>Senate Democrats are looking to introduce a constitutional amendment that would abolish the electoral college
>Three senators are pushing this amendment from Hawaii, Illinois, and California.
>Sen. Brian Shatz of Hawaii
en.m.wikipedia.org
>Dick Durbin of Illinois
en.m.wikipedia.org
>Dianne Feinstein of California
Other urls found in this thread:
spectator.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
nytimes.com
youtu.be
twitter.com
Yeah, good luck with that.
If they pull this shit, it's time for a real revolution.
They acknowledge it most likely wont happen yet but they are trying to get it out there so presidential candidates will have to talk about it. Many younger generations and others uneducated about politics would instantly back up a president that says they should get rid of the electoral college.
They're going to continue change electoral laws by state so that EV gets awarded based on national popular vote instead.
Nothing would happen. If Americans didn't revolt when a private bank took control of their money, they won't for this.
Already passed in several US states.
>Win
IT'S GOOD
>Lose
IT'S BAD
Your fortune: Excellent Luck
Doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of passing, they need 3/4 of the states to ratify an amendment. Same reason they want to get rid of the EC is why they couldn't get the support for an amendment like this.
But kudos to them for at least trying to do it the right way instead of just cramming some blatantly unconstitutional bill through Congress, they made their point I suppose.
If this were to actually happen... Well... It's war.
How can we push this forward so we can finally kill the leftist scum?
Ah, the ironing of senators calling the electoral college unrepresentative.
Fuckin dramacrats
>Schatz
>Durbin
>Feinstein
Honk honk
Call me when it is 3/4s.
In the first case they would have won either way. You're quoting two different papers
Inevitable consequence of the war of northern aggression. This isn't a voluntary union of states, it's a federal empire and it doesn't really matter if smaller states will get upset that they would now have zero say in national politics because it's "illegal" to secede. American states are property of the federal government since 1865.
spectator.org
this article does a good job of giving you talking points when people say "muh slavery" when it comes to electoral college
I don't understand why small liberal states would want to cede their power. I think most Democrats actually want a global government.
I haven't checked lately, did these Marxist vermin get rid of "Superdelegates?"
The fact that the electoral college system exists at all is a form of gerrymandering and voter suppression, that serves to give Republicans more power and suppress the voice of voters who vote Democrat.
A large blue state like California has 55 electoral votes, whereas a small red state like Wyoming has 3 electoral votes. That's 18.333 times more. Now California's population is 39,144,818 while Wyoming's population is 586,107. That's 66.79 times more. Therefore, the Electoral College gives Wyoming 3.64 times more voting power than it otherwise would have. This same advantage doesn't apply to the blue states.
So, why should the votes of red states matter more than blue states? That's not democracy. As it currently stands, a vote in a place with the lowest populations like Republican Wyoming, effectively counts for 4 times the voting power, in terms of electoral votes per population represented by that electoral vote, than a place like Democratic California.
This is, obviously, massively unfair and unjust. That sort of differential simply should not exist in a fair system, but it does, as the electoral college is NOT a fair system.
All 4 times the popular vote didn't align with the electoral college it was always a democrat losing the presidency but winning the popular vote against a Republican.
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
The electoral college system is just one of the many dirty tricks Republicans use to suppress voters and undermine American democracy. Other Republican voter suppression tactics include voter id laws, registration fuckery, and so on. And that's another subject.
except leaf, the EC was put in place with the original constitution, meaning it was made before there was even a republican/democrat 2-party system as it exists today
Was wondering how long until someone noticed
Doesn't matter. It's still a shitty, undemocratic system that gives Republicans far more power than is fair.
>constitutional amendment
it's pure virtue signalling
How the fuck will the Senate minority do anything let alone amend the Constitution?
It's the only reason for low population states to stay in the Union and grow your food. We'll sooner see you starve.
you are correct, because we are a federal republic and not a pure democracy...popular vote at the federal level should never be put into place
>Yeah, good luck with that.
This basically. They have no chance of convincing the "lesser" 45ish states to give up their right to have a say in the federal election process. This absolutely will not happen.
California is the most important agricultural state, you dumb redneck.
Maybe they should work on voter id first, then see if they really want to get rid of the electoral college
>Doesn't matter.
It absolutely does matter. Just because you don't understand it isn't my problem. Tell me leaf, how much of your 7th grade US history class do you spend talking about the importance of the Electoral college? I doubt that you understand it at all based on the stupidity of your statements.
