Democrat introducing bill to abolish Electoral College

originally posted by: TheKnightofDoom
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Care to explain to a Brit why it is good for the political system? it stops mob rule correct?.

Embracing the abolition of the EC would be embracing mob rule.

Leaving the current system in place ensures that everyone has equal (as much as is possible) representation.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Xtrozero

Unless i am incorrect, this would take a 2/3's majority to pass.

Meaning: it has no chance of passing

I just get this cringey feeling that republicans might pass it using "it won't get 3/4 states' votes anyway," as an excuse.

I'm just unsettled it's 'out' there now....what if, what IF???

Like I said earlier...if our election systems have been so hijacked and gerrymandering so effective that the results of this election were completely designed and controlled, then they could do it again, in 2020.

Only they could make it so the republican wins the popular vote but loses the electoral college.

And if they have that much control over our election systems...they could *cause* 3/4 of the states to vote for it, within the seven year deadline, and it would all seem very, very plausible.

I am ever faithful to my cynicism.

A guaranteed plan to abolish the Electoral College is a beautiful goal to globalists (like Soros). The march to globalism could be ramped up 1000%.

But it would take decades to implement. I see how they began to implement it with the election debacles of 2000 & 2004.

A decades-long plan, like that, epitomizes the elite's brand of socialism: Fabian socialism. And I have long suspected that Fabians infiltrated both major parties.

a reply to: alphabetaone

Ah I get it now

Look If the result was the other way around Trump would be all over the story saying he really won. I suspect everyone including Trump thought he would lose the EC but gain the popular vote giving him the chance to look good while losing but you guys threw them all a curve ball (ooh I talk all USAer ) and voted the other way lol.
Nowt will change Trump will toe the line just like they all have.

originally posted by: TheKnightofDoom
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Care to explain to a Brit why it is good for the political system? it stops mob rule correct?.

It keeps highly urbanized regions from having their way with the more rural areas that actually produce things for the countries survival.

They can't get their crap shipped from NY to LA without us maintaining the rails and roads. Typically, they would use terms like "social contract" when putting a hand in my pocket and pulling out a bit of my cash. I say the same social contract exists to give some equal consideration to us, the folks who don't live in the beltway or the california coast.

(ok, so a little more impassioned than was needed.....but if we have any more buildings abandoned here we will be able to lease our town as a old west movie set)

Dems need to be treated with contempt in the house and senate. They are blatantly out of their minds.

If you listen to the news you would never know they just got trashed for the third strait election.

originally posted by: TheKnightofDoom
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

He can't do anything now he has won It would give the dems more chance to get in next time.
You guys are going to be so disappointed in Trump he isn't anti establishment just look at who he is appointing the same old same old.
You guys should be all over his flip flopping but give it time I hope you all realise who and what he is and that is nothing he said he is.
I'm glad he is in because like everyone I hated Clinton more but tbh you all had crap choices.

Look at who he is appointing?

So far It's Steve Bannon and Priebus. How is that the same old, same old?

/scratches head.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

I'm just unsettled it's 'out' there now....what if, what IF???

I'm not sure if it makes you feel better or not, but getting 38 states out of 50 to accept a ratification to the constitution would almost take an act of god to accomplish. The likelihood that you would ever see such a thing is very, very slim.

A bill is meaningless out in the wild there....

a reply to: alphabetaone


Yes this call for its end is simply part of the hum and background noise made to devalue a Trump win.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan....but if we have any more buildings abandoned here we will be able to lease our town as a old west movie set)

This is just plain sad! I hate hearing things like this happening.

Friggin NAFTA

originally posted by: JimSmith
a reply to: Khaleesi

And oddly that seems to be what he wanted, since he was railing against the College in 2012.

According to the article linked in the OP, in his "60 Minutes" interview on Sunday, he had this to say about the Electoral College.

Trump said during a "60 Minutes" interview on Sunday that he still has issues with the Electoral College.
"I'm not going to change my mind just because I won," the president-elect said. "But I would rather see it where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes and somebody else gets 90 million votes and you win."
www.msn.com...

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: alphabetaone


Yes this call for its end is simply part of the hum and background noise made to devalue a Trump win.

