this blows my mind, he got very nearly the same level of support among women as romney (and clinton got less than obama) and more support among hispanics (source)
is there anything he could have done differently to have done *worse* with those groups?
It's like that scene in Platoon where after the one guy is murdered The one guy says "I don't know what's going to happen brothers but I'm hurtin real bad inside."
The electoral college strikes again. I don't know how I get through this day. Got to work an hour early on two whole hours of sleep.
Well technically it hasn't struck at all yet since they don't vote for a month or so, and technically all it would take is a few key members to decide to vote against who they're representing and Clinton could still be legally elected president, though nothing like that has ever happened as far as I know.
Regardless, the electoral college is archaic as fuck and needs to die, the whole reason it exists is because of century+ old transportation logistical issues for collecting votes spanning the country in a time before vehicles and highway systems.
This would also be a slap to the face of Democracy, although it likely won't happen. The electoral college does nothing but create an environment where the will of the people can be disregarded. Even if it were to happen in favor of my candidate, that'd be a serious issue.
I doubt it'll happen any time soon, but an overhaul of the system is past due. The electoral college and most of the traditions we still follow are so ridiculously outdated, and we just elected a guy who says the Constitution is not a living document.
this blows my mind, he got very nearly the same level of support among women as romney (and clinton got less than obama) and more support among hispanics (source)
is there anything he could have done differently to have done *worse* with those groups?
I think this speaks more to how utterly shitty of a candidate Clinton was more than anything else, I mean holy shit. I think these were the worst two candidates we've ever had in our lifetime by far. Clinton is a piece of shit career criminal but at least she's a known, predictable evil. Trump is really a mystery, which is why markets dropped because they hate unknowns.
He goes from zero involvement in politics to becoming the next president, that's just fucking mind-blowing. Even people that were not career politicians, like Reagan, was still a governor first. So to have someone with no true track record of positions, just random tweets and interviews and shit just makes him a massive question mark.
Game time. First things first people. Gotta win those Midterm elections. The current Dmeocratic party is obviously in shambles otherwise this should've been a sure thing, so we need to cut off the dead weight, shape up, and get people to vote in the Midterms. We can't let voter apathy and unenthusiasm defeat us again.
The dems have 26 senate seats to defend in 2018, yikes
The electoral college strikes again. I don't know how I get through this day. Got to work an hour early on two whole hours of sleep.
Well technically it hasn't struck at all yet since they don't vote for a month or so, and technically all it would take is a few key members to decide to vote against who they're representing and Clinton could still be legally elected president, though nothing like that has ever happened as far as I know.
Regardless, the electoral college is archaic as fuck and needs to die, the whole reason it exists is because of century+ old transportation logistical issues for collecting votes spanning the country in a time before vehicles and highway systems.
So since Hillary won the popular vote, the Electoral College *could* cast their votes for her??? How do we make this happen?
I would say the natural reaction for those that have been around is not to say "screw it". That is defeatist talk and breeds complancy and feet stomping. Not caring, is exactly what's wrong. It's not an either/or if you chose someone who CAN win and will meet your ideals much more closely. People often lose "big picture". There are many battles in this "war" to win you will need to lose some and compromise in some ways in order to get to a final goal. For me "none of the above" is as good as NOT exercising your right to vote (unless Chris Rock is running for that party). We have a hard enough time getting people registered AND voting in this country. Instead of trying to figure out how we can come together I have seen too much separatist talk these days amongst 3rd party and Democrats (we may not see eye to eye on everything, but are "closer" on most).
Too many folks have bled real blood, sweated real sweat and cried real tears to get me the right to vote. How can I chose to stand for nothing?
I never meant to imply that non-voters were non-carers (is that a word?). It has been proven that when people feel invested in a candidate they will get out and vote. Look at the die hard Trump/Clinton supporters. They totally bought in. I do feel those people were in the majority and most felt this was a lesser of two evils situation. I can totally see the view point of someone who cares about the country but cannot in good faith support either of the two primary runners (which is why I went with Johnson). Once we've gotten to the presidential election it's too late. I would argue that voting in the caucuses is much more important. This way, there is a candidate that people get behind which then carries over into the proper election. There is no way to prove this but I have a hunch that if Sanders was the DNC representative there would have been a higher voter turn out.
