New York Times: Abolish The Electoral College

From the editorial board of the New York Times:

The Electoral College, which is written into the Constitution, is more than just a vestige of the founding era; it is a living symbol of America’s original sin. When slavery was the law of the land, a direct popular vote would have disadvantaged the Southern states, with their large disenfranchised populations. Counting those men and women as three-fifths of a white person, as the Constitution originally did, gave the slave states more electoral votes.

Today the college, which allocates electors based on each state’s representation in Congress, tips the scales in favor of smaller states; a Wyoming resident’s vote counts 3.6 times as much as a Californian’s. And because almost all states use a winner-take-all system, the election ends up being fought in just a dozen or so “battleground” states, leaving tens of millions of Americans on the sidelines.

There is an elegant solution: The Constitution establishes the existence of electors, but leaves it up to states to tell them how to vote. Eleven states and the District of Columbia, representing 165 electoral votes, have already passed legislation to have their electors vote for the winner of the national popular vote. The agreement, known as the National Popular Vote interstate compact, would take effect once states representing a majority of electoral votes, currently 270, signed on. This would ensure that the national popular-vote winner would become president.

  • bkmn

    This will distract him from ruining the country for a day or two.

    • Oikos

      His cabal of grifters will take care of that whilst he tweets.

      • paganguy

        Yep, while he fiddles with his smartphone.

        • Todd20036

          Really? I thought he used a pair of tweezers for that.

          • paganguy

            Nah… his hands are plenty tiny enough.

    • Butch

      Running….Ruining. One letter difference……

    • Kim K’s Kute Koochy✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

      i don’t think he notices the diff bw “running” & “ruining”
      Just like he can’t tell the difference bw “facts” & “lies”

  • Oikos
    • Joe in PA

      I hate to see sad kitty. ;(

      • Oikos

        Grumpy cat.

        • Joe in PA

          ok, that’s better, and me too.

        • unclemike

          Disgruntled feline.

    • Jonathan R Carr

      People said that Trump was “never gonna happen” either…

      • Oikos

        So? What is your point? It is a hell of a lot harder to change the constitution than to win an election.

        • Jonathan R Carr

          My point is that unexpected things can and do happen.
          It’s easy enough to say “never gonna happen” & if no one actually TRIES to make it happen, then the nay-sayers would be correct & things will never change. There are MANY things about our country & Constitution that have been changed because they no longer serve their original intended purpose. It just takes enough citizens committed to making it change. If we never changed anything, we wouldn’t even have the Bill of Rights, would we?

        • dukeofhurl

          This isn’t changing the constitution though.

  • Michael R

    That’s odd … you don’t hear any Republicans calling
    for an end to this ………or gerrymandering .

    • clay

      . . . or voter suppression
      . . . or making sure MI voting machines actually tally the votes

      • Ragnar Lothbrok

        ….OR keeping Russia’s fingers out of our pie.

    • Ninja0980

      The last one Democrats don’t have a high ground on.
      MD and IL were the only two states Democrats where Democrats got the Governor, Senate and House.
      And they gerrymandered the hell out of those two states.
      It needs to be done away with all together.

      • DanimalChgo

        IL does not have a Dem governor, we have the Trump-esque Republican Bruce Rauner.

        • Ninja0980

          Now they do… not when the maps were redrawn though.

      • juanjo54

        Really? California has a Democrat, Jerry Brown, in the governor’s seat, and democratic majorities in its assembly and senate and has for around 8 years. It also has a non-partisan committee that draws the borders of the districts instead of the usual party hacks. it also uses a system in primaries where the two top vote getters in the primary advance to the general election. This has meant that in the past few elections no Republicans have been no the ballot at all for statewide office. Needless to say they hate this a lot.

        But tow things did them in. First, back when they ran things they championed a little thing called Prop 186 which stripped Latinos of civil rights because you know, you have to break eggs to make an omelet. Second, the voters passed a proposal to require non-partisan drawing of election district boundaries. The Republicans supported the proposal because the democrat were the ones who were going to be drawing the next boundaries. That blew up in their face badly. Lots of formerly gerrymandered districts were redrawn and Republicans found themselves losing seat after seat in the legislature. Helped in part by pissed off Latinos who were sick and tired of being demonized for everything that was wrong in the state.

  • Giant Monster Gamera

    Never going to happen when the party that is advantaged doesn’t have a conscience.

  • TK

    While we’re dreaming…can we also ask the parties to get rid of primary caucuses and ‘first in the nation’ primary honors for bullshit white states?

    • IamM

      Yes. Assign primary dates to states by some randomized rotation.

      • David in Tucson

        Better yet, since we have ONE day as general election day, have ONE day as primary election day. Period. Stop the caucus nonsense. Have a primary election day that actually counts.

  • http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2016/12/19/gettyimages-623049756_wide-9b53e72ec4cb3a46005de38f04c39c09aa0bb28d-s900-c85.jpg

    The Electoral College seems to be a pretty convoluted way of choosing a leader, isn’t it?

    There are efforts to change it, especially after this past election, which saw the winner of the popular vote lose the election for the second time in the past five elections.

    The National Popular Vote proposal would guarantee the winner of the popular vote is the winner of the presidency. It needs support from enough states to add up to 270 electoral votes. It has so far been enacted by 11 jurisdictions with 165 electoral votes. It is nice to see that there is some momentum.

    But it is unlikely to be adopted by a majority of states anytime soon.

  • crewman

    This would make the vote of rural, GOP voters count the same as voters from liberal metropolitans. Get ready for an outpouring of high-and-mighty, solemn reverence for the Founding Fathers’ vision and the sacredity of the electoral college.

    • Oikos

      and if we say otherwise we are traitors who hate murica.

      • Ninja0980

        Or that we aren’t “real” Americans.

        • Steverino

          As well as not being true Scotsmen, er, Americans.

      • Bared Bear

        Wear a flag pin. That fixes everything.

    • Tread

      This is why we need to work overtime to make sure in 2018 we take back Congress. We MUST make sure that the fucking information, uneducated mouth breathers never put us in this predicament again. I’m tired of kowtowing to the lowest common denominator.

  • David From Canada

    I’m Canadian. Your American Presidential elections are too long and too complicated. Our last election for Prime Minister lasted 4 months, which we thought was long. I’ve noticed that Americans make things more difficult than they have to be. No advice, just an observation.

    • Marides48

      This reminds me. Doesn’t our election cycle for POTUS 2020 begin in maybe a year from now?
      Fasten your seat belts……!