Yes, maybe. Honestly I think there is no way the Democrats could have gotten away without proposing something radical, no matter how absurd. They needed something to say to get back on their feet after the hit to the solar plexus they took....lest they lose all their staunch supporters.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

I'm just unsettled it's 'out' there now....what if, what IF???

I'm not sure if it makes you feel better or not, but getting 38 states out of 50 to accept a ratification to the constitution would almost take an act of god to accomplish. The likelihood that you would ever see such a thing is very, very slim.

A bill is meaningless out in the wild there....

It doesn't make me feel better.

Read the rest of what I wrote above -- I still have my wild conspiracy theories about how they could accomplish this. And my theories about the hijacking of our election systems predate current events by about 6 years:

Like I said earlier...if our election systems have been so hijacked and gerrymandering so effective that the results of this election were completely designed and controlled, then they could do it again, in 2020.

Only they could make it so the republican wins the popular vote but loses the electoral college.

And if they have that much control over our election systems...they could *cause* 3/4 of the states to vote for it, within the seven year deadline, and it would all seem very, very plausible.

I am ever faithful to my cynicism.

A guaranteed plan to abolish the Electoral College is a beautiful goal to globalists (like Soros). The march to globalism could be ramped up 1000%.

But it would take decades to implement. I see how they began to implement it with the election debacles of 200 & 2004.

A decades-long plan, like that, epitomizes the elite's brand of socialism: Fabian socialism. And I have long suspected that Fabians infiltrated both major parties.

So, to me...this election and this proposed legislation just validates my fears.

The 2000 and 2004 election debacles were orchestrated to cause us to accept electronic voting machines and abandon recountable paper ballots. That has happened in 17 states. Those elections were also the catalyst for the Help America Vote Act which has left our voting and voter registration laws open to exploitation. George Soros' Brennan Center for Justice is behind the 'research' to support the passing of these legislation reforms.

Republicans have gerrymandered and allowed our electoral districts to be manipulated.

I already suspect 'they' have enough control of our election systems to convince us Hillary won the popular vote by a huge margin while allowing Trump to still win the electoral vote.

And if they could do that...they can do the inverse in 2020. And they can rig enough state elections to pass this amendment AND MAKE IT LOOK PLAUSIBLE, within the seven year deadline.

If I didn't already have this theory that over the last two decades, our election systems have been slowly hijacked...I wouldn't worry a thing about this either.

But I do have this theory, so I can't easily shake this.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I read the entire thing. No worries, I'm an EOAE (Equal Opportunity Anxiety Enabler) and I say, if you've got a conspiracy theory, by gum throw it out there until your vocal chords bleed!






But seriously, do you also believe that cell phones and smart phones were a conspiracy to get the world on board with digital devices, or was it simply the natural order of progression....voting machines, in my eyes, going digital are part of that natural order.

a reply to: windword

I watch that interview. The question was not about the EC but the general flap about elections being rigged, if he still thought they were and he said yes and wouldn't change his mind about THAT because he had won. Someone out there is now telling BS tall ones. We are seeing more clearly how F-UP the press has become.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

" It would require a bill first and then 3/4ths of the states to ratify it within seven years to amend the Constitution. "


Precisely . Why would 3/4ths of States Cede their Right of Representation in Presidential Elections ? If that Ever Happened , all those States with Sparse Population Numbers who would have Voted for that would Cease to be States with Any Constitutional Rights . Dumbest Idea I Every Heard of . The Socialist Democrats will Never stop trying to Destroy our Country , they are All Traitors and should be put in Prison .

originally posted by: alphabetaone
But seriously, do you also believe that cell phones and smart phones were a conspiracy to get the world on board with digital devices, or was it simply the natural order of progression....voting machines, in my eyes, going digital are part of that natural order.

You cannot recount votes cast on voting machines. They can be audited, but they cannot be recounted -- the vote tallies will never change. Paper ballots CAN be recounted and examined to determine 'voter intent.'

They convinced us that moving away from paper ballots is for our own good.

It's not. It makes our elections less-secure. It eliminates oversight.

So, no, I don't think it's the natural order of things.

