2016 Postmortem

onenote

(44,662 posts)

89. The founding fathers also set up the EC to ensure overrepresentation of slave states

Thu Dec 15, 2016, 04:41 AM

Dec 2016

The EC represented a compromise. And while one group wanted it to provide a buffer between the public and the decision as to who would be president, the slave states wanted it because under the EC, they gained votes based on their slave population, while a popular vote approach would have left them with a smaller say in the election.

So from that standpoint, the EC has worked just as it was intended to by giving the old slave states an disproportionate role in the election.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

101 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

It should be no shock to anyone if the Electoral College elects someone other than Trump [View all] mtnsnake Dec 2016 OP

I will be shocked. As will the rest of the country. nt. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #1

They're going to elect Trump. Skinner Dec 2016 #2

I would be surprised, but it SHOULD be no shock if they didn't elect him mtnsnake Dec 2016 #9

I would bet most of them don't even know a history of the electoral college pangaia Dec 2016 #101

Must we always be pessimistic.. whathehell Dec 2016 #27

It's not pessimism SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #29

Wrong whathehell Dec 2016 #35

Would not be the first shocking thing about this election. Cracklin Charlie Dec 2016 #64

That's the sort of shock MFM008 Dec 2016 #65

The only legitimate alternative is Hillary Clinton. duffyduff Dec 2016 #99

Yesterday it was reported that there are 20 likely to vote against flamingdem Dec 2016 #3

Some may have already decided Jean-Jacques Roussea Dec 2016 #10

Keeping mum would be the smarter thing to do. whathehell Dec 2016 #40

Ha! Wouldn't that be ironic? The "shy electoral voter" trumping the "shy Trump voter"! nt jonno99 Dec 2016 #41

Yeah, I saw that thread here yesterday, and that gives some reason for hope. nt mtnsnake Dec 2016 #12

Just heard it is now up to 39 CountAllVotes Dec 2016 #19

Thirty Nine!! whathehell Dec 2016 #42

oh yay flamingdem Dec 2016 #45

do you have a link? 39 would be awesome. yodermon Dec 2016 #47

No link to the 39 figure CountAllVotes Dec 2016 #50

ok thx yodermon Dec 2016 #52

39 republican electors?? triron Dec 2016 #60

Apparently half of them are Republicans CountAllVotes Dec 2016 #63

On "The View" CountAllVotes Dec 2016 #49

Any Rs among those 39? If not, it means nothing. stopbush Dec 2016 #53

Of course there are few or none. duffyduff Dec 2016 #94

Please: source triron Dec 2016 #59

You're confusing those who are demanding to see the intelligence on Russian hacking with Dream Girl Dec 2016 #88

Yep. The EC is going to vote Trump. duffyduff Dec 2016 #95

Yeah.... but bpositive Dec 2016 #4

It would be shocking ... ZoomBubba Dec 2016 #5

It's either Trump or Clinton Jean-Jacques Roussea Dec 2016 #7

It depends on who the faithless electors SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #11

But those are the only people who will become president Jean-Jacques Roussea Dec 2016 #16

Once it gets to the House SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #17

The public always has a say Jean-Jacques Roussea Dec 2016 #21

Violent revolution? SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #24

That's the history of our country Jean-Jacques Roussea Dec 2016 #37

The "public" cast more votes for Trump than they did for all Repub house candidates combined onenote Dec 2016 #30

OK there is no such thing ... ZoomBubba Dec 2016 #39

bureaucratic defeatism Jean-Jacques Roussea Dec 2016 #44

OK then. ZoomBubba Dec 2016 #48

People think the election is out of our hands just because it's in the proceedings of the Jean-Jacques Roussea Dec 2016 #51

Constitutionally it is out of our hands now n/t SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #70

Thank you. whathehell Dec 2016 #43

Unfortunately, I highly doubt they'd vote for anyone but a Republican. nt mtnsnake Dec 2016 #14

Even another Republican would be a huge improvement whathehell Dec 2016 #33

He/She would be illegitimate. I personally would NOT accept that individual as a president. duffyduff Dec 2016 #76