      • Butch

        You don’t have to look far to read about it already.

      • Mark

        Kanye already bought himself some new shoes….

    • Chucktech

      Thats why gawd dont luv Canida an He luvs ‘Murikah.

    • Tiger Quinn

      Rob Ford. That’s really all I have to say to you.

      • Randy Ellicott

        Local politics will always provide for more eccentric candidates, but Rob Ford was no where near the Prime Minister position, just a mayor.

        • ByronK

          It is almost like Ford was a micro-rehearsal for Trump. A grossly incompetent candidate being championed by the angry, disenfranchised “outsiders” in a protest vote against the “elites”.

          • Randy Ellicott

            I am not to sure on the details of Ford’s rise to power, though I think we in america have enough people like Ford in local office to have been test cases for trump…

          • Strepsi

            He was elected mayor in an amalgamated city, where the suburbs together – full of suburbanites who hate taxes and like homogeny – voted en masse against the downtown progressive city-dwelling “cultural egghead elite”…..

      • Jean-Marc in Canada

        Really? You’re going to point to the one anomaly in local politics and conflate that with national politics; and then further argue a false equivalence? Oh honey, put down the Rob Ford crack pipe, you’ll hurt yourself.

      • Smithbc

        Rob Ford was a mayor. We just elected a total idiot to PRESIDENT. Big difference. There have been bigger loons as mayors of random cities.

      • douglas

        He’s dead so what’s your point? And he was stripped of all his powers when the crack video came out. So here is my repose to your Rob Ford….. Ted Cruz, Michelle Bachmann, Louis Gohmert, Jeff Sessions, Rick Perry, Howard Cain, Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, George Bush, TRUMP. I could go on but you get the point. At least Ford was just a Mayor. Nine of the names I listed ran for president and 63 million Americans thought the worst of them all would be a good choice for the highest office in the land.

        • Mark

          you missed Tom Delay, Huckabee, and that crazy ol bat up in Michigan….

    • Joe in PA

      $$$$

    • clay

      They don’t do things to make them more difficult, they do thing to make them more money.

      • Roxannejchampion

        Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj238d:
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        !mj238d:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash238MediaWebGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj228d:….,……

    • William

      Four months sounds like a dream.

    • Smithbc

      4 months would be amazing. Our next election season is starting any day now.

    • Jean-Marc in Canada

      So true, I remember watching the news and people saying “it’s too long.” LOL

    • Steverino

      There is no governing at the federal level anymore in the United States, only perpetual campaigning.

    • Ernest Endevor

      The population of Canada is approx 2 million less than the STATE OF CALIFORNIA by itself. Don’t mean to shout but this is an enormously diverse and dynamic nation. A dreadful catastrophe has fallen upon us.

      • Strepsi

        Huh? The U.S. invented broadcast media: it takes as short a time to tell 350 million people the issues as 35 million….

    • Robincho

      The first course everyone signs up for at our Electoral College is the one we call “How-To-Eat-Corndogs-Without-Looking-All-Queer-While-Still-Acting-Like-You-Give-A-Fuck-About-Ethanol.” But my favorite course will always be “What-Parts-Of-A-3/5-Person-Are-Missing?”

      The Electoral College — Where You Get American Political Nolledge…

    • greenmanTN

      It seems like we had a full year of this stuff, maybe more. By the time of the election throwing myself off a building was starting to sound good.

    • Moebym of the Resistance

      They are indeed, which is why our voter turnout is crap.

    • Strepsi

      i re-watched a “Big Fat Quiz of 2015” and it was full of Trump Mexican rapist / wall jokes! I second David’s observation, but add the question, “How can you govern the country for 4 years when 2 FULL YEARS are spent campaigning?!!”
      (and worse, now that the GOP defined “lame duck president” to mean during primaries, never mind election day….

    • Phillip in L.A.

      Totally agree, David!

      “Americans make things more difficult than they have to be”

      Some folks think this is a “feature” of our Constitution, rather than a bug.
      James Bryce, a Member of Parliament for Aberdeen, visited the United States in the Nineteenth Century, and said this about the U.S. Constitution, in his classic, The American Commonwealth:

      A philosopher from Jupiter or Saturn who should examine the constitution of England or that of America would probably pronounce that such a body of complicated devices, full of opportunities for deadlock and conflict, could not work at all. . . .
      [¶] Every Constitution, like every man, has ‘the defects of its good qualities.’ If a nation desires perfect stability it must put up with a certain slowness and cumbrousness; it must face the possibility of a want of action where action is called for. If, on the other hand, it seeks to obtain executive speed and vigour by a complete concentration of power, it must run the risk that power will be abused and irrevocable steps too hastily taken. Those faults on which I have laid stress, the waste of power by friction, the want of unity and vigour in the conduct of affairs by executive and legislature, are the price which the Americans pay for the autonomy of their States, and for the performance of the equilibrium among the various branches of their government. They pay this price willingly, because these defects are far less dangerous to the body politic than they would be in a European country.

      1 James Bryce, The American Commonwealth (London & New York: Macmillan and Co., 1888), at 301-302.

    • NancyP

      We are not parliamentary. We have set terms, and do not have the capacity to hold “no confidence” votes to get rid of our top leader before his term is over. This set-up is more adaptable to overly long campaigns.

    • Spudger

      On the whole, I agree with you this shit takes way too long – but we also have 10x your population and arguably a larger set of geographically based cultural divisions. It’s going to take longer.

      We already have dismal turnout – Imagine what it would be if we didn’t spend a year+ hauling the imminent election into the public eye.

  • Ragnar Lothbrok

    We should have done that 16 years ago !!!!

    Why did we ever let the idea go ??

    • Tiger Quinn

      It keeps getting Republicans elected, they will NEVER let it go.

  • Chucktech

    The Electoral College, which is written into the Constitution, is more than just a vestige of the founding era; it is a living symbol of America’s original sin.

    They left out Rubber Stamp. That is what the Electoral College has clearly become.

  • Todd20036

    This discussion should have been raised in 2000

    • Marides48

      How soon we forget.

    • Moebym of the Resistance

      It was, but not enough people cared. That or the media didn’t give it enough airtime.

      • JCF

        It WAS discussed…through September 10, 2001.

  • Tiger Quinn

    As it has proved itself to be entirely toothless, there’s no reason to have it.

    • Kate

      It served its purpose perfectly. President Trump won the states, winning the election, and California was kept in check, ensuring the president represents the will of the states.

      • Phillip in L.A.