The electoral college strikes again. I don't know how I get through this day. Got to work an hour early on two whole hours of sleep.
Well technically it hasn't struck at all yet since they don't vote for a month or so, and technically all it would take is a few key members to decide to vote against who they're representing and Clinton could still be legally elected president, though nothing like that has ever happened as far as I know.
Regardless, the electoral college is archaic as fuck and needs to die, the whole reason it exists is because of century+ old transportation logistical issues for collecting votes spanning the country in a time before vehicles and highway systems.
So since Hillary won the popular vote, the Electoral College *could* cast their votes for her??? How do we make this happen?
No, it doesn't matter what the popular vote is. legally the electoral college can vote for whomever they wish regardless of who they're representing voted for. In reality it's just a formality though, I don't think anyone on the electoral college has ever voted differently and it would be quite the shitshow if that ever happened today.
But the whole popular vote not mattering on close elections is just another reason the electoral college needs to go. Take a large state like California and Texas. Every single person that voted for Trump in California had their vote flushed down the toilet. Every single person in Texas that voted for Clinton had their vote flushed down the toilet. Meanwhile you have razer-thin margins in other states, so those votes matter more. It's mind-numbingly stupid.
I would say the natural reaction for those that have been around is not to say "screw it". That is defeatist talk and breeds complancy and feet stomping. Not caring, is exactly what's wrong. It's not an either/or if you chose someone who CAN win and will meet your ideals much more closely. People often lose "big picture". There are many battles in this "war" to win you will need to lose some and compromise in some ways in order to get to a final goal. For me "none of the above" is as good as NOT exercising your right to vote (unless Chris Rock is running for that party). We have a hard enough time getting people registered AND voting in this country. Instead of trying to figure out how we can come together I have seen too much separatist talk these days amongst 3rd party and Democrats (we may not see eye to eye on everything, but are "closer" on most).
Too many folks have bled real blood, sweated real sweat and cried real tears to get me the right to vote. How can I chose to stand for nothing?
I never meant to imply that non-voters were non-carers (is that a word?). It has been proven that when people feel invested in a candidate they will get out and vote. Look at the die hard Trump/Clinton supporters. They totally bought in. I do feel those people were in the majority and most felt this was a lesser of two evils situation. I can totally see the view point of someone who cares about the country but cannot in good faith support either of the two primary runners (which is why I went with Johnson). Once we've gotten to the presidential election it's too late. I would argue that voting in the caucuses is much more important. This way, there is a candidate that people get behind which then carries over into the proper election. There is no way to prove this but I have a hunch that if Sanders was the DNC representative there would have been a higher voter turn out.
I have seen a lot of this sentiment (I couldn't in good faith vote for Hillary). To me (and some/many of my friends) she was the "best" of the popular choices. This was also the case for some of those that supported Bernie in his run. I wasn't fully bought in, but it was a choice of battles in the war that I wanted to "win".
I dealt with a lot of younger folks who just didn't understand what was going on and were so blinded by the POTUS race they ignored the local and Congress elections. For me, I would have been willing to give up POTUS to get those that DID support my viewpoint in Congress and local seats. The better job they do there, the more popular a candidate would be in 2020. The problem is those that m that don't vote or vote for another party are often "tipping points" between the two major party candidates. They will often get blamed for one side losing over another. This is because there are not enough people to get in, but enough to make someone lose.
The electoral college strikes again. I don't know how I get through this day. Got to work an hour early on two whole hours of sleep.
Well technically it hasn't struck at all yet since they don't vote for a month or so, and technically all it would take is a few key members to decide to vote against who they're representing and Clinton could still be legally elected president, though nothing like that has ever happened as far as I know.
