Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:30 PM Apr 2018

Trump pushes to swap Electoral College for popular vote

Source: Politico




By LOUIS NELSON 04/26/2018 10:47 AM EDT

President Donald Trump on Thursday voiced support for doing away with the Electoral College for presidential elections in favor of a popular vote because the latter would be “much easier to win.”

The president’s support for a popular-vote presidential election came as an aside during a freewheeling Thursday morning interview with “Fox & Friends,” the Fox News morning show he is known to watch and from which he receives almost unflinchingly positive coverage. Trump made the remark amid a larger point about public figures who publicly support him in turn benefiting from a boost of popularity from Trump supporters.

“Remember, we won the election. And we won it easily. You know, a lot of people say ‘Oh, it was close.’ And by the way, they also like to always talk about Electoral College. Well, it’s an election based on the Electoral College. I would rather have a popular election, but it’s a totally different campaign,” Trump said. “It’s as though you're running — if you're a runner, you're practicing for the 100-yard dash as opposed to the 1-mile.”

“The Electoral College is different. I would rather have the popular vote because it's, to me, it's much easier to win the popular vote,” he continued.

Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/26/trump-electoral-college-popular-vote-555148

62 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump pushes to swap Electoral College for popular vote (Original Post) DonViejo Apr 2018 OP
There's an app for that. NT mahatmakanejeeves Apr 2018 #1
Yeah, right... TranssexualKaren Apr 2018 #2
Surely this is an Onion piece, right? nt Ferrets are Cool Apr 2018 #3
I thought it was a joke, too. Dave Starsky Apr 2018 #8
trump is so fucking dumb.. he thinks Cha Apr 2018 #47
If I recall Liberalagogo Apr 2018 #4
His argument is that he concentrated on the electoral vote not the popular vote. former9thward Apr 2018 #30
Oh please Liberalagogo Apr 2018 #34
So when he was funding Democratic candidates and causes in NY former9thward Apr 2018 #35
Yes, he was a shithole back then too. padfun Apr 2018 #55
Trump "concentrated"......... SergeStorms Apr 2018 #37
Unfortunately many Democrats did what you just did. former9thward Apr 2018 #40
From Wikipedia- SergeStorms Apr 2018 #44
How come Clinton never showed up in Wisconsin? former9thward Apr 2018 #46
Lazy, much? SergeStorms Apr 2018 #49
OK. Can we make that retroactive? Then, deal! ollie10 Apr 2018 #5
Its like a Monty Python sketch but the BootinUp Apr 2018 #6
"I would rather have the popular vote because it's, to me, it's much easier to win the popular vote" RockRaven Apr 2018 #7
Trade wars are easy to win. Arms races are easy to win. lagomorph777 Apr 2018 #15
To give the devil his due, there's a grain of truth there: The Mouth Apr 2018 #9
Didn't Trump lose the popular vote? left-of-center2012 Apr 2018 #10
Yup, and not only that, there's this tidbit from the article that's quite interesting progree Apr 2018 #17
After he led the country into an illegal war based on provable lies. robbob Apr 2018 #45
Ehhhh...... what's a meager 3 million votes??? groundloop Apr 2018 #20
There really is no bottom to how stupid he is, is there? Spider Jerusalem Apr 2018 #11
NO--don't forget --ALL those votes were from illegals. he actually won by 5 mil without niyad Apr 2018 #18
He said he would have run a completely different campaign. former9thward Apr 2018 #31
You Seem Convinced ProfessorGAC Apr 2018 #54
I've noticed that the same three or four posters always take a contrary position. tavernier Apr 2018 #57
Does this moron know how to count?? C_U_L8R Apr 2018 #12
Does he have a single clue about what it takes to pass an Amendment to the Constitution? Stonepounder Apr 2018 #13
If he could do it with an executive order, and DID... maddiemom Apr 2018 #22
Except it doesn't need a constitutional amendment. Massacure Apr 2018 #29
National Popular Vote interstate compact djg21 Apr 2018 #38
unconstitutional Cold War Spook Apr 2018 #41
Fair enough. But still, states do not need to collude to make it happen. Massacure Apr 2018 #43
Not necessarily. djg21 Apr 2018 #52
Two thoughts on this. Cold War Spook Apr 2018 #58
Courts don't give advisory opinions. djg21 Apr 2018 #60
Doesn't Trump know that would take adding a new Amendment to the Constitution? Cold War Spook Apr 2018 #14
This isnt entirely correct. djg21 Apr 2018 #39
unconstitutional Cold War Spook Apr 2018 #42
Hmmm. I wonder if ... Whiskeytide Apr 2018 #16
something like that was my first thought as well--they figured out how to rig the whole thing. niyad Apr 2018 #19
This is correct. While I support a popular vote, NYC Liberal Apr 2018 #21
And let's make it retroactive. MrsCoffee Apr 2018 #23
That was exactly my reaction DFW Apr 2018 #24
Same here dameatball Apr 2018 #27
trump thinks he won the popular vote.. Cha Apr 2018 #48
Well, if it makes it easier to win... ThoughtCriminal Apr 2018 #25
Don't tease . . . . . . no_hypocrisy Apr 2018 #26
I cannot STAND this man SylviaD Apr 2018 #28
Which is ironic because Clinton is a supporter of the electoral college gyroscope Apr 2018 #32
This is not a democracy. Cold War Spook Apr 2018 #59
This is just his ego speaking..... Red Mountain Apr 2018 #33
I think BigOleDummy Apr 2018 #53
Theres no limit to his delusions. So much winning. truthisfreedom Apr 2018 #36
Great idea - retroactively! Rhiannon12866 Apr 2018 #50
What an idiot. That is the problem with the electoral college, it gives the red states an unfair still_one Apr 2018 #51
Best bet would be state legislatures voting to commit EC votes to popular vote winner Va Lefty Apr 2018 #61
All he has to do is sign an executive order to abolish the Electoral College, JustABozoOnThisBus Apr 2018 #56
The puppet honestly believes that millions of illegal votes were cast CrispyQ Apr 2018 #62