        “California was kept in check”

        Not according to chess rules!

  • Ninja0980

    I keep hearing how this will give CA and NY more power then the rural states.
    To put it bluntly, this will help balance the scales, as the rural states and their voters have more power in the Senate and Congress then Blue states and their urban voters ever will.

    • William

      Elections should not hinge on how the people of Ohio vote.

    • Than.

    • Cattleya1

      It was meant to – it was a deal hammered out by the Founding Fathers which gave the small and rural states a leg up on the more urban and larger states. Why else give Rhode Island and Wyoming as many Senators as New York and California? Because, the Fathers in the smaller states would never have backed ratification. The political exigencies of the 1790’s have come to bite us on the ass 220-some years later.

  • Natty Enquirer

    It won’t happen. The present system favors the two parties which have a stranglehold on U.S. politics and they won’t give it up. Neither party cares about the popular vote; they care about winning the White House.

  • canoebum

    This article points to the problem with the Electoral College I wrote about here in the past few days; it is a vestige of slavery in the United States. It has no place in a modern, media obsessed, highly connected nation. It also violates the one person, one vote principle. Unfortunately, as long as it works to the benefit of Republicans, no Congressional action to end it will move forward. To rid ourselves of this fossil will require a national movement on the scale of the Suffrage Movement of the early 1900s or the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s.

    • Kate

      It is one person, one vote. Each Californian vote counts equally towards how California votes.

      It was never a popular vote, was never intended to be, and eliminating it would help destroy the “states” in the United States.

      • canoebum

        I thought I blocked you. I’d better try it again.

        • juanjo54

          she is correct.

        • gary47290

          You can block Kate but she’s right. Abolishing the electoral College is wrong for a federal republic.

          Further, a national popular vote means a national recount. Under the Electoral College, the results are crystal clear in 45 or more states (depending on how close a margin you want to argue about). With a national popular vote (whether officially or by this bogus compact), looking for questionable votes to benefit your side makes a legal challenge as productive in California as in Pennsylvania. Do you really want endless lawsuits in 50 states?

          Finally the Electoral College is not anti-democracy. It is a different sort of democracy.

          We don’t object to the parliament of Canada electing the Prime Minister instead of the people. Why should the President of the United ***States*** become the president of 330 million Americans?

          • canoebum

            Why should the vote of a single Wyoming resident count the same as four voters in California, or 3.6 voters in New York? Kate is not right. The Electoral College was a bad compromise with southern states who wanted to count their slaves, who had no right to vote, because they were property, as part of their population. It should have been done away with after the South lost the War Between the States in 1865 and the slaves were emancipated. Lastly, we don’t have a Parliamentary system here. If we wanted that, we could have stayed in the Commonwealth, a notion soundly rejected by the country in 1789.

      • Dean

        States rights should be abolished along with local school board control. These two things keep idiots and bigots on power.

  • dr morbius

    Dream on.

  • Gay Fordham Prep Grad

    To amend the Constitution you need a 2/3 vote in the House and Senate then 3/4 of the states have to ratify. Not happening EVER. Got it, never going to happen. Stop banging your head against the wall…it annoys me.

    • Smithbc

      Did you read the segment? He’s taking about a different solution.

      • Gay Fordham Prep Grad

        I did…makes no sense to me. Why would the good and wholesome people of Alabama ever cede their electoral power to the atheistic communist Jewish militant homosexualists of California and New York?

        • clay

          They don’t have to. Only those heavily populated (i.e. blue and purple) states totally more than 270 electors need to.

    • Silver Badger

      It annoys the wall too, but the wall is too nice to say anything. (I’m actually agreeing with you GFPG.)

    • canoebum

      I’m sure lots of men said the same thing during the push to give women the right to vote. Get ready to be annoyed.

      • Silver Badger

        Being annoyed at the trump administration will be a way of life with many of us. Perhaps this is an exercise in flexibility?

    • Lazycrockett

      The way to work around it is to get the states to pass legislation that they must vote for the winner of the popular vote.

      • Ben in Oakland

        Actually, that’s what we have now.

        • Natty Enquirer

          Only at the state level. The Compact prescribes that states assign their electors to the winner of the national tally.

          • Phillip in L.A.

            The Constitution merely says that States shall have the power to decide how its electors (for Representatives in Congress and the President) are chosen, iirc

  • The issue I see with a straight-up popular vote is that presidential candidates would never leave the 20 most populous metro areas in the country, and states like Montana and Idaho and the Dakotas would lose what voice they have. Hell, you lock up the Boston/NYC/DC corridors, and California, and the election is pretty much in the bag.

    • MBear

      “…and states like Montana and Idaho and the Dakotas would lose what voice they have”

      You say that like it’s a bad thing…? 😉
      /snark

    • Ernest Endevor

      Good. That’s as it should be. We pay enough in subsidies to keep their economies afloat.

      • So you’re saying that money makes your vote more valuable? Isn’t that what Hair Drumpf thinks?

        • Ernest Endevor

          Not at all. What I’m saying is that I’d like to live in an actual democracy where my vote counts as much as does the vote of a resident of Wyoming.

    • OdieDenCO

      state should not have a voice. It’s we the People, not we the states.

      • It has nothing to do with states; it has to do with population density. My vote in Minneapolis/St. Paul would carry weight, while my friend in Hibbing MN might as well stay home.

        • OdieDenCO

          bull! one person, one vote. how does population density negate that? I get your point, the candidates may never campaign outside of the larger urban areas. But in this day and age of mass communication what difference does it make? you could run an entire campaign in your basement and still be heard by the majority of Americans. the nearest I have every come to a president or presidential candidate is standing on my porch as Reagan drove by. yet I still vote for the candidates without every seeing them in person.

    • Ben in Oakland

      So maybe they should be trying to convince other people to vote their way, you know, with facts, n stuff life that.

      Basically, 80,000 people in three states elected trump. That should not be.

      • I have no particular argument with anything you just stated.

    • ryan charisma

      you mean the educated people will have equal vote to eddie punchclock & sally housecoat? GOOD.

      • As much as it can pain me, I point out that education and political philosophy has nothing to do with the validity of my vote.

    • unclemike

      Uh…they still have senators and congressmen, no? How exactly do you lose a voice if one person = one vote?

      • That’s an entirely different issue. If you lived in Hibbing MN, would you like knowing that your vote didn’t matter at all?

