"Literally zero people have made" the argument that the 2016 result discredits the Electoral College. Also: https://twitter.com/brianbeutler/status/1152663127873527809 …pic.twitter.com/Vy2LfaYMpY
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Good for you. The Electoral College is bad on its merits and should be eliminated.
It does seem hypocritical of of us and an affront to democracy that in each of their elections Clinton and Obama lost the popular v–oh what's that you say?
And that’s absurd too. It’s nonsense on stilts that nobody cares about rural or urban votes in the two largest states. That a continental nation settles its presidential election on the contingent evaluation of maybe a third of the voting population based in a dozen states.
That those states change over time is irrelevant. So another third of the population in a dozen states is where the election occurs. The votes are weighted between those that matter and the majority which don’t. That’s nuts.
That's because the Republican lost, not because there's a EC bias against Republicans. The EC usually works to magnify the size of the victor's win. Reagan beat Mondale 525-13, but his popular vote margin was slightly smaller than 98-2.
I think minortarianism is a deeply held ethos of conservative thought. And majority are sometimes cruel and worse. But it’s not sustainable generally in a democracy. Legitimation will collapse. Most votes wins is intuitive to most people for a reason.
Is this a self own? Dems won the popular vote in every one of those elections. You’re proving our point.
Did the Electoral College work as intended in 2016? Or in 2000? Did it protect America from an unfit President? Or did it usher in a deranged old man into the highest office in the land?
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.