(November 13, 2016 at 2:30 am)Brian37 Wrote: Think about it, and read my take on it. IF it were reverse, would you want that "majority rule" to be Trump and the loons whom are about to take over? Now don't get me wrong, I doubt it will get employed, but when brought up to their party it is a warning to behave.
This is what is wrong with your argument. It's not about the result you prefer, it's about the result that is fair. Would I want Trump to have the majority vote? No, but if he actually did, I'd have to respect that, because clearly that would be what most of the country wanted.
Quote:We are a sanctuary government, in the context of the constitution that means neither the majority or minority always get what they want. They designed it as a fail safe to prevent tyranny. Which is why originally, before some states made it law that the electorate had to vote the way the voters did, they could go against their voters anonymously. Popular vote is what gave rise to Hitler.
False equivalence. Just because the popular vote is what gave rise to Hitler doesn't mean it's a bad or terrible thing. It's actually a very fair method of determining an outcome between two options.
Quote:I ultimately see this as a football game or baseball game, metaphorically speaking. If you know the rules going in, you cant complain when you lose. I hated that Bush won, and now this. If we had had the same turnout in every state like Obama did or better, it never would have gotten to this point. But it is in place just in case we end up with someone like we have now. If you want to avoid morons like Trump, the idea is to beat them at the game, so you don't have to end up employing the "oh shit what were we thinking" option in it.
Bullshit you can't complain when you lose, especially if the rules are inherently unfair.
Quote:If Kim Jong Un won both the popular vote beyond the close margin, OUR constitution would allow the attempt of the public to appeal say "HELP DONT DO THIS"
That appeal to our Senate isn't limited to majority or minority, just a last option to say " do you really want to do this"?
Right, and the problem is, this was all put into motion before political parties were really a thing. The only election where the House and Senate decided it was when there were 4 major parties who each got a good share of the vote.
The problem with the electoral college today, other than being a ridiculously unfair system, is that the actual "electors" are party members, and generally party members in their position will vote for their party.
