samnada
onomatopatoot
samnada

Your intentional blindness is pathetic. Or you really are just stupid.

The 3 richest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 50%. Who caused the Great Recession, and who was bailed out and protected? You’re notion of who’s stealing from whom is totally nuts.

You’re a great example of why we need to have the majority decide who’s President.  Thanks.

If you think Bush and Trump being gifted the Presidency after receiving a minority of the votes is the way our system should work because there wasn’t mass violence as a result, we have nothing to discuss. One of the key reasons for the EC was to protect against the election of an unfit President. Clearly it has

You’re confused. The EC has nothing whatsoever to do with representation in Congress, where all the laws are passed, and all the federal judicial appointees are approved. The national direct vote movement is not trying to change the allocation of representatives in the Senate and House. The EC is only relevant to the

Currently EC votes are based on each state’s vote, but once enough states pass the NPV agreement all their EC delegates would vote for the national popular vote winner.

That’s an opinion. There are good reasons to believe your opinion is incorrect.

As we often see in these comments you are conflating Constitutionally protected rights, human and civil rights, with majority rule in electing the President. It’s a silly, straw man argument.  The three richest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 50%. And you’re worried about protecting those three. I have diffe

Living up to your name. We’ve tried not democracy and see how that’s working. I’ll take “stupid” democracy for a change and adjust as needed. Protecting administrative units is pretty far down my list of priorities.

“There is no support for your assertion. Only confirmation bias.”

If we can’t agree that Gore and Clinton were the candidates preferred by the voters when they won the popular vote then this is a pointless discussion. Votes are preferences, and vote counts are facts.

I have no concern for states. I have concern for people. Everything is always subject to renegotiation based on new conditions. That’s why the amendment process to the Constitution was created, and why the EC has evolved with so much variation and flexibility in it’s execution. That flexibility can be used to adjust

Don’t know. She’s admitted it was a mistake, but that’s easy to say in hindsight. I have no insight into the factors that determined her vote, and make no excuses for her. I’m not pretending she is an ideal politician, only that Bush and Trump are all the evidence we need to be convinced the EC has caused enormous

Clinton won his two elections by popular vote margins of 5.5% and 8.5% over the GOP candidate. You’re right that’s not the system we currently use to elect Presidents, which is precisely the topic of the article and this entire discussion. It should be. What’s your point?

Hillary wasn’t a candidate for President in 2000, and didn’t make the decision to invade Iraq. Bush did. He was elected due to the EC reversing the popular vote. If not for the EC, Gore would have been President, and Bush, Cheney and the other Neo-Cons wouldn’t have been in a position to determine our foreign policy.

It’s a fact that 2 of the last 3 Presidents took office after losing the popular vote, and were not the preferred choice of the electorate. That’s contrary to the fundamental concept of democracy.  What’s opinion is that somehow an archaic system of using intermediaries operating under varying rules by State, who

No it’s not. Fairer to what and to whom? Land area? The only context for fairness is to citizens. Citizens vote, and whoever gets the support of the most citizens should represent them, and is loaned the power to make decisions and laws on their behalf. There is no concept of whoever lives around the least number of

You’re conflating rights with laws. No one is talking about taking away rights that are protected for each citizen. What we have now is a tyranny of the minority. How is that better? How about protecting the right of every person’s vote counting equally? Why aren’t we protecting that? What ordains the minority as

The myths are addressed here:

You can make up 1000 explanations for Hillary losing, but the simple fact remains if the popular vote determined who’s President she would be in the WH instead of Agent Orange. And we would not have invaded Iraq causing the deaths of 100's of thousands. The stakes are enormous and we have failed badly. It’s time to