        • rusty57

          No.
          In an election there will be a candidate that wins and another
          who doesn’t. So there always be someone who’s vote doesn’t matter at all (though I’m not convinced that’s entirely true)
          Sorry, but the invalidation of 65,000.000+/- votes by 62,000,000+/- votes, using an archaic system that was designed to keep those who owned other human
          beings from having to go out and get real jobs is the issue here.

        • unclemike

          Their vote would count just as much as anybody else’s. Just because their state has a smaller population doesn’t mean they should be over-represented to compensate.

    • BobSF_94117

      Why everybody can find sympathy for the poor folks in WY but doesn’t give a damn about the 40 MILLION in CA is a mystery to me.

      • Not what I said at all. What I am implying that your geographic location should have nothing to do with the weight of your vote for the presidency. A straight-up popular vote gives undue weight to urban dwellers.

        • IamM

          Not really. Advertising cost is determined by market size so it costs about the same to reach 10,000 voters no matter where they live.

        • BobSF_94117

          your geographic location should have nothing to do with the weight of your vote

          The EC system means where you vote HAS EVERYTHING TO DO with its weight. You appear very confused.

    • IamM

      No one campaigns in Idaho Montana or the Dakotas now.

      The ones whose votes are courted in the presidential race mostly just voters living in four or five large swing states.

      • gary47290

        No one campaigns in Massachusetts, California, Texas or Alabama either. 40 some states are predictively voting for a known party.

        A national popular vote just raises the cost of the electional astronomically when a meaningless state-level margin can be meaningful nationally.

        • IamM

          A national popular vote, or a reformed electoral system that awards EVs proportionally rather than all or nothing, makes candidates compete for everyone’s vote instead of being able to ignore virtually everyone because the system effectively disenfranchises them.

    • juanjo54

      add Florida and Ohio in that mix and you’re right.

    • The candidates pretty much ignore the low population states as it is. Maybe for voting purposes the country should be divided up not along state lines, but population blocks. Some blocks would be quite large, some very small. But each block would get one single EC vote, which would even out the rural v urban votes. And in order to have the EC actually fulfill their duties as they were originally meant, have the EC voters not be picked by party, but the same way we empanel Grand Juries, randomly picked, and the names are sealed.

  • MBear

    It suits the people in power, so yeah: good luck with that.

  • Rick

    Well if the NYT is for it, they’ll be sure to hate it.

  • Ernest Endevor

    This is a terrific idea. I read about it first – and provided links here – about a month ago. This is something that could really make a difference to our elections.

  • BobSF_94117

    Now that we’ve seen that the “escape valve” of the EC is utterly worthless, there’s no way in hell the GOP will repeal it. Nor will more than a couple red states sign up for the pact to get around the EC’s effect.

  • Brad Lathem

    Abolish the electoral college, abolish lifetime Supreme Court appointments, abolish gerrymandering

    • IamM

      Also abolish first past the post voting. It disenfranchises minorities, suppresses alternative parties, and is vulnerable to spoiler candidates.

      • Moebym of the Resistance

        Run more candidates first, then work on this.

        • IamM

          I think, as a practical matter, we’ll have to get more candidates elected before we can work on this. 🙂 But, ranked voting is one of the reforms that can help make government more representative. Though gerrymandering & voter suppression are far bigger problems at the moment.

          • Kate

            Ranked voting would be a major improvement, and would help third parties to matter and flourish. That would be a very good thing, as governance shouldn’t be reduced to one of two bad choices.

      • juanjo54

        the alternative has serious isssues as well. It gives relatively minor, single issue parties a very large chink of power, far greater than their size justifies. If you think this is not a problem then look at Israel where Shaas or one of the other ultra far right parties has been a partner in every government coalition for over 30 years and used that power to implement all sorts of legislation to benefit the ultra-orthodox right wing. France, Spain, Germany, Italy and other governments in Europe all have this problem to one degree or another. Spain went without a government at all for over a year because no one could get past the magic number to form a government. Italy changes governments more often than the typical Italian changes his underwear.

        • IamM

          I’m suggesting ranked voting of candidates, not a parliamentary system of government.

  • Acronym Jim

    The photo accompanying this article has been doctored. Here is the original:

    https://blogonwouldye.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/lizard.jpg

  • KQCA

    We learned on Monday that the electoral college’s role to spare us an unfit president does not work.

  • Gerry Fisher

    If the Electoral College served as nothing more than a rubber stamp for the election of Trump, then it serves no purpose. Abolish it.

    • Kate

      It serves to ensure that each state has a voice, instead of just California and NY.

      It served that purpose very, very well this past election.

    • Amanda B. Rekendwith

      What if alternatively, the Electoral College choice needed to be ratified by a Council of Former Presidents, who had the ability to choose the winner of the popular vote under certain circumstances. The number of members of the Council would fluctuate over time, but come election time, the decision of the majority of the Council would be final.
      In this past election, of the 5 living former or current Presidents (Carter, GHWBush, Clinton, GWBush, and Obama),if 3 were to say no to Trump, then that would be the final say.

  • juanjo54

    I hate to toss some cold water on the discussion but this NYT’s article has cherry picked some data and recast it to support a pre-existing conclusion. At the time of the drafting of the Constitution the majority of enfranchised and on-enfranchised people in the United states lived in North Carolina, Delaware, Virginia, New York and Massachusetts. Of those states the majority of voters lived in the slave states, Delaware, Virginia and North Carolina. The concerns at the time were that if the popular vote determined the election then the candidates would only look at the states with the largest population and once elected would focus on keeping those populations content while ignoring the other states. It was a valid concern and still is.

    It is true that any candidate for president looks at which states are safe, battlegrounds or a complete loss. But there are many roads to the magic 270 which is why different candidates have focused on different states and the states which are battlegrounds can shift over time. If we went to a system of popular vote only then the most populous states would be the only ones a candidate would need to focus on. Requiring electors in any state to vote for whomever carries the popular vote does not change that problem. It means California, Florida, Texas, New York, Ohio, Illinois and one of a few other states [Georgia, Wisconsin or Michigan] would always determine the winner of the presidency.

    In the recent debacle we just completed, almost all the votes putting Clinton over the top came from one state, California. Now if we had followed the system endorsed in the NYT article had been in effect in the past election I would have been quite happy. But then I live in California and am a democrat. I might not be so content if I were from in Idaho or North Dakota.

    • Phillip in L.A.

      Excellent and thoughtful post, juanjo54! Thx for this!

  • Piona O.

