The real election fraud is that this country does not adhere to 1 person 1 vote.

This.

Direct only for primaries, leaving general under delegates. We are still a Federal Republic, and one man one vote will give overwhelming power to costal states.

Do the people who live in the coastal states any less American? Why is it that the fewer neighbors you have, the more you matter in this country?

Because the states need to be represented too. Otherwise you will have tyranny of majority.

And that is worse than a tyranny of the minority how exactly? Why is someone from Texas inferior to someone from Wyoming?

And that is worse than a tyranny of the minority how exactly?

It's not tyranny of the minority. The candidate that wins is often the majority.

Except in 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016. That is a 7% failure rate, if 7% of the time the NFL or NBA team won with the least amount of points, nobody would accept that. Yet, here we are with our political system..

Not the least amount of points - the second most (usually), but with more points in a different method of scoring.

Like if they added "style" points to NFL and teams that had amazing plays consistently could beat out a team that ran boring ass plays but won by a small margin.

3 million votes is not a small margin.

I'm not saying it's good. I'm saying it is not tyranny of the minority

How is 62 million > 65 million?

Did I say that? I said the system is not "tyranny of the minority" as in the minority does not always rule.

Would you prefer that the same NFL or NBA team wins EVERY game?

You're advocating for letting the winner be whoever wins over California and New York in every election.

So, do you just want liberals in power forever?

Do you want an economy more like California?

Do you want gun control laws like New York? Does that make sense in Alaska?

The reason we have the system set up like this is because each state is supposed to have it's on way of life, and their separate input matters more than each individual I'm the country.

Otherwise you end up with everyone in Alaska dying unarmed from predators, and their vote will never matter so there's nothing they can do about it.

Now, the system is pretty fucky since the states have been robbed of their individual peer to a certain extent, but the point remains...

Do you really want California and New York to choose everything for everyone in America forever?

I certainly fucking don't. I'm very thankful there's a chance to override a shit vote due to two highly populated, extremely insulated, like-minded individuals.

There's a reason people outside of those areas aren't as liberal. Life is different, and I don't think we should ignore the fact that the political pendulum swings in a very balanced manner in this country. I think it's better than having the same team win every game, personally.

Would you prefer that the same NFL or NBA team wins EVERY game?

I don't, I prefer the team that scores the most points wins every time, nothing less and nothing more.

You're advocating for letting the winner be whoever wins over California and New York in every election.

No, I am advocating who gets the most votes wins the election.

Do you want an economy more like California?

You mean a state with the 5th largest economy in the world? Yeah I'll take that over my native Idaho, who receives 78 cents for every dollar we put into the federal government.

Okay, I may be misled on California's current economic standing.

I still don't want the two biggest population centers choosing the president every time, and I'm certainly not alone in that.

If you want it changed, feel free to lobby for it. Protest. Organize with people who agree with you and try to actually do something about it.

Unfortunately, I highly doubt fifty percent of the country wants that change, so you'll have to just accept it forever. Because they'll always vote the same way. And your voice will never matter.

Just like what you want for states that aren't California or New York! Sucks ass, right?

Luckily we have representatives to condense the vote and give your side a better chance.

Just like the electoral college does for elections.

You don't have to agree. You don't have to like it. You do have to get over it or do something about it. Crying on Reddit didn't change my mind, and I doubt it influenced anyone who has any understanding of the subject.

Sorry your side lost in 1787. Maybe you'll have a better chance this time around.

If you want it changed, feel free to lobby for it. Protest. Organize with people who agree with you and try to actually do something about it.

I do, and I am.

You know what?

I take it back. I'm sorry for being an arrogant prick.

While I can't say I've definitively changed my mind, it's clear as it ever will be that I need to educate myself more on this topic before I open my mouth about it, lol.

I'm usually not this adamant about my opinions, either. I guess somewhere some sort of brainwashing/biased talk must have hit me hard.

I'll reexamine my opinion and refrain from talking about this until I have a more thorough understanding of it.

Again, sorry for being a dick. Thanks for bringing new information to light for me. Have a good one, bro.

It's all good no worries man. I hope you have a great 4th.

Thanks, you too!

Changing the electoral college for the presidential election would have no bearing on the number of Representatives / Senators a given state would have in the House / Senate.

Certainly not a tyranny of the majority by any means.

That's why we have the Senate.

If you think not getting the guy you voted for is a 'tyranny' then you need to rethink your priorities.

