posted ago by PeteJeffrey
+475 / -0
It is so obvious now. No one in a democratic city will question it. Those cities will outweigh the rural votes. However with the electoral college they would need more people in on it because each election they don’t know which districts to rig. If they get rid of it they will be able to rig the same ones every time.
Ask Canada how well it works not having an electoral college. The absolute nutjobs in Vancouver, Montreal, and Toronto deicide everything for a country the size of half a continent.
That's not true - we are represented by MPs who represent each riding, and each party needs a certain number of MPs to form a majority or minority government. The ridings are re-organized occasionally to reflect population changes.
Justin Trudeau promised to get rid of this system before he was elected in 2015, and institute a new system called first past the post where basically the highest percentage of votes across the country would determine the winner. Then once he was elected he said "nah" and decided not to do it.
YES
The signs point to the having done this for awhile now. WA/OR/CA's "Blue Lock" is, IMO, at least partially because the institutions have picked up the needed bits of chicanery.
But. WA & OR stop making shit up because "Running up the score" doesn't get them anywhere.
So the entire "Muh Popular vote" is ... "We could run the score up better this way, how do we sucker people into it?!?"
need to prevent the tyranny of the city
DAM RIGGERS!
Plus the states that will win the election are swing states that aren’t under one party rule.
And boom goes the dynamite. - “Cleveland Brown”.
I was saying this the whole time, the fools crowing about 'winning the popular vote' so they could own the libs' interstate compact drove me insane.