    Why would the party in power ever modify the system that put them in power? Republicans, who for all practical purposes own the government until 2020, will never allow the Electoral College to be reformed, because it’s given them unwarranted Presidencies in two of the last five elections. And (as a life-long Democrat) I fear that if Democrats ever regain power, they also will refuse to reform the system that put them there. Politicians are politicians: they all put power above principle.

  • Platos_Redhaired_Stepchild

    Abolishing the Electoral College is nearly impossible. However, I think some states bind their Electors to choosing who wins the popular vote in their state. That is more achievable.

  • JOHN MAYOR

    THE POLITICS OF TRUE PLURALITIES
    .
    _______________
    .
    [ATTENTION!!:… AS THERE ARE A NUMBER OF “FAKE GRAMMARIANS” ON WEBSITES WHO SPEND A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THEIR TIME “NETTROLLING” OVER CAPS, HYPHENS, ELLIPSES, PUNCTUATION, EXCESSIVE LUCIDITY/ DETAIL, EXCESSIVE COMMENT LOG LENGTH, EXCESSIVE BLISTERING/ BITING HUMOUR, AND SPAM (AND BLAH, BLAH, BLAH!… AND WHINE, WHINE, WHINE!… AND FLAG, FLAG, FLAG!)!… BUT!… WHO WOULDN’T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOUND GRAMMATIC LITERARY EXPRESSION AND THEIR NETTROLLIAN NETTROLLING NETTROLLICIDE IF THEIR RESPECTIVE PSYCHIATRISTS’, AND/ OR SOCIAL WORKERS’ LIVES DEPENDED UPON IT, I WOULD HAVE READERS NOTE THE FOLLOWING!…
    .
    LARGE LETTERING IN A “PASSIVE TEXTUAL COMMENT” D-O-E-S N-O-T T-R-A-N-S-L-A-T-E TO “S-C-R-E-A-M-I-N-G”!… THAT CONCLUSION WOULD BE THE “LEARNED ASSOCIATION” OF LARGE LETTERING WITH SOUND, B-E-H-A-V-I-O-R-A-L D-E-L-U-S-I-O-N-S, EVIDENCE OF SYNESTHESIA, THE I-L-L-U-S-I-O-N-A-L SIDE EFFECT/ SEQUELA/ EPIPHENOMENON OF EXCESSIVE ALCOHOL USE, PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION, PSYCHOTROPIC DRUGS, BRAIN TRAUMA, OR SOME GENETIC-BASED COGNITIVE PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGIC MALFORMATION (E.G., I-N-B-R-E-E-D-I-N-G!), POST-CONCEPTION! AND!… THE COVERT AND OVERT M-O-L-E-S-T-A-T-I-O-N OF THOSE WHO USE LARGE LETTERING BY “P-S-E-U-D-O-G-R-A-M-M-A-R P-O-L-I-C-E”/ CLIQUES, IS N-O-T-H-I-N-G L-E-S-S THAN S-O-C-I-O-P-S-Y-C-H-O-P-A-T-H-I-C “P-S-E-U-D-O-G-R-A-M-M-A-T-I-C B-U-L-L-Y-I-N-G”!!
    .
    LARGE LETTERING, IS USED TO E-M-B-O-L-D-E-N T-H-E E-M-P-H-A-S-I-S OF U-N-E-M-B-O-L-D-E-N-E-D REGULAR/ NORMAL SIZED TEXT!… AND IN A FASHION, SIMILAR TO QUOTATION MARKS!… AND!… HAS N-O-T-H-I-N-G T-O D-O WITH “S-O-U-N-D”!
    .
    HYPHENS!… WHETHER USED BETWEEN REGULAR/ NORMAL SIZED TEXT IN AN EXPRESSION, OR BETWEEN EMBOLDENED/ LARGER SIZED TEXT IN AN EXPRESSION, ARE USED TO EFFECT AN “A-R-T-I-C-U-L-A-T-I-O-N” OF A GIVEN TEXTUAL EXPRESSION!… AND!… TO DELIBERATELY “R-E-L-A-X”/ S-L-O-W D-O-W-N THE READING OF AN EXPRESSION, IN ORDER TO A-R-T-I-C-U-L-A-T-E “H-E-I-G-H-T-E-N-E-D A-T-T-E-N-T-I-O-N” TO PARTICULAR EXPRESSIONS THAT ARE DEEMED I-N-T-E-G-R-A-L TO A MESSAGE/ CONCEPT BEING COMMUNICATED! AND, AGAIN!… THE USE OF HYPHENS H-A-V-E N-O-T-H-I-N-G T-O D-O WITH “S-O-U-N-D”!
    .
    ELLIPSES!… ARE USED TO EFFECT A DELIBERATE BREAK IN WHAT WOULD– OTHERWISE!– BE A “QUICKENED” CONTIGUOUS SENTENCE USING “CONVENTIONAL” SENTENCE STRUCTURE, AND PUNCTUATION! THEY ARE USED TO ARTICULATE A SENTENCE IN THE SAME MANNER A HYPHEN MIGHT BE USED TO ARTICULATE A WORD!… AND, TO “R-E-L-A-X”/ S-L-O-W D-O-W-N THE MESSAGE BEING COMMUNICATED!… IN WHAT WOULD– OTHERWISE!– BE A MORE “HURRIED” CONVENTIONAL SENTENCE STRUCTURE! AND!… IS COMPARABLE– I’LL SUGGEST!– TO “S-A-V-O-U-R-I-N-G” AN AFFORDABLE FINE WINE!… AS APPOSED, TO “GULPING IT DOWN”!
    .
    LASTLY!… EXCLAMATION MARKS– FOR ME!– ARE PREFERRED OVER PERIODS, AS I DESIRE “L-U-C-I-D A-T-T-E-N-T-A-T-I-V-E-N-E-S-S” TO THE IDEAS/ NOTIONS/ CONCEPTS BEING COMMUNICATED! AND, ONCE AGAIN, THEIR USE HAS N-O-T-H-I-N-G T-O D-O WITH “S-O-U-N-D”!… N-O-T-H-I-N-G T-O D-O WITH “M-A-N-I-C S-Y-N-T-A-X”!… OR “M-A-N-I-C S-E-L-F E-X-P-R-E-S-S-I-O-N”! THE “M-A-N-I-A” WITHIN THE MINDS OF SOME NETTROLLIANS, FROM NETTROLLIA, ATTEMPTING NETTROLLICIDE, IS SIMPLY THE MANIFESTATION OF ONE OR MORE OF THE AFORENOTED CONDITIONS!
    .
    I DON’T DELIBERATELY CHOOSE TO EXPRESS MYSELF USING “HYPERVERBOSITY”!… OR EVEN VERBOSITY! MY WORDS… AT TIMES!… MAY BE MANY!… BUT, THESE ARE CHOSEN CAREFULLY!… AND ARE MEANT TO EXPRESS– EFFICIENTLY, AND EFFECTIVELY!– WHAT IS E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L FOR T-H-O-U-G-H-T-F-U-L R-E-A-D-E-R-S TO ENTERTAIN/ RECEIVE! AND, UNLIKE “T-R-U-M-P-I-A-N T-H-I-N-K-E-R-S”, I DON’T JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS “E-A-S-E O-F A-C-C-E-S-S”!… NOR, A WOMAN BY THE PRESUMED “E-A-S-E O-F H-E-R G-E-N-I-T-A-L A-C-C-E-S-S”! AND SO!… IF MY WORDS APPEAR TO BE “I-N-A-C-C-E-S-S-I-B-L-E” TO SOME… T-O-O B-A-D!… I’M NOT “DUMBING DOWN (LIKE SOME OF TRUMP’S VICTIMS!)”, JUST SO SUCH, CAN “G-E-T O-F-F”!
    .
    THESE WILL SIMPLY HAVE TO “P-L-A-Y” WITH THEIR OWN “D-U-M-B-*-S-S E-X-P-R-E-S-S-I-O-N-S”!… AND SYNTAX!… IN ORDER TO DO THAT! “FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION” ON THE NET (INCLUDING, GRAMMATIC STYLE!) IS GLOBALLY/ INTERNATIONALLY SUPPORTED!… HOWEVER, “NETTROLLIAN CYBERSTALKING”, AND HARASSMENT (AND RE, E.G., GRAMMATIC STYLE!), I-S N-O-T!! AND SO… THESE POINTS BEING MADE!… ENJOY THE ENSUING!]