Regardless, the electoral college is archaic as fuck and needs to die, the whole reason it exists is because of century+ old transportation logistical issues for collecting votes spanning the country in a time before vehicles and highway systems.
So since Hillary won the popular vote, the Electoral College *could* cast their votes for her??? How do we make this happen?
No, it doesn't matter what the popular vote is. legally the electoral college can vote for whomever they wish regardless of who they're representing voted for. In reality it's just a formality though, I don't think anyone on the electoral college has ever voted differently and it would be quite the shitshow if that ever happened today.
But the whole popular vote not mattering on close elections is just another reason the electoral college needs to go. Take a large state like California and Texas. Every single person that voted for Trump in California had their vote flushed down the toilet. Every single person in Texas that voted for Clinton had their vote flushed down the toilet. Meanwhile you have razer-thin margins in other states, so those votes matter more. It's mind-numbingly stupid.
I get what you're saying, but shouldn't the Electoral College vote for who wins the Popular Vote in their state? Isn't that how it's supposed to work (regardless of what candidate it is)? I'm asking because I genuinely don't understand how it works if that's not the case.
In my lifetime I've seen four presidents enter the white house. In each of those elections, the democrat won the popular vote, but in only two of them he actually won the election. How do you win the vote 100% of the time and only win the election 50% of the time?
Why even hold an election in 2020 - just assume the democrat would have won the popular vote and then declare the winner on a coin flip.
This is fascinating and horrifying. I agree with others that this is much more of a protest vote than a pro-Trump vote. Exit polls show a historical high % of people don't think Trump is presidential material, but they'd rather have that than Hillary. Brexit had a similar feeling. People are voting against the status-quo, more than they're actually voting for the changes. I don't know what this mindset means going forward.
The electoral college strikes again. I don't know how I get through this day. Got to work an hour early on two whole hours of sleep.
Well technically it hasn't struck at all yet since they don't vote for a month or so, and technically all it would take is a few key members to decide to vote against who they're representing and Clinton could still be legally elected president, though nothing like that has ever happened as far as I know.
Regardless, the electoral college is archaic as fuck and needs to die, the whole reason it exists is because of century+ old transportation logistical issues for collecting votes spanning the country in a time before vehicles and highway systems.
So since Hillary won the popular vote, the Electoral College *could* cast their votes for her??? How do we make this happen?
No, it doesn't matter what the popular vote is. legally the electoral college can vote for whomever they wish regardless of who they're representing voted for. In reality it's just a formality though, I don't think anyone on the electoral college has ever voted differently and it would be quite the shitshow if that ever happened today.
But the whole popular vote not mattering on close elections is just another reason the electoral college needs to go. Take a large state like California and Texas. Every single person that voted for Trump in California had their vote flushed down the toilet. Every single person in Texas that voted for Clinton had their vote flushed down the toilet. Meanwhile you have razer-thin margins in other states, so those votes matter more. It's mind-numbingly stupid.
I get what you're saying, but shouldn't the Electoral College vote for who wins the Popular Vote in their state? Isn't that how it's supposed to work (regardless of what candidate it is)? I'm asking because I genuinely don't understand how it works if that's not the case.
"Sort of"...you have to remember however, that each state is not weighed equally. So because of the "weight" some states are given over others, popular vote does not equal electoral vote. You also have some states which can "divide" their electoral vote. http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/lessons/davidwalbert7232004-02/electoralcollege.html
The electoral college strikes again. I don't know how I get through this day. Got to work an hour early on two whole hours of sleep.
Well technically it hasn't struck at all yet since they don't vote for a month or so, and technically all it would take is a few key members to decide to vote against who they're representing and Clinton could still be legally elected president, though nothing like that has ever happened as far as I know.
Regardless, the electoral college is archaic as fuck and needs to die, the whole reason it exists is because of century+ old transportation logistical issues for collecting votes spanning the country in a time before vehicles and highway systems.
So since Hillary won the popular vote, the Electoral College *could* cast their votes for her??? How do we make this happen?