Dave Starsky

(5,914 posts)
8. I thought it was a joke, too.
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:49 PM
Apr 2018

Good Lord, is he a dullard. He honestly doesn't know how anything works on any subject.

former9thward

(31,936 posts)
30. His argument is that he concentrated on the electoral vote not the popular vote.
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 06:30 PM
Apr 2018

His argument is that if he had been going for the popular vote he would have done the campaign completely differently. No one ever know how that would have turned out.

former9thward

(31,936 posts)
35. So when he was funding Democratic candidates and causes in NY
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 10:56 PM
Apr 2018

he was a shithole? When the Clinton's came to his wedding he was a shithole? Why would they do that? Did you know something they didn't?

padfun

(1,786 posts)
55. Yes, he was a shithole back then too.
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 07:17 AM
Apr 2018

A shithole can belong to any party. Most are Republicans and a few are green (Jill Stein)

SergeStorms

(19,186 posts)
37. Trump "concentrated".........
Fri Apr 27, 2018, 02:17 AM
Apr 2018


The GOP purge of the voting rolls won the electoral college for Trump, certainly not any "concentration" on his part.

What a freaking troglodyte.

former9thward

(31,936 posts)
40. Unfortunately many Democrats did what you just did.
Fri Apr 27, 2018, 08:22 AM
Apr 2018

Post substance free stuff on the internet and ignore the upper Midwest. There is zero evidence Trump won because of a "purge of the voting rolls". People like to say that on the internet but they never back it up with any evidence. In 2012 Obama won the black vote with a 88% margin (94 - 6). In 2016 that margin went down to 80% (90-10). That may seem a small difference but it cost Clinton several states in the Midwest.

SergeStorms

(19,186 posts)
44. From Wikipedia-
Fri Apr 27, 2018, 10:40 PM
Apr 2018

"In Wisconsin, a federal judge found that the state's restrictive voter ID law led to "real incidents of disenfranchisement, which undermine rather than enhance confidence in elections, particularly in minority communities"; and, given that there was no evidence of widespread voter impersonation in Wisconsin, found that the law was "a cure worse than the disease." In addition to imposing strict voter ID requirements, the law cut back on early voting, required people to live in a ward for at least 28 days before voting, and prohibited emailing absentee ballots to voters.[79] A study by Priorities USA, a progressive advocacy group, estimates that strict ID laws in Wisconsin led to a significant decrease in voter turnout in 2016, with a disproportionate effect on African-American and Democratic-leaning voters".

Next.

former9thward

(31,936 posts)
46. How come Clinton never showed up in Wisconsin?
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 12:58 AM
Apr 2018

Next. And why aren't you linking to Wiki so people can see the context?

SergeStorms

(19,186 posts)
49. Lazy, much?
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 04:31 AM
Apr 2018

If you want to make sure I'm not lying to you just search "voter suppression in 2016 Presidential election".

As far as Clinton not going to Wisconsin, it's well documented that it was a very large mistake on her campaign's part. Ancient history though, and we're all paying for it now.

RockRaven

(14,899 posts)
7. "I would rather have the popular vote because it's, to me, it's much easier to win the popular vote"
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:42 PM
Apr 2018

But you *didn't* have it, and to you it *wasn't* easier. DOPE!

lagomorph777

(30,613 posts)
15. Trade wars are easy to win. Arms races are easy to win.
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:28 PM
Apr 2018

The popular vote, apparently not so much, not if you're a Republican.