>import millions of illegals into your sanctuary state
>illegals count in census
>use tens of millions of illegals to gain more reps in the house
>start whining that the electoral college is unfair
No nigger, California deserves even less political representation.
All the illegals it imports shouldn't be counted in the census and all of Californias representatives that come as a result of illegal immigration stripped away.
why would i ever listen to some faggot foreigner talk about my country's political machines?
Then tell me, in your own words, why is the electoral college so important?
They hate you niggerloving (taconigger in this case) faggots, too. East Cali won't side with them. Go away, Toronto coward leaf.
Tell me, why should a state have the right to nullify federal immigration laws so that it can gain more representation in congress?
This is embarrassing
This would be the end of our republic
nytimes.com
Why should those who cannot vote be represented in a democracy? That by definition implies that some votes will count more than others.
What are you talking about?
So that stupid niggers and Marxist faggots living like sardines don't define our destiny.
I'm ok with a 3/5 compromise on that.
The EC is just as important to our Republic as our Constitution is. Without the EC, we're nothing but a Democracy. The founders of this nation feared democracy more than they feared monarchy, that's what they wrote about the Tyranny of the Majority. I'd rather be dead than witness either of those two scenarios unfold. Sorry, but without the EC, there are no "United States".
Why should representation in congress count those who cannot vote?
He's talking about the open rebellion in California that's flooding us with beaners like Germany flooded Europe with sandpeople.
one step closer to civil war
>why is the electoral college so important?
It gives each state no matter the size a fair say in the election of a president. The last election was a great example. Hillary may have had more votes, but she certainly did not win the most states/counties. Our EC system keeps a few large cities from dictating the entire direction of our country. It is not hard to convince a few cities to vote for you. It is very hard to convince a majority of the USA to do the same. That is what the EC is about to me.
What retard senator would vote away his states ability to vote??
You realize that white Americans are immigrants too, right?
Who fucking cares. Without the people having the ability to recall their supposed representatives for any or no reason, it's just another twist to the rules of the game which remains every bit as rigged as before.
>What retard senator would vote away his states ability to vote??
A democrat.
You say abolish the electoral college because it unfairly gives more representation to those who live in low population states. Yet, you ignore the fact that the house of representatives uses the census to designate how many reps a state gets. So under the same logic, those incapable of voting should not be counted in the census. Otherwise it gives an unfair advantage to states who have more people incapable of voting.
Why dont you read a book about it?
>imaginary lines and corporations should have a say in the Presidency
>believing the justifications of oligarchs and the petit-bourgeoisie
Nah I'm good
On April Fool's Day how fitting. For the party of fucking Fools.
Oh, can illegals vote can non-citizens vote in federal elections? Why should non-citizens count for representation? Why should a state that has more non-citizens than others gain an advantage?
I thought it was one man one vote, not one man (plus all the illegals that can't vote) one vote.
They cant do it
youtu.be
I don't think you need to get rid of it. Get rid of winner-takes-all and maybe add something like ranked choice voting and that would get a balance of parties that represents the people just a little better.
>Hillary may have had more votes, but she certainly did not win the most states/counties.
Because the electoral college is a form of gerrymandering.
>Our EC system keeps a few large cities from dictating the entire direction of our country.
You could have just said you want to suppress the voice of inner city people by making their vote worth less.
One person one vote isn't actually fair. Think of two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner. Even though everyone has one vote, in practice the sheep has no ability to influence the outcome. Under the current system, D and R are roughly equal, and that also represents national presidential outcomes.
This is getting to be too much man, this isnt gonna end without bloodshed is it?
>Because the electoral college is a form of gerrymandering
Wrong. It is not gerrymandering. It is a protection against a few urban centers dictating the entire lawmaking process of the entire country.
Fuck around and find out. You'll all get eaten in your asphalt cities by your precious foreign pets. They will turn on you as soon as the grape drink runs out.
You realize a difference between citizen and foreigner?
Answer the question leaf
Why do you believe illegal immigrants should count for the same representation as citizens for congressional apportionment?
Different leaf here.
Back in the day landlocked states were only willing to submit to federal rule if they got assurances they wouldn't get fucked over due to being the minority population-wise. (which was exceedingly prescient)
Pulling a bait & switch on this one would be the end of the US of A. Wouldn't even take a civil war, just unopposed disorganized seccession, like the end of the USSR. Half those states already have one foot out the door. (Texas is like 90% there)
>This is getting to be too much man, this isnt gonna end without bloodshed is it?
