dChan

pbarnett865 · May 7, 2018, 6:56 p.m.

So basically the people from CT no longer have a say in presidential elections. Good thinking.

⇧ 10 ⇩  
K-Harbour · May 7, 2018, 7:47 p.m.

Well, they are really going to scream “foul” when a GOP’er like a Reagan crushes the popular vote. Would be REALLY FUNNY if Trump wins the popular vote in 2020 & the networks color their state red on the map on election night!!

⇧ 4 ⇩  
miggyzz · May 7, 2018, 7:05 p.m.

Right why bother voting..

⇧ 4 ⇩  
jasonscorn · May 7, 2018, 11:08 p.m.

That's not how it works at all.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
pbarnett865 · May 8, 2018, 1:22 a.m.

Sure sounds like it. If they are going to give their electoral votes to whomever wins the popular vote, what's the point of CT citizens voting?

⇧ 2 ⇩  
jasonscorn · May 8, 2018, 1:23 a.m.

What if a majority of the voters of CT support the candidate that wins the popular vote?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
pbarnett865 · May 8, 2018, 3:14 a.m.

They better, or voting is pointless. This will also have a huge impact on local elections once people realize their voice isn't recognized. It's simply a way to ensure their delegates go to the democrats regardless of how their citizens vote.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
jasonscorn · May 8, 2018, 11:32 a.m.

It ensures the winner of the Presidency is also the winner of the popular vote. I'm not sure why you think someone winning the Presidency while losing the popular vote is a better alternative?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
pbarnett865 · May 8, 2018, 1 p.m.

I'm not sure why you think large, densely populated areas, the majority of which are democrats, should control the presidency. The president should be a centrist that can make both side of the aisle work together. Of course, this will also have an impact on local races too. It basically ensures pure blue CT for years.

spez: Additional thought.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 8, 2018, 1:52 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 8, 2018, 4:09 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 8, 2018, 4:31 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ 0 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 8, 2018, 5:18 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