No, it doesn't matter what the popular vote is. legally the electoral college can vote for whomever they wish regardless of who they're representing voted for. In reality it's just a formality though, I don't think anyone on the electoral college has ever voted differently and it would be quite the shitshow if that ever happened today.
But the whole popular vote not mattering on close elections is just another reason the electoral college needs to go. Take a large state like California and Texas. Every single person that voted for Trump in California had their vote flushed down the toilet. Every single person in Texas that voted for Clinton had their vote flushed down the toilet. Meanwhile you have razer-thin margins in other states, so those votes matter more. It's mind-numbingly stupid.
I get what you're saying, but shouldn't the Electoral College vote for who wins the Popular Vote in their state? Isn't that how it's supposed to work (regardless of what candidate it is)? I'm asking because I genuinely don't understand how it works if that's not the case.
The electoral college strikes again. I don't know how I get through this day. Got to work an hour early on two whole hours of sleep.
Well technically it hasn't struck at all yet since they don't vote for a month or so, and technically all it would take is a few key members to decide to vote against who they're representing and Clinton could still be legally elected president, though nothing like that has ever happened as far as I know.
Regardless, the electoral college is archaic as fuck and needs to die, the whole reason it exists is because of century+ old transportation logistical issues for collecting votes spanning the country in a time before vehicles and highway systems.
So since Hillary won the popular vote, the Electoral College *could* cast their votes for her??? How do we make this happen?
No, it doesn't matter what the popular vote is. legally the electoral college can vote for whomever they wish regardless of who they're representing voted for. In reality it's just a formality though, I don't think anyone on the electoral college has ever voted differently and it would be quite the shitshow if that ever happened today.
But the whole popular vote not mattering on close elections is just another reason the electoral college needs to go. Take a large state like California and Texas. Every single person that voted for Trump in California had their vote flushed down the toilet. Every single person in Texas that voted for Clinton had their vote flushed down the toilet. Meanwhile you have razer-thin margins in other states, so those votes matter more. It's mind-numbingly stupid.
I get what you're saying, but shouldn't the Electoral College vote for who wins the Popular Vote in their state? Isn't that how it's supposed to work (regardless of what candidate it is)? I'm asking because I genuinely don't understand how it works if that's not the case.
Sort of, but it's not strictly about the popular vote. I'm going to make up numbers to make it easy but let's just take California. Say 20 million people voted in California, and 11 million vote for Clinton and 9 million vote for Trump. Clinton gets ALL 55 electoral votes for California because she won the popular vote for the state, so 9 million votes get flushed down the toilet. Now take a smaller state with say 5 million votes, and one wins 3 million to 2. That's a 1 million vote margin determining all of that state's electoral votes, meanwhile the 9 million votes for the loser in California get flushed down the toilet.
The silver lining here is that in four years, trump will still be trump, and the dems will hopefully learn a lesson and field a stronger candidate than Hillary. This candidate will enter into a race against a republican base that hasn't had four years of conservative media screaming in their ear that the government is working against them, that Obama is the cause of all their ills, etc. I really wonder what right wing talk shows will sound like now with a trump presidency and republican controlled congress. How do you indulge conspiracy theories when its your people in charge?
With a Hillary presidency, the republicans would have had the ability to regroup, focus their hatred on Hillary, stoke their conspiratorial fires even more so than they had under Obama, then field a candidate likely just as crazy as Trump but more electable than Trump. Now they are stuck with him, and don't have their most powerful weapon against their opponents, the ability to rail against the status quo. Either way I think both sides were destined for single term administrations..
Only silver lining I see is that the election is over. No more being outraged by every potential slight for a least a few more years. Everything else that comes with having a Cheeto for a president still sucks.
@April_May_June another caveat is that while each state is weighted by their population, none have less than 3 electors, even the shitty flyover states that nobody lives in, similarly to the u.s. senate but less so where empty land basically has political power (this is why wyoming with a population of < 600k people has the same number of senators as california with a population of 38m people). wyoming also has the most electoral vote oomph per voter. this may be intentional because otherwise a significant % of the country would be completely inconsequential in an election, but it does mean that shitty empty states where nobody live are actually as a group are more important than you'd expect, and there's one party that tends to do well in those places and not so well in densely populated areas.