There is no way that a constitutional amendment to dissolve the EC would ever go through in the near future. If It did, I would guarantee that the Tree of Liberty would be watered.
Voting is a stupid idea anyway. Monarchy when?
Why arent elections based on amount of states won rather than population? Like one state is one point and you need 30/50 to win or something liket that.
>I need a daddy to save me
>Makes argument about system with 2 parties, where one party is favored
>Informed system pre-dates 2 party system
>Carries on unphased that whole argument is without merit.
Get with it leaf.
This leaf will go unraked for not being an ass.
Numerous studies have shown that non-citizens voting in US elections is exceedingly rare. It's not a real issue, and is only a red herring used by Republicans as an excuse to impose voter suppression measures like voter ID laws.
The Senate tongues my anus.
Your fortune: ｷﾀ━━━━━━(ﾟ∀ﾟ)━━━━━━ !!!!
Retard, do you know what congressional apportionment is?
Do you know what the census is?
>Wouldn't even take a civil war, just unopposed disorganized seccession
People think that the major urban centers are self sufficient. They forget that the food they need to eat, and only have a 3-5 day supply of comes from "flyover" states. It wouldn't take long to starve them out. All a state needs to do is stop all interstate traffic for a few weeks. Places like NYC would be total chaos within a few days.
non-citizens don't need to vote to rig the system
Their very existence grants their state more power in the house due to congressional apportionment.
>niggers cant get ID
how do you think they buy alcohol?
and how are those studies conducted?
they go door to door and ask if any of the illegal aliens voted illegally?
>ID laws
Nothing is wrong with showing Identification to open a bank account, purchase alcohol or a firearm. I see no problem in being required to show ID when I vote.
Each state is worth 2 points
DC is worth 1 point (to act as a tie breaker and to give it some say)
26 points needed to become President.
100,000 people were apprehended at our southern border in March, dipshit. The ones that slip by can have babies that vote opposite of mine.
Are you real?
30 makes it definative though, so theres no doubt
It might be Obamaleaf.
Children of undocumented immigrants are citizens of America. Why shouldn't they be allowed to vote?
How could states change the fact that each state gets as many electoral votes as they have congressmen + senators?
SHUT DOWN THESE SPOOPS!!!!!!!
>(((Shatz)))
>(((Feinstein)))
Because that's how the Constitution was written and I agree with it. Slaves and illegals can count as 3/5ths to ensure some representation for a group of residents that can't legally vote.
The Civil Wat fucked everything up, before the 14th Amendment there was no such thing as a US citizen, you were considered a resident of your State, and that entitled you to Constitutional protections.
A bunch of fucking monkey brained retards cluster fucked a beautiful system that didn't need to be fucked with.
I doubt thats constitutionally viable
True. It would get dicey though with third party candidates too.
Like Perot in 92.
Neither Bush or Clinton would have got 26.
So there’s still some bugs to work out.
But 84? Reagan would have clinched 99 out of 101. Legend.
States that Dems win anyways. Could be a funny backfire in 2020 though.
Let the bodies hit the floor
Ha. Shit.
Meant 51. Damn drugs
the united states is a federation.
why should the urban cores dictate life for those living in the countryside as if they were subjugated vassals?
strip political agency from the rural areas and you WILL see insurrection.
primarily in the form of attacks on vital infrastructure to punish the urban centers.
the EC is a core tenant of federalism and was designed to avoid exactly that scenario
Forgot to add that since there are no slaves, that 3/5ths compromise adds 0 electoral votes.
Definitely not advocating for slavery...
>blue states that votes solidly blue are throwing away their state power
DO IT NIGGER
Because you're going to be raked, because you're a traitor. Believing that shitting out a baby makes it a citizen is all the proof I need. Your capitol was founded by the pussies that didn't want to be free of a crown across an ocean.
A man born in a manger doesn’t become a donkey
Where you’re born doesn’t impact your identity dipshit. Would you also say that a man born in Iran can never be American because of his birth?
Because that's how fucking empires work.
>a federation
Worst idea ever. Break the fucker up so that we can physically get our hands on the ruling class that betrays us.
>won't become law any time soon
It will never become law because the minority states make up the majority of the by-state votes. Low population states (all blue states) will back out as soon as their forced to vote opposite of how its constituency voted, and the governors of those states will be tarred, feathered, and ran out on a rail.