    http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/e1/e13d818361ed05c03f5995b4b155c700fae3928d1ba16a285789ef84f8ee2898.jpg
    http://img.memecdn.com/shift_o_326501.jpg
    http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/10/101779/3927738-1230972750-gramm.jpg
    http://www.animalmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/funny-memes-to-the-grammar-police.jpg
    _______________
    .
    .
    Barring some miraculous outcome, come January 6, 2017 (when Congress meets!)!… or, when BETTER LEGAL MINDS have finally determined to put an end to the fiasco known as the 2016 U.S. Election!… millions of American citizens will have suffered a Federal Election loss, because a thing called an Electoral College, has systemically breached the Rights of citizens to a “DIRECT ELECTION”, and, “ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE”! And because, some OLIGARCHS have decided… many years ago!… to “R-I-G” the Election of a U.S. Presidential Candidate, by instituting a mechanism to undermine a NATIONALWIDE DEMOCRATIC PLURALITY! And that mechanism will continue, unless a “judicious judicial judicare” puts the boots to this U-N-D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C Electoral College injustice!
    .
    However!… however ASTONISHING one might perceive the present Electoral College to be to the “Principals of Democracy”, none of this compares to the DIABOLIC NATURE inhere within the very “democracies (so-said/ so-called!)” which a-c-t-u-a-l-l-y a-d-h-e-r-e to DIRECT ELECTIONS, and which have adopted a “ONE VOTER, ONE VOTE” system to elect Candidates into Office! And I’ll demonstrate this, by revealing the I-N-S-A-N-I-T-Y that was– and is!– the Brexit vs Bremain referendum!
    .
    How is it “DEMOCRATIC”– e.g.!– when the Brexit Referendum “win” of Thursday, June 23rd, 2016, was “won” W-I-T-H-O-U-T the E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L M-I-N-I-M-U-M of 50+% of the T-O-T-A-L N-U-M-B-E-R of ELIGIBLE BRITISH VOTERS’ VOTES?… AND!… NOT JUST, BY WAY OF A MAJORITY OF THOSE WHO’VE DECIDED TO CAST A VOTE! In other words, how can L-E-S-S than the E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L M-I-N-I-M-U-M of 50+% of the T-O-T-A-L N-U-M-B-E-R of eligible British voters’ votes, constitute a “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y”? It is– de facto!– I-M-P-O-S-S-I-B-L-E (i.e., without God!)! And thus, the Brexit vote is a further example of a “P-S-E-U-D-O-D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-S-E-U-D-O-P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y” “winning the day”!
    .
    To compare the Brexit Referendum to an election of a Candidate within a Electoral District… if fifty thousand eligible voters decide not to vote in a District that is composed/ comprised of one hundred thousand eligible voters… and five Candidates are running!… the math would suggest, that NO CANDIDATE could possibly obtain a “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y” from the remaining fifty thousand eligible voters who have cast a vote! Unless!… and of course!… A H-I-J-A-C-K-E-D, AND E-L-I-T-I-S-T P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L P-R-O-C-E-S-S SIMPLY MARGINALIZES THOSE WHO HAVE NOT SHOWN UP TO VOTE; AND, THEN, DICTATES THAT THEIR “NO SHOW”/ ABSENCE, CANNOT– AND SHOULD NOT!– BE HELD “B-I-N-D-I-N-G” IN SOME FASHION, OR FORM (AND SOME “NO SHOWS” ARE AS SUCH, DUE TO DISABILITY, AND/ OR INFIRMITY!… NOT TO MENTION, THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN SYSTEMICALLY AND SYSTEMATICALLY DISCRIMINATED AGAINST, DUE TO THEIR Y-O-U-T-H!)! FOR!… OUT OF SIGHT, IS OUT OF MIND!
    .
    Simply put!… and to return to the Brexit Referendum!… the said total of 17,410,742. “winning” “pro Brexit” British voters, plus the said total of 16,141,242. “losing” “pro Bremain” eligible British voters, who– together!– showed up at the “Referendum ballot boxes (i.e., 33,551,984 eligible British voters!)”, are in contrast to the ACTUAL TOTAL of 46,499,537 eligible British voters (see Google result, Electoral Commission | Provisional electorate figures published!… AND, LET ALONE, THE EVEN HIGHER ACTUAL TOTAL NUMBER OF ELIGIBLE VOTERS’ VOTES TO BE HAD, IF MANY OF THE DISABLED/ INFIRMED BRITISH CITIZENS WERE “ACCOMMODATED”!… AND!… IF MANY BRITISH YOUTH WEREN’T THE TARGETS OF “P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L A-N-D S-O-C-I-A-L P-A-T-E-R-N-A-L-I-S-T-I-C A-G-E-I-S-M”!)!… and reveals a deficit of 12,947,553. of the ACTUAL TOTAL NUMBER of eligible British voters, and a deficit of 5,839,027. eligible British voters for even a “B-A-R-E M-I-N-I-M-U-M M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y W-I-N (i.e., 46,499,537. ÷ 2 = 23,249,768.5… + .5 = [23,249,769.] – 17,410,742. = 5,839,027.!)”! AND THEREFORE, THE COMBINED “WINNERS” AND “LOSERS” TALLY OF ELIGIBLE VOTERS, S-H-O-U-L-D N-O-T B-E M-A-D-E S-Y-N-O-N-Y-M-O-U-S W-I-T-H T-H-E A-C-T-U-A-L T-O-T-A-L- N-U-M-B-E-R O-F E-L-I-G-I-B-L-E B-R-I-T-I-S-H V-O-T-E-R-S/ V-O-T-E-S!… AND!… THE “WINNING TALLY”, S-H-O-U-L-D N-O-T B-E M-A-D-E S-Y-N-O-N-Y-M-O-U-S W-I-T-H T-H-E “M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y W-I-L-L” O-F T-H-E E-L-I-G-I-B-L-E V-O-T-E-R-S O-F B-R-I-T-A-I-N! AND!… THEREFORE!… THE “WINNING TALLY” OF ELIGIBLE BRITISH VOTERS– AT LEAST!– SHOULD BE MET WITH A C-O-N-S-T-I-T-U-T-I-O-N-A-L (AND TORT!) C-H-A-L-L-E-N-G-E (TO START!) FOR THE F-L-A-G-R-A-N-T B-R-E-A-C-H OF THE “L-E-G-I-T-I-M-A-T-E” “P-R-I-N-C-I-P-L-E-S O-F D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y (I.E., AND E.G., IN THE F-A-I-L-U-R-E OF THE BREXIT REFERENDUM RESULT TOTAL, TO ACHIEVE EVEN A B-A-R-E M-I-N-I-M-U-M M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y T-A-L-L-Y, FOR A ‘M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y W-I-N’!)”!
