The popular vote isn't a thing

[EatTheRich]

Statistically you’d be wrong since a majority of legal voters aren’t even showing up to vote at all. The odds you’ll be caught impersonating another voter would be ridiculously low.

About half show up. So if for example there are 10 cases of voter impersonation, and the legitimate voters are equally likely to show up before or after the person impersonating them, there is nearly a 95% chance that one of the legal voters will show up and find that an impostor has voted in their stead.

 

[middleview]

I must have -- but enough states are opting out that it won't matter, and if it ever affects the outcome of a presidential election, I'd expect the losing candidate to go to SCOTUS. The constitution establishes the electoral college, not a popular vote system, and the laws might be challengeable on those grounds.

But yes, a popular vote means those votes won't matter. There will no longer be battleground states -- merely a national election (which was never designed -- it was stated many times that what was being created was a federal government, not a national one), in which the states with the largest populations rule everyone else.

If you go to the web site for the compact you would find that the total population of urban areas is roughly equal to the population of the suburbs and rural areas.

You do realize the constitution says a state may award it's electors in any manner as the state sees fit. So they are perfectly within their rights to aware all to the winner of the national popular vote.

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/

 

[middleview]

Statistically you’d be wrong since a majority of legal voters aren’t even showing up to vote at all. The odds you’ll be caught impersonating another voter would be ridiculously low.

58% of registered voters voted in 2016. 92 million people eligible to vote didn't.
128 million did vote.

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/democracy/reports/2018/07/11/453319/increasing-voter-participation-america/

According to Pew Research 21% of those who could vote are not registered.

 

[middleview]

No, it was three or four states. We don't elect by a national popular vote, but by a federated system, by states, using the college of electors.

By the way....those 80,000 votes in Michigan, Wisconsin and PA mean that Trump won those states by less than 1%...so he got 50.1% and you pretend those states elected him...no they didn't. A tiny plurality in those states elected him and the 49.9% who voted against him were victims of the tyrannical majority.

In wisconsin the turnout was 59%...2.67 million people out of 4.5 million eligible to vote.
Trump got 47.2% of that 59%. He was elected by 27% of the eligible voters there vs 26.5 for Hillary.

 

[Emily]

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is fully consistent with the current constitutionally prescribed method of electing the president.

Yes, it is.
It is also fully inconsistent with the clear and obvious intent of the constitution.
It is also meant solely to guarantee that only Democrats will be elected POTUS for the foreseeable future.
Any other claim is a lie.

If a large majority of the people live in one or a few cities, and they all share a common interest, why should a small minority with an antagonistic interest be able to force it on them?

For the greater benefit of the whole. That's something to which you should be able to relate.

 

[Dawg]

Unless the cities were divided in which case rural voters would have the balance of power.

So if all the cities were overwhelmingly in favor of a single candidate, would it make sense to let a small rural minority overrule them?

Rural voters couldn't if they tried with popular vote, LA county has more residents than several states

 

[Dawg]

By the way....those 80,000 votes in Michigan, Wisconsin and PA mean that Trump won those states by less than 1%...so he got 50.1% and you pretend those states elected him...no they didn't. A tiny plurality in those states elected him and the 49.9% who voted against him were victims of the tyrannical majority.

so if Braves only win by 1 run does that mean they didn't win?

 

[middleview]

Yes, it is.
It is also fully inconsistent with the clear and obvious intent of the constitution.
It is also meant solely to guarantee that only Democrats will be elected POTUS for the foreseeable future.
Any other claim is a lie.


For the greater benefit of the whole. That's something to which you should be able to relate.

So Ronald Reagan did not get elected by the popular vote? George HW Bush and W were not elected by the popular vote in 1998 and 2004?

 

[EatTheRich]

Rural voters couldn't if they tried with popular vote, LA county has more residents than several states

Right. With popular vote the majority would rule, not a specially advantaged minority in tiny states.

 

[middleview]

Protected from a coalition of larger, more heavily populated states.

Where did you read of a meeting of the coalition of larger states? How would that be managed? A bunch of governors get together to pick the president and instruct their voters who to vote for?

 

[The truth]

Where did you read of a meeting of the coalition of larger states? How would that be managed? A bunch of governors get together to pick the president and instruct their voters who to vote for?

another crazy info wars conspiracy no doubt

 

[Emily]

Right. With popular vote the majority would rule, not a specially advantaged minority in tiny states.

Wrong. With popular vote a specifically advantaged minority in a couple of metro areas would rule.

 

[The truth]

Wrong. With popular vote a specifically advantaged minority in a couple of metro areas would rule.

say what? The electoral college is absurd and outdated, Americans will soon rid themselves from it

 

[Emily]

Americans will soon rid themselves from it

Yup, by hook or by crook. Y'all could just throw milkshakes and bricks at legislators who oppose the Nat'l Popular Vote Compact. Anything to assure one-party rule. WOOT WOOT! Way to preserve democracy and fight totalitarianism.

 

[The truth]

Yup, by hook or by crook. Y'all could just throw milkshakes and bricks at legislators who oppose the Nat'l Popular Vote Compact. Anything to assure one-party rule. WOOT WOOT! Way to preserve democracy and fight totalitarianism.

it is called Democracy,popular all over the world,get used to it

 

[Emily]

it is called Democracy,popular all over the world,get used to it

It is called totalitarianism, popular all over the world. I'm used to it but don't have to like it.

 

[EatTheRich]

Wrong. With popular vote a specifically advantaged minority in a couple of metro areas would rule.

How?

 

[EatTheRich]

It is called totalitarianism, popular all over the world. I'm used to it but don't have to like it.

As if Hitler wasn’t the prototype for totalitarianism.

 

[middleview]

As if Hitler wasn’t the prototype for totalitarianism.

he did not gain power by popular vote.

 

[EatTheRich]

he did not gain power by popular vote.

Nope. Neither did Stalin who is the other best-known totalitarian leader.