The Mouth

(3,145 posts)
9. To give the devil his due, there's a grain of truth there:
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:04 PM
Apr 2018

you would run a completely different kind of campaign.

progree

(10,892 posts)
17. Yup, and not only that, there's this tidbit from the article that's quite interesting
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:37 PM
Apr 2018
Only one Republican, George W. Bush in 2004, has won the nationwide popular vote in presidential elections dating back to 1992.


So that's one Republican presidential popular vote victory in 7 elections (1992, 1996, 2000, *2004*, 2008, 2012, 2016)
 

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
11. There really is no bottom to how stupid he is, is there?
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:10 PM
Apr 2018

Does he know he lost the popular vote by three million?

niyad

(113,055 posts)
18. NO--don't forget --ALL those votes were from illegals. he actually won by 5 mil without
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:45 PM
Apr 2018

the iillegals.

former9thward

(31,936 posts)
31. He said he would have run a completely different campaign.
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 06:32 PM
Apr 2018

Whether you believe that or not is another matter.

ProfessorGAC

(64,852 posts)
54. You Seem Convinced
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 06:54 AM
Apr 2018

Explain how the campaign would differ.
Then explain how it differs when other candidates are doing the same.
This is an intellectual canard posited by a buffoon and you're defending it as if it has merit and intellectual weight.
Taking a contrary position just to be contrary is easy.
So, your logic is.....

tavernier

(12,368 posts)
57. I've noticed that the same three or four posters always take a contrary position.
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 07:25 AM
Apr 2018

I guess they feel that we need to see the viewpoint from the other side.

Stonepounder

(4,033 posts)
13. Does he have a single clue about what it takes to pass an Amendment to the Constitution?
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:22 PM
Apr 2018

Hint: You can't do it with an Executive Order

maddiemom

(5,106 posts)
22. If he could do it with an executive order, and DID...
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 03:00 PM
Apr 2018

It would be a thing of beauty! Actually, Trump has it fixed in his mind that this is why Hillary got nearly three million more popular votes: it was easy! Winning the E.C., as he did, was much harder. It makes as much sense as anything else that he believes.

Massacure

(7,512 posts)
29. Except it doesn't need a constitutional amendment.
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 06:20 PM
Apr 2018

States are free to pick electors for President as they see fit. It just so happens that 48 of the 50 states choose to appoint electors who pledge to vote for the winner of the state popular vote. There's nothing that prevents a state from choosing to appoint electors who pledge to vote for the winner of the national popular vote, and it would only take 11 states to do it to put a candidate winning the national popular vote over the 270 threshold they need - California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, and New Jersey.

 

djg21

(1,803 posts)
38. National Popular Vote interstate compact
Fri Apr 27, 2018, 06:53 AM
Apr 2018

The National Popular Vote interstate compact would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It will go into effect after it is enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—that is, enough to elect a President (270 of 538). Under the compact, when the Electoral College meets in mid-December, the candidate who received the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC) will receive all of the electoral votes of the enacting states.

The National Popular Vote bill has been enacted by 11 jurisdictions possessing 165 electoral votes—61% of the 270 electoral votes necessary to activate it, including four small jurisdictions (RI, VT, HI, DC), three medium- size states (MD, MA, WA), and four big states (NJ, IL, NY, CA). The bill has passed a total of 35 legislative chambers in 23 states—most recently by a 40–16 vote in the Arizona House, a 28–18 vote in the Oklahoma Senate, a 57–4 vote in New York Senate, a 37–21 vote in Oregon House, and a 26-16 vote in the New Mexico Senate. A total of 3,055 state legislators have either sponsored or cast a recorded vote for the bill.

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

Massacure

(7,512 posts)
43. Fair enough. But still, states do not need to collude to make it happen.
Fri Apr 27, 2018, 07:07 PM
Apr 2018

I have to concede that if the state make their statute conditional on other states doing the same, that would probably run afoul of the Constitution. But a state could decide to pick electors based on the national popular vote regardless of how many other states do the same.

 

Cold War Spook

(1,279 posts)
58. Two thoughts on this.
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 07:33 AM
Apr 2018

One, I am sure the Supreme Court will rule on this before the first time it is used, for or against. Second, be careful what you wish for, you might just get it. I am all in favor of the popular vote picking the winner, but what if a candidate can not win the popular vote, but can get enough Electoral votes under today's system. Couldn't his/her people try to get those states to back out of the arrangement before the blackout?

 

djg21

(1,803 posts)
60. Courts don't give advisory opinions.
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 08:25 AM
Apr 2018

Art. III, Section 2, Clause 1

There needs to be an actual case or controversy. The litigation likely could come after Congress elects either to approve or disapprove of the compact after the requisite number of states subscribe.

As to your hypothetical, wouldn’t it be difficult to know with any certainty how the candidate would fare so far in advance of a general election?

I also question whether States actually need to enter a compact or agreement to accomplish the goal of the “Compact.” It may be that the initiative just has an unfortunate name.