    .
    And so!… the Brexit “win”… like the “wins” seen so often in our PSEUDODEMOCRATIC PSEUDOELECTIONS (AND EVEN IN ELECTIONS WHEREIN SAID “PLURALITY TOTALS”– E.G., IN AMERICA!– MIGHT BE FAVORED OVER ELECTORAL COLLEGE “WINS”!)!… I-S A S-H-A-M!! And!… it escapes me, why “plurality-driven citizens” from respective “democracies (so-called!)” from around the world, haven’t challenged these scurrilous, and shameful “F-A-U-X P-U-B-L-I-C R-E-F-E-R-E-N-D-A”!… AND P-S-E-U-D-O-E-L-E-C-T-I-O-N-S!… AND!… haven’t brought civil proceedings against any and all institutions, which have allowed these G-L-O-B-A-L F-A-R-C-E-S to continue! And thus… re the Brexit Referendum result!… it’s my contention, that the Brexit Referendum is defeatable… AS IS THE 2016 U.S. ELECTION!… due to it’s inherent S-Y-S-T-E-M-I-C V-I-O-L-A-T-I-O-N of the “L-E-G-I-T-I-M-A-T-E” “PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY”! But then… and again!… this would require BETTER LEGAL MINDS!
    .
    This horrendous situation involving our PSEUDODEMOCRATIC PSEUDOELECTIONS, has resulted in “winning Candidates” winning (if, indeed, Pluralities are recognized!) with as little as 1/5th of the total number of eligible voters’ votes!… AND!… THEN DARING, TO CALL SUCH RESPECTIVE “WINS”, D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C! A-N-D W-O-R-S-E!… and in the case of the Brexit Referendum result (AND “PSEUDOWIN”!)!… such a “W-I-N” could– POTENTIALLY!– C-O-M-P-R-O-M-I-Z-E T-H-E S-E-C-U-R-I-T-Y O-F A-N E-N-T-I-R-E N-A-T-I-O-N! And so!… it’s no wonder why so many citizens within our respective “democracies (so-called!)” hate the elections process!… and!… hate Public Referenda!
    .
    And!… to add Elections insult to Elections injury, there are “Parties” within countries… and again, composed of “winning Candidates” who have “won” with L-E-S-S than the E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L M-I-N-I-M-U-M needed for a “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y”!… whose leadership cannot be chosen D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C-A-L-L-Y by the PEOPLE (e.g., in Canada!)!… and O-N-L-Y, by the Party (although, this is not to detract from the serious failings of the Elections Process in America, in the selection of America’s President!)! And further, rather than have the brightest!… the best!… “winning Candidates” from all across a country– and, from across a legislature’s floor!– forming Executive Cabinets (and in Canada– e.g.– composed of Ministers of Federal Departments, or Provincial Ministries!)!… THROUGH A NON PARTY-BASED LEGISLATURE OR PARLIAMENT (and something, incidentally, that municipalities have been doing for generations!… A-N-D, W-O-R-L-D-W-I-D-E)!… our current “PARTY-BASED DEMOCRACIES” have chosen, instead– A-N-D V-I-R-T-U-A-L-L-Y!– GANGS, CLIQUES, AND “P-S-E-U-D-O-S-O-C-I-A-L I-N-T-E-R-E-S-T-S”, TO ACT AS “GO-BETWEENS” FOR PARTY-BASED “OLIGARCHIC BACKROOM BOYZ”!
    .
    But!… if all of this wasn’t bad enough, there’s no “NONE OF THE ABOVE” option on millions of voters’ ballots (AND “B-I-N-D-I-N-G”!… AS A PREREQUISITE!)!… nor, an “AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION” of the “NO SHOWS (i.e., eligible voters who have NOT cast a vote!)” to “B-I-N-D-I-N-G” “NONE OF THE ABOVE BALLOTS (inasmuch, as such ‘NO SHOWS’, can’t be translated as being ‘F-O-R’ any Candidate!)”! (BUT!… PLEASE NOTE!… IF OUR “NO SHOWS”– AS SUCH!– ARE DUE TO OUR P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L A-N-D S-O-C-I-A-L I-N-A-B-I-L-I-T-Y, O-R U-N-W-I-L-L-I-N-G-N-E-S-S, TO ADDRESS THE VOTER NEEDS OF OUR DISABLED/ INFIRMED!… AND, OUR YOUTH!… THEN SUCH “INABLED”, OR “UNWILLING”, SHOULD BE “HELPED” RE THEIR “I-N-A-B-I-L-T-Y”!… OR “HELPED” RE THEIR “U-N-W-I-L-L-I-N-G-N-E-S-S”!) And!… had the “NONE OF THE ABOVE” and the “TRANSLATED NO SHOW” provisions been addressed, many “NO SHOWS” would have shown up to vote (for fear of receiving a M-A-N-A-D-A-T-E-D “BINDING” “AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION”!)! And!… if combined “NO SHOW TRANSLATIONS”, together with directly cast “NONE OF THE ABOVE BALLOTS” were implemented (wherein– TOGETHER!– these OUTNUMBER the votes cast for any respective “running Candidate”!), this combined tally could have meant the introduction of “lottery lists” of Candidates within respective Districts (preselected!… and the members in which, would not be eligible to run as “running Candidates”!)!… from which, our “winners” could have then been chosen! And thereby!… E-F-F-E-C-T-I-N-G F-U-L-L R-E-P-R-E-S-E-N-T-A-T-I-O-N F-O-R E-V-E-R-Y S-I-N-G-L-E E-L-I-G-I-B-L-E V-O-T-E-R, A-N-D V-O-T-E!
