*Claps Hands* Obama Elected

[quote=MrCuddowls]The thing is even though i'm happy with Obama getting Elected, I Still think the way these presidents are being elected is bad. The way its setup, you can basically have only 20 percent of the population voting for you and still win. That is a pretty sad thing to say about something so important. How this works is that the college decided to give each state at least 3 votes (Which is full on stupid of them) even though small states should only be getting 1 or 2 votes, and since the amount of votes is dependent on the population, they are essentially stealing votes from states that have large populations and thus deserve more votes than they are getting (like california or texas) Wyoming for example, 0.18 of the population of america live here, but this state gets 0.56 percent of the electoral votes. Someone running for president can basically win this state with just .09% + 1 votes. Columbia, win .1 percent of the population, get 0.56 percent of the electoral votes Vermont, .1%, .56% North Dakota .11%, .56% Alaska .11%, .56% South Dakota .13% .56% Delaware .15%, .56% Montana .16%, .56% Rhode Island .17%, .74% New Hampshire .21%, .74% Maine .21%, .74% Hawaii .22%, .74% Idaho .25%, .74% Nebraska .3% .93% West Virginia .3%, .93% New Mexico .33%, .93% Nevada .44%, 1.12% Utah .45%, 1.12% Kansas .46%, 1.12% Arkansas .47%, 1.12% Mississippi .48%, 1.12% Iowa .49%, 1.12% Connecticut .6%, 1.3% Oklahoma .61%, 1.3% Oregon .62%, 1.3% Kentucky .7%, 1.49% Louisiana .73%, 1.49% South Carolina .75%, 1.67% Alabama .77%, 1.67% Colorado .81%, 1.67% Minnesota .86%, 1.86% Wisconsin .92%, 1.86% Maryland .93%, 1.86% Missouri .97%, 1.86% Tennessee 1.03%, 2.04% Arizona 1.03%, 2.04% Indiana 1.05%, 2.04% Massachusetts 1.06%, 2.04% Virginia 1.29%, 2.42% New Jersey 1.42%, 2.6% This all adds up to 21.91 percent of the population and 50.19% of the Electoral votes You just won the elections with 1/5 of the population voting for you This system is horrible and they should throw it away and make a system where each vote is counted directly towards the president and the person with the most votes wins Thank you for reading this rant Im bored[/quote]

[quote=OTGBionicArm]I only cared who won because my dad said "if Romney wins and the republicans get the senate, we're moving to mexico".[/quote]

[quote=Mooninites]if the electoral process was different, what would be the point for a candidate to campaign in a state like Wyoming? It has a lower population in the entire state than a city like Atlanta or St. Louis. The point of the electoral process is to keep states relevant and basically make sure larger states. And in all honesty, in a winner-take-all system, an electoral college makes sense. [quote=OTGBionicArm] I only cared who won because my dad said "if Romney wins and the republicans get the senate, we're moving to mexico". [/quote] we call that addition by subtraction[/quote]

[quote=OTGBionicArm]My dad was actually serious about that statement o.o[/quote]

[quote=MrCuddowls]The above numbers are with the electoral college If electoral process was counted in a way where votes went directly from people to candidate, Then it wouldn't matter where they visit. If they get the votes of the top 10 most populated cities in America, it would equal 8 Percent of the population. Thats not much sadly, They would still have to win the rest of the 42% + 1 votes if they are going to get anywhere with getting elected. Now in terms of keeping states relevant. This isnt really an excuse to be honest, they would sabotage what the MAJORITY (California, Texas, New York etc) of the people of america want and vote for, just to keep small states relevant to the election. What they are basically doing is making a Wyoming vote equal to 3 Texas votes. Thats NOT fair and I would not be fukin happy if my vote wasnt worth just as much as everyone elses, im a citizen just like all these people and I live in a state where the majority really thinks this is the right way of doing things since it would make their lives better in terms of economy and safety and such and that sure as hell is what the voting system should take into account.[/quote]

[quote=Mooninites][quote=OTGBionicArm] My dad was actually serious about that statement o.o [/quote] if your dad is really stupid enough to move to mexico then I hope and pray he didn't vote [quote=MrCuddowls] The above numbers are with the electoral college If electoral process was counted in a way where votes went directly from people to candidate, Then it wouldn't matter where they visit. If they get the votes of the top 10 most populated cities in America, it would equal 8 Percent of the population. Thats not much sadly, They would still have to win the rest of the 42% + 1 votes if they are going to get anywhere with getting elected. Now in terms of keeping states relevant. This isnt really an excuse to be honest, they would sabotage what the MAJORITY (California, Texas, New York etc) of the people of america want and vote for, just to keep small states relevant to the election. What they are basically doing is making a Wyoming vote equal to 3 Texas votes. Thats NOT fair and I would not be fukin happy if my vote wasnt worth just as much as everyone elses, im a citizen just like all these people and I live in a state where the majority really thinks this is the right way of doing things since it would make their lives better in terms of economy and safety and such and that sure as hell is what the voting system should take into account. [/quote] well in terms of this election, you should be thankful it is an electoral process, because so far Obama only leads Romney by 500,000 votes. http://drudgereport.com/ In regards to your second part, your vote is worth just as much as any other vote, regardless of your state. You're worth 1 vote any way you look at it. You could say that your vote is worth less, the more people vote. Or you could say your vote is worth more in smaller states like wyoming given statistics. But in a nation of roughly 300 million, your vote is already worth next to nothing[/quote]

[quote=Anastasios]Inb4 threadlock.[/quote]

[quote=MrCuddowls]So are you saying its OK to have a system that can easily be taken advantage of? I Already gave a prime example of what a candidate could do in my first post They won all those small STATES which hold only 1/5th of the population (Notice how I capitalized States and not people) They won 50.19% of the electoral votes, with only 22% of the population voting for him and a whole 78% voting against him. I Bet those 78% must have felt pretty fucking cheated. Wouldn't you after seeing just 63 million people win a man an election and disregard an entire 252 million people and who they want to be president? TLDR Basically what im saying is its not fucking right for 22 percent of the entire population to equal HALF the electoral votes, That is completely fucked up and indefensible Even Shorter TLDR 63000000 =/= 252000000[/quote]

[quote=Crows foot]What I mean is that the world is releived that we didn't get another Warcrazy president in the US.[/quote]

[quote=caucheka][url=http://postimage.org/image/ajdbhhpb3/full/]haha, time for tears.[/quote]