how more people having a say is worse than rule by a minority

    • moonglow630
      moonglow630 2 days ago

      Noh Buddy yes they will. You obviously don’t grasp the intricacies of what being a Republic mean, and why being a straight democracy is harmful to the country. I’m sorry that your teachers didn’t provide you with a better education. I’ve surely lost my tolerance for beating my head against a wall trying to get you to understand.

    • Noh Buddy
      Noh Buddy 2 days ago

      @moonglow630 What? One vote in California would be one vote in Kansas. The state boundaries won't matter. As of right now if you vote GOP in California your vote doesn't matter.
      Lincoln didn't lose the popular vote. He won a plurality you dipshit

    • moonglow630
      moonglow630 2 days ago

      Noh Buddy the people in LA, NY & Chicago’s votes end up being worth MORE!! I was born & raised in CA. I know the population & the politics. Trump has the 3rd highest amount of votes in CA. But because of TWO CITIES CA WILL ALWAYS BE BLUE. That’s how the whole country would work w/out the electoral college. The two cities & their agendas would get attention, & the rest of the state gets ignored. And those two cities push their values on towns that are vastly different.
      People in Kentucky don’t want to live by NY & CA values.
      Not to mention, there are many Republicans who don’t vote because they think their state is automatically going to go blue, like my state of WA(yes I left CA). If every vote counted, then blue states could “flip” red. Dems won’t have the definite win they think they will.
      Also, the Republic wasn’t set up so much for the rich, as it was the educated.
      And FYI. Abraham Lincoln LOST the popular vote. So I guess you’re saying the guy who frees the slaves never should’ve been president.

    • Noh Buddy
      Noh Buddy 2 days ago

      @moonglow630 So why should people in LA county be worth less than those in Wyoming?
      Not being a democracy is a problem. It was MEANT to be a country controlled by the rich.