    .
    And so… and given the “politcal fair” we’ve received from every major “Party”, I ask you:… Should we be fearful of a “lottery list”, if a TRUE PLURALITY (i.e., with respect to my hypothetic model!) has denied all “running Candidates”?
    .
    All one need ensure in the establishment of a “lottery list”, is the institution of PROPER SECURITY BACKGROUND CHECKS for “listed Candidates”, and the institution of “PROPER” “LISTED PREQUALIFICATIONS”!
    .
    To return again to Brexit!… to juxtapose the just aforenoted “plurality template” onto Referenda!… and onto the Brexit Referendum, in particular!… if the directly cast “NONE OF THE ABOVE BALLOTS”, combined with the “TRANSLATED NO SHOWS”, OUTWEIGHED the votes cast for either the Brexit or Bremain scenarios, then NEITHER Brexit, nor Bremain, would be– DEMOCRATICALLY!– left on the table! And the MPs of the British Parliament would then be forced to renew their respective individual approaches, and collective approach, re their “arrangement” with the EU!… and, their respective dialogues, and collective dialogue, with the citizens of Britain!
    .
    And given… and in contrast to the abovenoted!… in the light of the process that was implementated for the Brexit Referendum (though, yet to be revealed “officially”!)!… WELL!… you have the makings of a P-O-O-R E-X-C-U-S-E F-O-R A D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C R-E-F-E-R-E-N-D-U-M!… A-N-D A P-O-O-R “R-A-T-I-O-N-A-L B-A-S-I-S” F-O-R T-H-E R-E-D-I-R-E-C-T-I-O-N O-F T-H-E F-U-T-U-R-E C-O-U-R-S-E F-O-R A-N E-N-T-I-R-E C-O-U-N-T-R-Y!!
    .
    And so… and to sum up!… what we have, presently, are “P-S-E-U-D-O-D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-I-E-S (IF EVEN THESE CAN BE ACHIEVED!… E.G., A HILLARY CLINTON PSEUDODEMOCRATIC PLURALITY!)” IN THE G-U-I-S-E OF “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C-A-L-L-Y E-L-E-C-T-E-D” CANDIDATES! An intolerable situation!… and deserving of both CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES, and TORT ACTION! And!… A-N-Y O-T-H-E-R A-C-C-E-P-T-E-D P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y OTHER THAN A “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y” ACCEPTED BY A PROSPECTIVE CANDIDATE, AND/ OR BY A PROSPECTIVE VOTER (AND BASED UPON THE “L-E-G-I-T-I-M-A-T-E” “PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY”, AS AFOREMENTIONED!… AND OTHER, THAN ONE INSTITUTED BY GOD!)!, IS A CANDIDATE, OR VOTER, WHO IS EITHER BLIND TO THE “LEGITIMATE” “PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY”, OR WHO IS A TRAITOR TO THE “LEGITIMATE” “PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY”! AND!… WHO IS EITHER BLIND, OR A TRAITOR, TO THE COMMON GOOD OF THE PEOPLE!
    .
    THEREFORE, THE “J-U-S-T ESTABLISHMENT” OF “T-R-U-E DEMOCRATIC PLURALITIES” WITHIN OUR RESPECTIVE REFERENDA, AND ELECTIONS PROCESSES, IS F-U-N-D-A-M-E-N-T-A-L TO THE VERY REALIZATION OF “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y”!… AND!… WITHOUT WHICH, WE ARE SUBJECT TO MERE OLIGARCHIC WHIM!
    .
    IT IS OUR DUTY AT THIS CRUCIAL TIME, TO CONTINUE THE FIGHT BEGUN BY LEARNED OTHERS!… TO R-E-S-I-S-T THE SLIDE INTO COMPLACENCY, AND INTO SELF-DOUBT! WE OWE IT TO OURSELVES, AND TO OUR COUNTRY, TO BE VIGILANT IN OUR CAMPAIGN TO OBSTRUCT, UNDERMINE, AND EVENTUALLY OVERTHROW THIS “ADVANCE OF TYRANNY”! AND WITH THAT THOUGHT, I LEAVE YOU WITH THE FOLLOWING…
    .
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5P8G_V5v7g
    .
    Please!… no emails!
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH
    HH

    • Spudger

      You spelled “political” wrong.


  • America has become a one-party state, the very thing they criticise when it happens in countries like Russia and China. This possibility was foreseen by the founders, which is why the Electoral College exists as the last bulwark against the country accidentally electing someone as manifestly as unfit to rule as Donald Trump. However, they failed to exercise their discretionary powers and installed him anyway.

    There is now no viable political opposition across the USA, because the Republican Party control the White House, the US Military, the Supreme Court, the Senate, the House of Representatives, most of the state legislatures, most of the state governorships and are close to being able to amend the US Constitution to make retrospectively legal anything they do that is currently illegal or unconstitutional.

    Recent events have demonstrated they also control the FBI and the CIA. Republicans are unlikely to investigate Republicans. Why would they investigate themselves, now they have the absolute power to pass any law and to commit any act they like without consequence? This is analogous to asking pedophiles to investigate child abuse. Even street protests won’t stop them because they can command the military to fire at will on street protesters and shut down the free press. If they declare a State of Emergency, they don’t even need to call elections.

    America, you just voted for the destruction of your once great republic.