Itssoeasy wrote: » He can request a recount. It can’t order or direct anything.
paleoperson wrote: » He can direct that a recount takes place in a close election. It is standard practice and they couldn't refuse.
gmisk wrote: » I think your right I think 7ish EC votes went to people like Kasich or Paul in 2016.
TomOnBoard wrote: » This ^^^... Imagine how we would feel in Ireland if our votes in an EU context were dictated solely by population? it's bad enough as it is, but we would never get a look in, if our perspectives were not shared by the large populations in the mainland. Bad as the EC system may be, it is fundamental to the concept of a country being formed out of a set of States that are United, and not a single entity where California and New York together would dictate policy in every facet of life for the entire mid-West.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » I can't dig it up but The Economist had an article on this. Apparently, for some states it's winner-takes-all and for others, electors are delegated in proportion to the distribution of the popular vote. That would make a lot more sense to me.
Brian? wrote: » Ordering? He can't order them to do anything.
Brian? wrote: » Ilhan Omar re-elected in MN by 40 points. Delighted for her after the bile she's been subject to over the last 2 years.
AbusesToilets wrote: » The system would be more representative if the EC votes were awarded proportionate to the votes in each state. That alone would give a more accurate reflection of voter sentiment, and would also encourage candidates to compete in states where they might not be able to win outright.
TomOnBoard wrote: » I disagree. A Biden presidency will be made impossible to function as it will try to deal with a post-Covid economy that is in tatters, while a Senate stays in Republican hands. Mc Connell will do to Biden EXACTLY what he did in Obama's second term. By the time 2024 comes around, Trumpism will not have gone away. I'm feeling quite desperate about it TBH! I do agree that Biden may not stay the full term and may hand the reins over to Harris at some point after the next mid-terms.
Manic Moran wrote: » No, we're not. We're voting as the populations of the 50 States at the same time to elect the chief executive of the United States. Note that legally, most of us aren't voting for a person, we are voting for a group of electors. The deference to the population discrepancy is that some states have more votes than others, though legally, all are separate and equal states. This concept is fundamental to the structure of the US, not just for elections. It's how the country works on a daily basis.
10000maniacs wrote: » Trump whinging about Wisconsin. Ordering a recount.
Panrich wrote: » Meanwhile in 2016...https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2016/12/01/Trump-campaign-objects-to-recount-efforts-in-Michigan/8861480642641/
BorneTobyWilde wrote: » If Biden wins you'll not see a republican president for the next 16 years. Biden won't last 8 years though, he'll have to step down in 2 probably, if he lasts two. What happens in that scenario
Movementarian wrote: » At this stage what are people thinking for the last few results? Its odd that the republicans seem to think they are still the Arizona race...do theh know something the numbers aren't showing? If Trump gets Arizona, Georgia and NC he only needs PA? I'm still nervous on this....that he will sneak this yet....
Itssoeasy wrote: » So if Trump is calling for a recount in Wisconsin can Hillary Clinton ask for one for 2016 ? I’m joking obviously but it highlights the ridiculousness of trumps demand.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Trump demands recount in Wisconsin even before the count is finished.
Rjd2 wrote: » One small thing for both sides, they need to be better with spending their money on viral candidates .,,,examples? Amy Mc Grath and James Harrison in the senate, while the GOP base yet again looks like have splashed to much money on hopeless candidates who have some viral fame.
