Why not practically double the ELECTORAL COLLEGE to 1100? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 18, 2024, 02:11:23 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Why not practically double the ELECTORAL COLLEGE to 1100? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why not practically double the ELECTORAL COLLEGE to 1100?  (Read 11505 times)
Sasquatch
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,077


Political Matrix
E: -8.13, S: -8.52

« on: April 26, 2010, 10:53:20 PM »

The EC should have been abolished decades ago. I remember in 2000 people trying to explain how the guy with the most votes can still lose didn't pass my bullsh!t detector. That would be like in football, the winner was determined by who had the most yards instead of points.

Democrats and Republicans should both be against it. Democrats were screwed over in 2000, but in 2004 the Republicans could have been screwed over even harder. All Kerry needed was 120,000 votes in Ohio and he would have won. Yes, John Kerry who lost the popular vote by 3 million votes would have been president.

Also, do the small states really matter anyway? When was the last time a candidate went to Wyoming or Rhode Island? When was the last time those states were battlegrounds?


Get rid of EC.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.017 seconds with 11 queries.