I don't accept Trump, "legitimate" or not. n/t whathehell Dec 2016 #78

Don't care if you do. Most of the Trump voters don't accept Clinton. duffyduff Dec 2016 #92

No? Well, guess what? I could have said the same to you whathehell Dec 2016 #96

Honestly, I don't see it being either one ... ZoomBubba Dec 2016 #34

Hillary Clinton is the popular vote winner. Your claim she is disliked and not trusted is nonsense. duffyduff Dec 2016 #77

Best case scenario (which ISN'T going to happen) Goblinmonger Dec 2016 #100

it'll be as big a shock as Trump being PEOTUS in the first place Jean-Jacques Roussea Dec 2016 #6

Most electors are low-level party apparatchiks. Girard442 Dec 2016 #8

The thing is, there are more than a few Repubs who do not like Trump either mtnsnake Dec 2016 #20

Electors -- earn your pay! immoderate Dec 2016 #13

Exactly. mtnsnake Dec 2016 #15

As far as I can determine, they aren't paid anything for their electoral college work. n/t PoliticAverse Dec 2016 #22

Technicality. They know what it means. immoderate Dec 2016 #28

What do they get paid? nt. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #25

The thanks of the American people. immoderate Dec 2016 #31

Then they are about to earn their pay. nt. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #38

Collecting is not earning. immoderate Dec 2016 #46

Correct. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #57

Yes. That was a charge to not be a rubber stamp. It was, however, hyperbolic, immoderate Dec 2016 #69

Update: Actually ELECTORS ARE PAID! immoderate Dec 2016 #72

I would be shocked. n/t PoliticAverse Dec 2016 #18

Surely it WOULD shock a lot of people, but it SHOULD not shock anyone mtnsnake Dec 2016 #32

If often shocks me when something that should happen actually does. n/t PoliticAverse Dec 2016 #66

It would shock me DFW Dec 2016 #23

Actually it will be an enormous shock if it happens onenote Dec 2016 #26

Yes, historically speaking it appears to be against all odds of happening, but mtnsnake Dec 2016 #56

While I'm not a fan of amateur internet psychoanalysis onenote Dec 2016 #71

Ridiculous. Kotya Dec 2016 #36

I hope but I'm not optimistic. jalan48 Dec 2016 #54

This is nonsense jzodda Dec 2016 #55

Let them. The military would be happy to engage flamingdem Dec 2016 #68

that is a terrible reason to not do it JustinL Dec 2016 #80

Why on earth would you ever let those assholes push you around? mtnsnake Dec 2016 #81

Unfortunately for me one of them is my boss jzodda Dec 2016 #90

since it's never happened in our history NewJeffCT Dec 2016 #58

When in our history has the EC had to consider voting for someone as unfit & unqualified as Trump? mtnsnake Dec 2016 #62

The founding fathers also set up the EC to ensure overrepresentation of slave states onenote Dec 2016 #89

In this case they are the last firewall to avert a coup. nt Snotcicles Dec 2016 #61

I'll believe it when I see it. Pacifist Patriot Dec 2016 #67

Ha Ha Coyotl Dec 2016 #73

It would be EXTREMELY shocking to see 538 people try to decide the will of the entire country. jmg257 Dec 2016 #74

It won't work. The person would be illegitimate. duffyduff Dec 2016 #75

How would an electoral college vote be illegitimate? mtnsnake Dec 2016 #79

It IS illegitimate to invalidate the votes of 130 MILLION people. duffyduff Dec 2016 #93

Try telling that to the Founding Fathers. nt mtnsnake Dec 2016 #97

If a third candidate were to be elected SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #82

If the Electoral College fails to produce a majority winner, then the House would choose mtnsnake Dec 2016 #83

Agree 100% SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #84

No shock at all, but... RealityChik Dec 2016 #85

May I suggest HRC? triron Dec 2016 #86

I'm skeptical, but I hope so! Buckeye_Democrat Dec 2016 #87

Not acceptable. EVER. duffyduff Dec 2016 #91

Unfortunately for you, me, & everyone else here, those "fuckers" don't need our approval mtnsnake Dec 2016 #98