In my lifetime I've seen four presidents enter the white house. In each of those elections, the democrat won the popular vote, but in only two of them he actually won the election. How do you win the vote 100% of the time and only win the election 50% of the time?
Why even hold an election in 2020 - just assume the democrat would have won the popular vote and then declare the winner on a coin flip.
This explains why/ the electoral college pretty well, and even though I disagree with its assertion that it's just as important today it does bring up good points about the perils of a purely democratic popular vote dictating elections (we're not really a democracy after all we're a representative republic) and voter fraud/etc. The problem is it just hasn't changed with the times to keep serving its purpose without also being a hindrance. There's also a vastly greater voting populace now and it just doesn't scale adequately.
Isn't the Electoral College really another one of thise mechanisms that try to prevent less populous states from being completely run over by population centers?
Also I really want to hear how big meltdown is on the Keepin it 1600 podcast.
Isn't the Electoral College really another one of thise mechanisms that try to prevent less populous states from being completely run over by population centers?
Also I really want to hear how big meltdown is on the Keepin it 1600 podcast.
They did perioscope las night and were supposed to do a live cast today. While surprised and "angry" quite level headed if I do say so myself.
So it seems like Trump didn't turn out a huge historic wave of voters. As previously stated, he got less votes than Mitt Romney. To his credit, he did do a good job turning out supporters in the places it mattered, and was able to use the EV map to his benefit.
Wisconsin seemed to be the biggest surprise of the night. Maybe if we were paying attention ... it wouldn't have been such a surprise. I'm not saying voter suppression 100% lead to a Trump victory - Clinton did fail to turn out her coalition in key areas ... but states like Wisconsin and North Carolina with Republican leadership have been especially aggressive in the last few years trying to suppress votes in Democratic areas. And in Wisconsin where the margin was less than 30K votes, it definitely had an impact.
I swear if Bald Move dies this will literally be the worst year in my lifetime. This is absolutely the time we need the guys to remind us of less drastically world needing events, such as anagram names.
"Electing the electors" is a vestige of the time when people trying to conjure up a constitution had to both A) convince poor people to go to war by giving them a vote and convince rich people to finance the war by choosing the winner.
You see it in all those Revolutionist regimes-- From ancient Rome til the modern 18th-19th century ones: France, Haiti, New Grenada (Venezuela, Colombia). France took 3 whacks at it and most of those constitution writers still got jailed or beheaded.
The most amazing thing about the US Constitution is that it lasted more than 5 years.
I swear if Bald Move dies this will literally be the worst year in my lifetime. This is absolutely the time we need the guys to remind us of less drastically world needing events, such as anagram names.
Comments
It's like that scene in Platoon where after the one guy is murdered The one guy says "I don't know what's going to happen brothers but I'm hurtin real bad inside."
This would also be a slap to the face of Democracy, although it likely won't happen. The electoral college does nothing but create an environment where the will of the people can be disregarded. Even if it were to happen in favor of my candidate, that'd be a serious issue.
So since Hillary won the popular vote, the Electoral College *could* cast their votes for her???
How do we make this happen?
I dealt with a lot of younger folks who just didn't understand what was going on and were so blinded by the POTUS race they ignored the local and Congress elections. For me, I would have been willing to give up POTUS to get those that DID support my viewpoint in Congress and local seats. The better job they do there, the more popular a candidate would be in 2020. The problem is those that m that don't vote or vote for another party are often "tipping points" between the two major party candidates. They will often get blamed for one side losing over another. This is because there are not enough people to get in, but enough to make someone lose.
I'm asking because I genuinely don't understand how it works if that's not the case.
http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/lessons/davidwalbert7232004-02/electoralcollege.html
Also I really want to hear how big meltdown is on the Keepin it 1600 podcast.