Hillary Clinton Now Leads by 1 Million in History-Making Popular Vote Total

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

How much of a problem is the differing voting laws and regulations in individual states contributing to the problem of holding fair elections?

More all the time, and if Trump gets to pack the Supreme Court (2 or more appointments) it will get really awful.

[ZeroJunk]

Originally Posted by nailer

And based on your argument the majority of our population is unrepresented.

Not really. The Democrat has an almost insurmountable advantage most of the time. A couple of reliably Democrat states just flipped.

Flawed candidate same as 2000 when Gore couldn't even carry his home state.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by nailer

Why not just get rid of the states?

You are a heavy hitter.

[whell]

Originally Posted by nailer

Regardless of who's in power and who won, the Electoral College needs to go and the Senate needs to be proportion by population, the least populated states getting one ...

Regarding our being a republic of sovereign states, that was then and this is now. The Civil War set a precedent regarding holy state sovereignty.

The House is apportioned by population already. The Senate purposefully was not. No changes required or desired.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Tradition. What I suggest is radical enough for one revolution. Maybe get rid of the states after another 200 years.

As far as tradition goes, you suggested getting rid of states.

[whell]

Originally Posted by merrylander

I hate to break this to you but the electoral college was there to elect the Pres and VP simply because the framers of the Constitution did not believe that they could trust the Senators to do an honest job of it. The first proposal was to let the Senators elect Pres and VP. Then when it was decided that both be elected by the people the EC probably should have been disbanded but was not.

This was never the case.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

More all the time, and if Trump gets to pack the Supreme Court (2 or more appointments) it will get really awful.

Just a counter to Sanctuary Cities.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by whell

The House is apportioned by population already. The Senate purposefully was not. No changes required or desired.

Those who don't want a representative government agree. Keep the Faith baby.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by ZeroJunk

Not really. The Democrat has an almost insurmountable advantage most of the time. A couple of reliably Democrat states just flipped.

Flawed candidate same as 2000 when Gore couldn't even carry his home state.

No, really. It's precisely what you said regardless of your elections deflection.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by JCricket

Hey Tom,
Where did you get the info on the 400 point lead? I googled and didn't find anything conclusive. I would like to know more about this.

I got it from memory.

But here's something I got from googling just now.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/06/politi...on-nomination/

"My problem is that the process today has allowed Secretary Clinton to get the support of over 400 superdelegates before any other Democratic candidate was in the race," Sanders told CNN's Jake Tapper Sunday on "State of the Union." "It's like an anointment."