And I don't think medical diagnosis over the phone, by mail, or online is the natural progression just because it *could* be accomplished that way. It's not a good idea.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: alphabetaone
But seriously, do you also believe that cell phones and smart phones were a conspiracy to get the world on board with digital devices, or was it simply the natural order of progression....voting machines, in my eyes, going digital are part of that natural order.

You cannot recount votes cast on voting machines. They can be audited, but they cannot be recounted -- the vote tallies will never change. Paper ballots CAN be recounted and examined to determine 'voter intent.'

They convinced us that moving away from paper ballots is for our own good.

It's not. It makes our elections less-secure. It eliminates oversight.

So, no, I don't think it's the natural order of things.

And I don't think medical diagnosis over the phone or online is the natural progression just because it *could* be accomplished that way. It's not a good idea.

What's the practical difference between auditing and recounting?

There isn't one...unless you're the one doing the auditing OR the recounting, whether paper or digital, the count can be manipulated in a nefarious way if the auditer / recounters are predisposed to doing so.

So where's the difference?

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: windword

I watch that interview. The question was not about the EC but the general flap about elections being rigged, if he still thought they were and he said yes and wouldn't change his mind about THAT because he had won. Someone out there is now telling BS tall ones. We are seeing more clearly how F-UP the press has become.

What lie?

Trump said during a "60 Minutes" interview on Sunday that he still has issues with the Electoral College.
"I'm not going to change my mind just because I won," the president-elect said. "But I would rather see it where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes and somebody else gets 90 million votes and you win."
www.msn.com...

Referring to changing to a "simple vote" fixes a rigged Electoral College, not voter fraud, not voter intimidation or suppression, ONLY a rigged Electoral College.

And, again, for the record, I'm opposed to repealing the Electoral College and switching to a simple vote.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: alphabetaone
But seriously, do you also believe that cell phones and smart phones were a conspiracy to get the world on board with digital devices, or was it simply the natural order of progression....voting machines, in my eyes, going digital are part of that natural order.

You cannot recount votes cast on voting machines. They can be audited, but they cannot be recounted -- the vote tallies will never change. Paper ballots CAN be recounted and examined to determine 'voter intent.'

They convinced us that moving away from paper ballots is for our own good.

It's not. It makes our elections less-secure. It eliminates oversight.

So, no, I don't think it's the natural order of things.

And I don't think medical diagnosis over the phone or online is the natural progression just because it *could* be accomplished that way. It's not a good idea.

What's the practical difference between auditing and recounting?

There isn't one...unless you're the one doing the auditing OR the recounting, whether paper or digital, the count can be manipulated in a nefarious way if the auditer / recounters are predisposed to doing so.

So where's the difference?

Ah, but that's not how recounts work.

Recounts are conducted transparently, with WITNESSES onsite and in full public view. Paper ballots are examined with full transparency, and VOTER INTENT can be discerned with 100% accuracy on a well-designed paper ballot. Even pregnant and dangling chads on punchcard paper ballots indicate voter intent. But better designed paper ballots leave no doubt.

An audit of a voting machine means it just spits out a receipt and shows..."yep, the total is still exactly as it was reported originally." You cannot go back in time and try to figure out if any given voter had some other intent.

We got rid of our oversight when they convinced us that paper ballots are outdated. They aren't.

Here's a new place you can sign a petition.


hamiltonelectors.nationbuilder.com...

Home "The process of [the Electoral College] affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications." ~ Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers #68 #HamiltonElectors are patriots participating in the electoral process who believe that Presidential Electors are responsible for safeguarding our nation’s futureand ensuring that the next President is the best person for the job.

As Electors, we honor Alexander Hamilton’s vision that the Electoral College should act as a Constitutional failsafe against those lacking requisite qualifications, ability, and virtue from becoming President. Guided by the Framers’ original intent, we’re compelled this year to do our job as Electors, to put party aside, and to put America first.

So we are encouraging Electors from both red and blue states to answer the Founding Fathers’ call, deliberate, and unite behind an alternative Republican Candidate: the Hamilton Candidate. Americans of all political persuasions are invited to join us and show their support online, in their communities, and at their statehouse on December 19 when the Electoral College officially meets.

Sounds great, right?