Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Codician]

oh my god Clinton might just win the popular vote when everything tallied. every Clinton supporter is going to flip shit if that happens.

I wonder how many of the places Clinton "won" will have over 80% turnout rate. :')

(Hint: 80% turnout is pretty much impossible. Even Brexit with 72~% was ridiculous.)

[redwallzyl]

most of the uncounted votes are in California. still 9% and yea double checked and its a 100,000 lead for Clinton. now people can actually call they system rigged and be right in a way.

[Loud Whispers]

I wonder how many of the places Clinton "won" will have over 80% turnout rate. :')

(Hint: 80% turnout is pretty much impossible. Even Brexit with 72~% was ridiculous.)

u wot
What's ridiculous about 72%

[Codician]

I wonder how many of the places Clinton "won" will have over 80% turnout rate. :')

(Hint: 80% turnout is pretty much impossible. Even Brexit with 72~% was ridiculous.)

u wot
What's ridiculous about 72%

UK averages around 65~% (commonly less) voter turnout in general elections. 72% is a full standard deviation above that. That's wild.

[Vilanat]

I await Clinton fans to start lash at Sanders for not quitting on time as an excuse for her loss.

[Codician]

(removed)

[Antioch]

most of the uncounted votes are in California. still 9% and yea double checked and its a 100,000 lead for Clinton. now people can actually call they system rigged and be right in a way.

Democracy: where the person with fewer votes than his opponent gets to be president.

[Codician]

It's funny how the system is broken only when you don't like the result.

[ein]

regardless of the results, there's no denying that the democratic system in the states is broken

[LoSboccacc]

It's funny how the system is broken only when you don't like the result.

Yeah look all the leftie dragging their feet now on how democracy doesn't work

[Antioch]

It's funny how the system is broken only when you don't like the result.

Uh, I have found the US way of voting idiotic for years. But hey, I am just glad I don't live there.

In what way does someone with the lesser amount of votes winning make any sense?

It's not even winning with a minority vote, it is literally winning while more people say they want the other candidate.

[Codician]

Yeah look all the leftie dragging their feet now on how democracy doesn't work

Brexit vote was literally direct proportional voting and all we had were pro-EU people crying about how "that kind of democracy doesn't work, people don't really know what they want, we needed an electoral college system" and now America has voted with an electoral college system it's "the system is broken, we need direct proportional voting, this kind of democracy doesn't work".

Has me giggling.

regardless of the results, there's no denying that the democratic system in the states is broken

Yeah, no. If Hillary Clinton has more populist votes then it means your state lines got fucked somehow. The electoral college is meant to make it so that a state with more people gets more input. That means your population numbers weren't checked properly.

Either that or (more likely) illegal voting occured in favour of Hillary Clinton.

[Antioch]

Yeah look all the leftie dragging their feet now on how democracy doesn't work

Brexit vote was literally direct proportional voting and all we had were pro-EU people crying about how "that kind of democracy doesn't work, people don't really know what they want, we needed an electoral college system" and now America has voted with an electoral college system it's "the system is broken, we need direct proportional voting, this kind of democracy doesn't work".

Has me giggling.

regardless of the results, there's no denying that the democratic system in the states is broken

Yeah, no. If Hillary Clinton has more populist votes then it means your state lines got fucked somehow. The electoral college is meant to make it so that a state with more people gets more input. That means your population numbers weren't checked properly.

Either that or (more likely) illegal voting occured in favour of Hillary Clinton.

What, you literally have no idea what you are talking about do you?

The only actual reason is that more Republicans live in area's only slightly leaning Republican, while more democrats live in area's heavily favouring democrats. There is literally no difference between winning a state with 51% and winning it with 99% under the US winner takes all system.

[Codician]

What, you literally have no idea what you are talking about do you?

The only actual reason is that more Republicans live in area's only slightly leaning Republican, while more democrats live in area's heavily favouring democrats. There is literally no difference between winning a state with 51% and winning it with 99% under the US winner takes all system.

You do know some states are worth more, right?

[Frumple]

... uh, yeah, and it's the ones with smaller populations. Their votes count a hell of a lot more per person than those in more populated areas. Raw number of electors in a state does not mean they're getting more say. It means they've got to get together more people to have the same amount.

Seriously, the EC was, at least in part, specifically built to curtail populism (for all the good it did this time). It's biased towards the smaller elector count states.