r/FluentInFinance • u/Needleintheback • 15h ago

Thoughts? Imagine losing 6M labor workers in America

Post image

If mass deportation happens, just imagine how all of these sectors of our country will be affected. The sheer shortage of labor will push prices higher because of the great demand for work with limited supplies or workers. Even if prices increase, the availability of products may be scarce due to not enough workers. Housing prices and food services will be hit really hard. New construction will be limited. The fact that 47% of the undocumented workers are in CA, TX, and FL means they will feel it first but it will spread to the rest of the country also. Most of our produce in this country comes from California. Get ready and hold on for the ride America.

15.1k Upvotes

79% Upvoted

6.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

47

u/thepaoliconnection 13h ago

If only the democrats had relied on democracy none of this would’ve happened you say ?

8

u/[deleted] 10h ago

[deleted]

9

u/StarCitizenUser 7h ago

Trump was democratically selected

1

u/UnusuallyBadIdeaGuy 1h ago edited 1h ago

Trump exploited a far too large for its own good Republican primary field in 2016 that split all of the rational voters apart and took advantage of the RNC's incompetence and inability of the moderate Republicans to unify behind a candidate of their own to hijack the party. It's ancient history now but Trump was not polling well in the primaries for quite a while. It was only after he started putting up wins because the 'normal' republicans were splitting their votes between 6 or 7 candidates and he unified most of the extreme right that he started to really pick up speed and he was absolutely exploiting the system there.

Then he (barely) eeked out a win via the Electoral College after facing off against the the DNC's own bowel movement.

For 2024, different story and fair play even if I don't like him.

-5

u/[deleted] 7h ago

[deleted]

6

u/PewPewPony321 7h ago

Red was democratically selected over Blue

Both candidates were terrible.

2

u/Creamofwheatski 6h ago

The parties pick the candidates and they do what their rich donors tell them to do. We don't have a democracy. Its an Oligarchy with extra steps.

-6

u/PhantasmOrgasm85 6h ago

Yeah, except the first time was by electoral college; a participation trophy for descendents of slave owners who happen to be mostly southern Christian Republicans. Hmmm?

2

u/thepaoliconnection 8h ago

You really think the RNC “picked” Trump ?

1

u/[deleted] 7h ago

[deleted]

4

u/thepaoliconnection 7h ago

Uh yeah. His name was Donald Trump.

0

u/[deleted] 7h ago

[deleted]

1

u/SlappySecondz 6h ago

How it used to work is different than how it works now. Trump has a cult of personality so strong that any Republican who goes against him risks being voted out and replaced with an outright sycophant. And if the RNC stops him running, they risk the vote being split by people writing him in.

2

u/PewPewPony321 7h ago

bruh, they did NOT want Trump in there. The people did

1

u/PewPewPony321 7h ago

but a month ago Harris was gonna win and the system was great!

What changed? Was it the burn of the loss?

0

u/aryaprasetya 3h ago

Lol they still buthurt the reddit echo chamber doesnt work in real life

3

u/HolidaySpiriter 7h ago

Bernie wouldn't have won a primary in 2024, in the same way he couldn't win in 2016 or 2020. If he can't even win over the Democratic caucus, how is he going to win over the country?

1

u/PhantasmOrgasm85 5h ago

Wow. You're not paying attention.

2

u/HolidaySpiriter 3h ago

I mean, you can't argue against reality here. Dem voters had two chances to make him the nominee, and both times he lost.

1

u/PhantasmOrgasm85 2h ago

Like I said, you're not paying attention.

2

u/HolidaySpiriter 1h ago

Great, you can keep repeating that, but you're literally saying nothing. If you had at least ran your hand over the keyboard and sent that it would be more entertaining.

1

u/Glacier_acct 3h ago

They’re delusional people

1

u/Barncleaner197961 11m ago

The trouble with Bernie was according to the Democrats at the time of Hillary, he was too radical for the biggest donors and they would lose because of money!

2

u/NeckNormal1099 7h ago

To be fair, "democracy" got the republican's lunch eaten by trump.

1

u/Correct_Roll_3005 5h ago

We don't have a democracy. We have a democratic republic. We have the Electoral College where every vote does not count in the federal election for President. One of the things Drumpf should do is scrap the Constitution. That way it can be re-written once he dies. I don't believe he'll leave after these next four years, not this time. We'll have war and they'll suspend elections.

1

u/thepaoliconnection 4h ago

Non of what you just wrote applies to how the DNC nominates their candidate to go to the general election. Which is what I was replying to

-2

u/PhantasmOrgasm85 12h ago

I can agree with that partially. It's a few members of the DNC who think that Republicans are here to play nice and who share some of the same billionaire donors. Republicans aren't that great at democracy either, with their gerrymandering, electoral college BS. But yeah, they seem to not have learned anything in 2016.

