- Joined
- Sep 3, 2010
- Messages
- 120,954
- Reaction score
- 28,531
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
First off, in this case, you can prove the "negative" with a complete set of data. It would be the same set, in fact, necessary to prove the "positive". Because we would need to know the thoughts of all the electors to know if they did or didn't consider their duty in protecting the Republic against an unfit candidate. Thus, in this instance, to prove that it did occur has the same ability as to prove that it did not. You are only deflecting because, like me, you are not a mind reader and thus do not have that set of data. Do YOU comprehend that?
What set of data are you pretending exists and should be referred to?
That is completely ridiculous. When the electors met in state after state after state after state those meetings had reporters and media there.The entire Russian question was very much alive and well then. There is not one single media news story - in print or over the airwaves - that even a single electors meeting even discussed for seconds the Russian question. Not one. Had it happened, it would have been major news and you know it. The absence of it is evidence that nothing of the kind happened in even a single state. Not a one.
The duty that Hamilton said they had was never performed.
The EC did what the EC was supposed to do. It helps to protect against popularism and ensures that the system does not become dominated by a few, most populated states. Hillary messed up, should have been easy to beat Trump, but didn't. That's her bad. I know you're upset at that, lots of people are, but it doesn't mean the EC didn't do its job. It just means that Hillary couldn't do her job.
What part about the fact that no single electors meeting performed as Hamilton promised the American people they would so baffles and befuddles you that it causes you to babble repeating nonsense that has already been refuted?
Furthermore, it was not through the EC that there was any foreign intervention. They way that the EC helps to limit the ability of foreign interference is that the electors are changed out, and not announced until much later, thus without some stable office or permanent electors, it's harder to insert agents or bribe electors. Not only that, but what we have now is perhaps some collusion but no proof that the election results were changed by Russia. Do you have that proof?
Nobody ever said it was. Nor was that what Hamilton was referring to. This is a fantasy of your own making .
The chief threat comes from a foreign adversary supporting a candidate for the office - not the electors for the office. Hamilton saw the electors as protection against that foreign adversary and their chosen candidate. Please get this straight and stop repeating nonsense. You are smarter than that and you know better than that.
The reasons that the EC was constructed are still needed, and was demonstrated in this last election. California shouldn't have the final say in the President, the President must represent the whole Union or at least appeal to a large proportion of it. That's more than just the People (as we are not a direct democracy), but also the States. The concerns of Wyoming shouldn't be overruled just because they do not have as many people as LA. Without the EC, the rural areas of the US will lose their influence in the Presidential elections.
California does NOT have the final say in the election. No state has the final say in the election. You re smarter than that and you know better than that.
If you operate under the belief that small states and rural areas have influence in the election, please provide evidence for it. The travel schedule of ALL the major candidates says completely the opposite. Nothing supports you claim in reality. But please feel free to present the evidence that these little states and rural areas have some serious influence in the election.
The reality is the advantage you think exists in the electoral college system DOES NOT EXIST IN REALITY.
The reality is the advantage Hamilton told us exists in the electoral college system did not function as promised in 2016.
It is a lose / lose proposition.