It’s axiomatic that States have the constitutional right of states to choose their electors: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . . ” (U.S. Const., Article II, Section 1, Clause 2).

This, taken with the Compacts clause, would suggest that so long as each State acts unilaterally (i.e., no express or implied agreement), they may individually adopt legislation to award their electors to the winner of the national popular vote without offending the Compact Clause. The fact that States may be acting in parallel doesn’t necessarily mean that there is an agreement or compact, though it perhaps could be circumstantial evidence of one.



 

Cold War Spook

(1,279 posts)
14. Doesn't Trump know that would take adding a new Amendment to the Constitution?
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:22 PM
Apr 2018

He will be dead before any new Amendment is made to the Constitution. It would never pass any way. Those states that benefit from the Electoral College would vote against it.

 

djg21

(1,803 posts)
39. This isnt entirely correct.
Fri Apr 27, 2018, 06:54 AM
Apr 2018

An amendment could be cleaner, but see post above about the National Popular Vote interstate compact.

Whiskeytide

(4,459 posts)
16. Hmmm. I wonder if ...
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:30 PM
Apr 2018

... Bannon and Boris have figured out that rigging an election for the popular vote is less trouble than working with and around the EC? If all you're looking at is a grand total, adding in fake votes might be easier. IDK. Maybe all 37m people in Montana will vote in 2020, and we'll all be damned surprised.

NYC Liberal

(20,135 posts)
21. This is correct. While I support a popular vote,
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:57 PM
Apr 2018

the current system is harder to rig because recounts can be limited to a few key states/areas. With a national popular vote, it would be much easier to hide vote padding; you could just add them all over the country. A lot harder to track down.

DFW

(54,291 posts)
24. That was exactly my reaction
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 04:35 PM
Apr 2018

Maybe President Hillary Clinton will even pardon him for some of the crap he has pulled.

ThoughtCriminal

(14,046 posts)
25. Well, if it makes it easier to win...
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 04:35 PM
Apr 2018

There are many extremely good reasons to switch from the EC to the popular vote. Leave it to Trump to come up his own reason.

 

gyroscope

(1,443 posts)
32. Which is ironic because Clinton is a supporter of the electoral college
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 08:50 PM
Apr 2018

...the same EC that handed the election to Trump despite her winning the popular vote by a large margin. Is she still a fan of the EC?

anywho, I definitely agree that the EC is anti-democratic.

Red Mountain

(1,727 posts)
33. This is just his ego speaking.....
Thu Apr 26, 2018, 09:20 PM
Apr 2018

It still bothers him that he lost the popular vote. He makes that better in his mind by pretending that if only he had been allowed to campaign in all 50 states he would have swung the popular vote his way.

He'd have turned those blue states red and never lost a vote in the swing states that elected him in the process of reallocating his time and money.

Because.....his ego needs that.

Nothing to see here. Same old shit.

truthisfreedom

(23,139 posts)
36. Theres no limit to his delusions. So much winning.
Fri Apr 27, 2018, 01:00 AM
Apr 2018

He believes he won the popular vote. He has to. His condition allows no other conclusion.

still_one

(92,061 posts)
51. What an idiot. That is the problem with the electoral college, it gives the red states an unfair
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 05:52 AM
Apr 2018

advantage.

There is no way the republicans will go for that because they know it would be a disaster for them, and it is highly unlikely that the red states would go for it because they would lose their influence.

It would require a change to the Constitution, and it isn't going to happen


Va Lefty

(6,252 posts)
61. Best bet would be state legislatures voting to commit EC votes to popular vote winner
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 08:46 AM
Apr 2018

"The National Popular Vote interstate compact would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The National Popular Vote bill has been enacted by 11 jurisdictions possessing 165 electoral votes—61% of the 270 electoral votes necessary to activate it, including four small jurisdictions (RI, VT, HI, DC), three medium- size states (MD, MA, WA), and four big states (NJ, IL, NY, CA). The bill has passed a total of 35 legislative chambers in 23 states—most recently by a 40–16 vote in the Arizona House, a 28–18 vote in the Oklahoma Senate, a 57–4 vote in New York Senate, a 37–21 vote in Oregon House, and a 26-16 vote in the New Mexico Senate. A total of 3,055 state legislators have either sponsored or cast a recorded vote for the bill."

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

JustABozoOnThisBus

(23,321 posts)
56. All he has to do is sign an executive order to abolish the Electoral College,
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 07:24 AM
Apr 2018

... then, voila, it is done. He's been told he has the power.

CrispyQ

(36,421 posts)
62. The puppet honestly believes that millions of illegal votes were cast
Sat Apr 28, 2018, 10:37 AM
Apr 2018

& that he truly did win the popular vote. President Moron.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump pushes to swap Elec...