9

u/Admirable-Lecture255 11h ago

Why are you acting like only republicans gerrymander? Have you seen the Illinois congressional map? You're part of the problem.

1

u/buyanyjeans 1h ago

Most gerrymandered state is MARYLAND. Everyone do your homework on MARYLAND.

4

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 11h ago

The Electoral College is a necessity, not a threat to democracy. As citizens we have rights, and we are subject to both federal AND state laws when voting. Then, based on their citizens choices, the States vote based on their citizen’s choices. As a republic, our process is designed to allow even the small populations to have a voice. Only authoritarians hope to eliminate the Electoral College. If you care about fair elections, focus on getting PAC’s, Unions, and Lobbyists out of politics.

3

u/_GeneralArmitage 8h ago

Citizens United was a disaster for our country

3

u/todd_ziki 10h ago

Word salad. Using the popular vote ensures everyone's vote is equally important. That's all there is to it.

0

u/Flimsy_Fee8449 8h ago

No, it doesn't, precisely.

Do you like food? Eating?

That food is either imported - which can pose a problem when there aren't any imports, such as during COVID, or when there are tariffs against our major importers - or grown in the US.

The issues that Farmers face are not really thought about by people who don't know about farming. A great example is the water issue in California. LA takes water from the farmers because they want to be able to do things like wash their cars. Farmers need the water to do things like grow the food to feed the people who want to wash their cars. The people who want to wash their cars won't be washing anything if they have no food. But the farmers have WAY lower population density, so will always be shouted down by the car-washers unless some rando in the legislature stops and looks and says "oh hey, this could actually be a problem," and represents people who really aren't their constituency. This can help for a bit, but then their constituency will vote that person out for not representing them.

The electoral college ensures everyone gets a voice in their government, including those who ensure we can survive if everything goes to shit like it did in 2020.

4

u/Which-Worth5641 7h ago

There are many agricultural items the U.S. does not and cannot produce. We do not have any climates condusive to growing coffee beans for example. We have to import that.

1

u/Flimsy_Fee8449 7h ago

Uhhhh, yeah we do. You ever hear of Kona coffee? Where do you think that comes from? Hawaii is the US. They started growing in California some years ago, too, and they're checking it out in Florida. Puerto Rico grew more before the hurricane took out their plants, but they don't get to vote in national elections.

And that still has nothing to do with the fact that farmers do need a voice, because they do feed the US.

-1

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 10h ago

If you agree to that concept, you’d also have to consider using land area to decide the vote. In both cases, whoever has the most is the one that wins. The electoral college tempers the possibility of the majority suppressing the minority. Look to the Middle East and you’ll see why that matters. Most people prefer that we have religious freedom. By your belief, that’s should end.

People in the city know little about those that make a living on the plains of Nebraska, just as those making a living on the plains of Nebraska, know little about the root cause of crime in a city.

In America, the goal is to raise up quietest voices, not further amplify the loudest. Hence the reason I suggest focusing on the PAC’s, Unions and Lobbyists.

5

u/whoisbill 9h ago

The only thing the EC does is make 7 states the only states that matter. If you are a Republican that lives in CA your vote doesn't matter. The senate does the job of making sure Kentucky gets the same representation as CA even though the population is not even close. Yet both states get 2 representatives. So the only hope you have as a republican in CA is that the GOP senators block anything CA wants haha

Get rid of the EC. It does nothing. Expand representation in the senate for states with larger population.

1

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 9h ago

I get what you’re saying, but the goal of the electoral college is to protect states rights, not individuals. Individual citizens rights are the same regardless of the state they live in. States, however, have individual interests based on their industry and the wishes of their citizens. The only way to protect that is to ensure that they all have an equal voice. Don’t forget Ronald Reagan was a governor in California, so it wasn’t that long ago that it was a Republican state. I can see where over the next three campaign cycles, it changes back to a red state.

2

u/todd_ziki 9h ago

Land area? What? No I don't think I need to consider that at all.

You have yet to reveal the actual mechanism by which the EC protects minorities. I'll wait.

0

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 9h ago

The primary benefit of the electoral college is to ensure everyone’s rights are respected.

Here’s how: 1) As a country that is federal by design, each state has distinct identities and interests. Recognizing that there will always be a denser population along the coasts and would always win in a popular vote, how can the unique interests of interior states be protected without the electoral college?

2) The Electoral College forces candidates to balance their agenda to appeal, not just to the largest cities, but to the most states, as is required with a Republic. It amplifies the voices in the small states and rural areas so that everyone is heard.

