Posted on 01/06/2019 5:49:55 AM PST by gaggs
The Electoral College proved its worth in 2016, by preventing Democrats in California and New York from stealing the election with illegal votes.
If they try to eliminate the E.C. there is no recourse other than open warfare. Without the E.C. there is no longer any reason to vote.
Hence, violence.
Period.
With no Electoral College we have the Tyranny Of The Big Cities.
EVERTHING would be ultimately managed by city people, who have little experience, knowledge, or contact with the Realities of how things are done that provide support for their lives.
Killing the Electoral College is national suicide.
This was true when the country was founded, true now, and will be true in the future.
The estimated population of the Boston Metro Area in 1790 was 175,000.
The estimated population of Tennessee in 1780 was 10,000
The people of Tennessee needed adequate representation so that Bostonites couldn’t politically run roughshod over Tennesseans. Not just on some kind of social issues, but lets say Massachusetts wanted to annex some new western territory and didn’t want to deal with the french or english (canadians) to get it. Seems like they have an easy target here.
Without the EC, the rest of the country would be ruled by the tyranical, insane, lib dictators coming out of CA and NY.
It would result in outright open warfare.
I think you’d only need two elections after you dissolved the Electoral College, to convince people in Montana, Mississippi, Alabama....to just not show up and vote. Voting numbers in at least twenty states would drop by 50-percent. In fact, I don’t even see a reason to run a primary nation-wide...I’d just run the primary in five states (Cal, Tx, Florida, NY, Illinois). You could even skip the conventions as being important, and just run a mini-convention with a hundred folks showing up and just fake your way to the national election.
“EVERTHING would be ultimately managed by city people, who have little experience, knowledge, or contact with the Realities of how things are done that provide support for their lives.”
And then we would resort to a very old tried and true tradition of placing those cities under siege. They will soon get hungry.
This will open the path wide for secessionist movements and violence. There will be real blood in the streets, your commute to work will be disrupted, your light & gas may shut off sometimes. It’s only the beginning.
If every voter roll in the country was scrubbed for dead, illegal and and multiple registrations, the Democrats would never win another election, national or otherwise.
We need the Electoral College. If they want to eliminate our REPUBLIC, we will start CW2.
This graphic would just convince Democrats that L.A. needs two Senators of its own. The last thing they care about is gun rights in Wyoming.
bttt
Georgia should be grayish on that graphic.
Georgia has 10.545 million.
http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/
“Los Angeles County Population 2018. Los Angeles County’s estimated population is 10,163,507”
https://www.bing.com/search?q=population+of+la+county+2018&form=EDNTHT&mkt=en-us&httpsmsn=1&refig=a89843bef3574f3cfcd2a3d3520aa240&sp=2&ghc=1&qs=AS&pq=population+of+la+county&sk=AS1&sc=8-23&cvid=a89843bef3574f3cfcd2a3d3520aa240&cc=US&setlang=en-US
The point is still valid!
The Senate and House take care of this, I don’t think the EC does.
If the EC worked like this, there would be no popular vote.
The EC’s reason to exist is still best explained by my dad in the 80s: “The electoral college is there so that people like Howard Stern don’t become president. Nothing against Howard, he might be a good president but you can’t make a president into a popularity contest”
The democrats liked the idea so much (I kid, I kid.. but you’ll see the folly in a moment) that they made “Superdelegates” to ensure that hardcore commies didn’t get the Democratic nomination.
So basically, they have their own electoral college in the form of the superdelegates, for much the same reason but still think the EC is bad.
Liberals are the best at projection and calling the kettle black.
Keeping things fair and even is the American way. Thus we need the Electoral College.
Those who want to do away with the EC are the same ones who see nothing wrong with criminal aliens voting and ballot harvesting. Wonder why that is?
I am elated to see that I am not the only one who understands this has now come down to a conflict between insane city disconnected ideology and rural country common sense about reality and practicality.
And it is... Every ignorant unrealistic perspective we are dealing with right now came from the city fantasy bubble majority.
What about awarding your state’s EV based on the person who gets the most votes nationwide.
Too many Democrats states have passed this rule to go in effect once 270 EV is reached.
What about awarding based on congressional district a candidate has won and award 2 to the winner of the state. This practice in ME & NE would be messy in larger population states.
A 39 second read you will want to pass on.
In their infinite wisdom, the United States’ Founders created the Electoral College to ensure the STATES were fairly represented. Why should one or two densely populated areas speak for the whole of the nation?
The following list of statistics has been making the rounds on the Internet It should finally put an end to the argument as to why the Electoral College makes sense.
Do share this. It needs to be widely known and understood.
There are 3,141 counties in the United States.
Trump won 3,084 of them.
Clinton won 57.
There are 62 counties in New York State.
Trump won 46 of them.
Clinton won 16.
Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes.
In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond)
Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.
These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles.
The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles.
When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.