If a country cannot function through respecting the will if the people, then that country is simply just too big to function properly.

It should be 1 person 1 vote regardless of where you live.

Exactly, a presidential candidate can potentially win with only 22% of the popular vote. Why we keep the Electoral College in today's age truly boggles the mind.

It gives power to zero states because states would have no power. The people would.

Right now the part of the nation with low population has too much power over the states with the largest populations, California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, etc.

Texas has the worst vote share out of all the states in the union, yet somehow many Texans are cool with not being counted the same so as long as their boy wins.

Texas is the second most populous state.

ITT: people with no understanding of American history nor the development of the Federal government nor how it was designed to work

I know fully how it works, the EC was put in place to keep the slave states happy.

The answer is an open source/transparent blockchain based voting system.

But still, how to overcome voter registration fraud when no one is wanting to ask for IDs?

True, this will be an issue. Probably a lot easier if you only make them do it one time forever. Tie it to the SS system, or welfare, or the tax system, or something else like that. However those places verify identity, then do that. You get a token that becomes yours forever, and no one can use it except for you.

Verifying citizenship will cripple certain political parties. They will fight it tooth and nail.

Even this comment is guaranteed to be downvoted by that same mentality.

It's guaranteed to be downvoted because there is literally zero evidence of non-citizens voting in significant numbers, thereby making your statement it "would cripple certain political parties" at nest unproven conjecture.

There is however plenty of evidence that this "muh non-existent illegal voters" gets used to push laws through preventing or making it harder for US citizens to exercise their right to vote.

Have them sign affadavits saying they are who they started they are.

You do make that affirmation when you sign your registration to vote, you also have to provide verifiable information.

ID requirements would be fine if assistance is made available to those who have trouble showing that they are genuinely qualified: generally the poor and elderly.

This entails issuing a national I.D. system. No thanks.

you mean Social Security numbers?

Lmao.

Explain yourself

Explain?? You want me to explain the Social Security Administration to you?? You want me to explain how insecure SSN numbers are? You want me to explain how they're not unique? Why haven't you even looked at your social security card and read the part where it says NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION?

Using SSN for ID is retarded and broken and begging to be defrauded. This is common knowledge. It is common sense.

What? Just make it a law that anyone can get a basic state ID for free if they need one to vote. Requiring an ID that costs money to vote is literally a poll tax.

Can you read?

Doesn't have to be national. If states are going to require ID, then there should be assistance to get it, not obstacles.

You no read good! You read bad!

Wrong.

Like they do in Africa and actually most of the world probably. Dip a finger in ink after you have voted. Anyone with a clean finger can vote. Done.

Exactly; if electronic banking can be made secure, so can voting. There must be an honest commitment to that end, however.

Except a large portion of the population doesn't want 100% verified (legal) voting.

Agreed there are people who are against federal databases of who they voted for.

I think the amount of people who are pro-election-fraud are probably a small minority. Fuck them, we should be able to beat those criminals with democracy.

Not while they control the voting centres. It seems inevitable that things will have to be taken before they can be distributed equitably. "Out of my cold dead hands" is a saying that comes to mind which could describe the current holders of power.

Voting machine programmer testifies under oath that manipulation is easy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7R1_ixtlyc

Hillary Clinton did much better against Bernie Sanders when there was no paper trail

https://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/16/clinton-does-best-where-voting-machines-flunk-hacking-tests-hillary-clinton-vs-bernie-sanders-election-fraud-allegations/

Ohio officials convicted of rigging election

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/14/nation/na-ohio14

The only answer is direct representation. As long as we have representatives that can be bought, we will be controlled by the rich. Even if the rich pay us all off, at least we will slightly benefit from the pay-off.

The point of direct representation is that there are no elected officials to bribe.

This is the whole reason the Russian narrative is being pushed so hard, why the DNC class action lawsuit isn't covered. It's is all a distraction. The timing fits perfectly. After the DNC leaks, the Russia narrative started getting pushed. Any conversation about electoral reform or a conversation of the neutrality of the DNC was and is still shutdown.

If you were paying attention the "Russian Narrative" started BEFORE the DNC leaks. Gucciffer came forward and started leaking shit only after Crowdstrike released its report.

I don't think that changes the motive of the DNC though. They knew what information was going to get out.

This entails issuing a national I.D. system. No thanks.

Did I say that? I said the system is not "tyranny of the minority" as in the minority does not always rule.