
Use the Electoral College the way it was intended - btcboss
https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19?source_location=discover_feed
======
ng12
> Secretary Clinton WON THE POPULAR VOTE and should be President.

The Electoral College is in the constitution. The popular vote has never been
a method for electing the president by design.

~~~
k8t
I don't particularly feel strong about this petition, but I don't think the
argument "because it's the constitution" is a good one. I can imagine the
constitution being outdated for certain reasons and I don't think it's a big
deal to adapt to the changes.

~~~
MrZongle2
_" I don't particularly feel strong about this petition, but I don't think the
argument "because it's the constitution" is a good one."_

I respectfully disagree. I think the fact that it _is_ in the Constitution
should give anyone pause about changing it. That's not to say that it should
not (or could not) be changed, but this isn't just something that an Executive
Order by the current President could change. This is a Congressional
responsibility.

This petition is absurd and pointless.

~~~
k8t
You're right, I agree. This petition is pretty absurd, especially because the
election is over (it would've had more substance if it was a non-election
year). Just wanted to point out that "because it's the constitution" shouldn't
be a discussion-stopper.

------
bbctol
If people are worried about a Donald Trump presidency because they're afraid
he'll break norms, tear down established systems, and use his elected status
to remove any independent/non-populist institution, it is not a good idea to
start with this.

------
serge2k
1\. She won a plurality of the popular vote. Yes, it's winning but it's not
even a majority.

2\. You don't get to just toss out rules because you lost. 3 days ago people
were shitting on trump for this type of rhetoric.

3\. The fact that the electoral college exists fucks up the popular vote. A
republican has no voice in California, and a democrat has none in Texas.
Having it be an actual popular vote would change voter behaviour pretty
drastically.

4\. The electoral college is not a system which values votes equally. A vote
in California is worth less than a vote in wyoming. Some people like that
because of the idea of tyranny of the majority. Some people say that's
ridiculous and a popular vote is the only good system. Figure it out for
yourself, I say that geographic based representation is why we have the
senate. Of course I like the democrats and the coastal population centers
would be a massive boost.

5\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact)

6\. Fight for an amendment. Ranked voting in a popular vote based presidential
election? Guess what not you can vote for bernie and johnson first before your
vote finally goes to Clinton, instead of being whiny and ruining things for
the rest of us.

------
aglavine
A different system would have leaded to different outcome. You can't expect
voters behaving the same when the rules change.

Also, Arrow's theorem is valid for any system

~~~
bdcravens
Exactly. Texas and California were pretty much in the bag from the get-go; I'm
sure if winning the state was irrelevant, more voters may have come out.

------
roryisok
I really can't see this happening. There's no precedent and it would lead to
serious civil unrest.

~~~
mentifex
Fathers! Keep Donald "Grab 'em by the pussy" Trump away from your daughters.

------
bdcravens
If we want the electors to vote with their conscience, and not blindly accept
who won what states (2 candidates coming out of conventions is absolutely NOT
what the forefathers intended) then perhaps Ted Cruz or Bernie Sanders still
have a very good chance? Otherwise it sounds like the petition is calling for
keeping and trusting the system as it has always been, except at the very last
moment.

------
bdcravens
It's worth noting that for much of the night, per the media, Trump had a 1m+
popular vote advantage. If it had turned the other way (Clinton victory w/
Trump popular vote win) people would be screaming if the Trump camp called for
this.

~~~
btcboss
It has nothing to do with popular vote. It has to do with qualifications. EC
is intended to keep out unqualified candidates -> As Alexander Hamilton writes
in “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the
office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an
eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.”

And if that were to happen (Clinton victory w/ Trump popular vote win), trump
would say the election was rigged and fuel fires to an uprising.

~~~
bdcravens
This assumes Clinton would meet the standard while Trump would fail it.
Between Whitewatergate, her husband's impeachment hearings, Benghazi, enabling
her husband's womanizing, the improprieties with the Clinton Foundation, and
more, such a standard may make her ineligible as well. I think being a bad
person isn't what the founders had in mind.

I also think they would have been appalled at the idea of someone who's
political achievements cannot be disentangled from who they married. After
all, the founding fathers weren't exactly fans of royalty.

If we want to apply intent, then the question is who would our next president
be, Cruz or Sanders?