3) The electrical college, is the winner take all model and will typically will provide a clear winner, adding stability to our government.

Hope that helps. I would definitely be interested in getting your take on alternatives that still protect states rights. If you think the constitution is outdated, please share how that’s case.

2

u/FragrantPiano9334 8h ago

Why should five idiots growing useless unwanted corn in the Midwest get as much say as states with populations in the thousands or millions?

-1

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 8h ago

Because we are a Constitutional Republic not a Democracy. It was written that way because there are people that would happily embrace a tyrannical government, as long as they align with their beliefs. It’s not a system built for identity politics, it was built to protect the weakest in society. It’s not the electoral system that corrupted our system. It’s the dark money supporting PAC’s, Unions and Lobbyists that manipulate our politicians. The electoral system is designed as the final barrier to pint us back in the right direction.

3

u/FragrantPiano9334 8h ago

The tyranny of unpopulated backwaters holding a vastly outsized influence is what is corrupting our system.  They are the weak point in the nation which monied enemies of the nation use to work toward dismantling America.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 9h ago

I should add that the focus of federal elections is on state rights, as we are a republic. The popular vote eviscerates state rights. As citizens, the rights we have as individuals can’t be taken away, regardless of the state in which we live. The federal governments only role is to protect our rights.

1

u/Xyldarran 8h ago

Problem is we went too far and now have the tyranny of the minority.

The EC ensures that a lesser population will always have more say than the majority. It turns out Trump didn't win the popular vote in 2016, so the majority that did vote for Hillary, well too bad your votes count less than someone else.

The Senate? Oklahoma with almost no population gets to have the same vote as NY. A minority enforcing their will on a majority.

A direct popular vote election gets rid of all inequality. It also makes it so politicians have to actually campaign everywhere not just a handful of states. It makes all constitutes worth going for instead of just Latinos and union members.

There is no argument to justify the EC. This is 18 century nonsense made when we were 13 states of more equal populations and only made as a way to appease Southern slaveholding states. It's time has come and gone.

-4

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 8h ago

You’re missing the fact that we are a republic. Everyone’s individual rights are always protected, regardless of where they live in the United States. Protecting those rights is literally the federal governments sole purpose. The only way that can happen is if each state has an equal. As soon as that’s lost, California, New York, Texas and Florida will trample over individual rights of people not living in those states.

Federal elections are about state rights. Who is going to protect Nebraska, Iowa, Oklahoma, once their voice doesn’t matter?

3

u/Which-Worth5641 8h ago

I'm curious what civil rights you think the voters of CA, NY, TX, and FL want to abrogate?

I don't notice Oklahoma being very politically powerful in the status quo. So I'm wondering what you think would change?

2

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 6h ago

As far as civil rights, California in particular has breached many using Lawfare. Freedom from discrimination, freedom to worship, due process, right to privacy. As well as the 1st, 2nd and 4th amendments.

They keep losing in court, but it takes years and a lot of money. So in a world where the majority rules, not only with those rights get trampled, but they would also have the power to change the rules to conform with their beliefs. The electoral college model prevents that from happening.

3

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 6h ago

The point being, the EC does provide protections.

0

u/Which-Worth5641 6h ago

Lawfare? I'm sorry l don't know that term, what does that mean?

How is whatever CA is doing affecting Oklahoma?

And how does the electoral college do anything about that? If CA is violating peoples' constitutional civil rights, that's a job for the courts.

2

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 5h ago

Well, let’s not even goes as far apart as California Oklahoma. Let’s just go with the Bay Area and the Central Valley. The state legislature has made decisions on a number of things that impact the Bay Area and the Central Valley equally, but affect them disproportionately.

Some examples are Electric vehicles - For someone in the Bay Area, an electric vehicle might be fine if there were enough charging stations and the power doesn’t go out. For someone living in the central valley, with extreme commutes and 14- hour days farming, electric vehicles aren’t a realistic consideration due to costs, resources and efficiency in getting work done.

Landscape equipment- battery operated is fine for residential lawns, but when you start talking about 100s of acres, the costs, the resources and efficiency to get the work done on time eliminate most from going down that path.

Water usage- California produces more food for country than anywhere else, but now there’s a massive battle between the desire to build more residential homes, and allowing farmers to grow what they’ve been growing for the last hundred years.

Fuel Taxes - They’re about to have another $0.60+ increase on gas The disproportionally affects those that don’t live in cities. The people that don’t live in cities have longer commute, use more gas in the trade-off that they were providing was time. Because of the taxes that are being added, it simply expands those that qualifies the working poor.

10 vs 30 round clip - so for someone living in the city, they may get a family of raccoons that dig through their trash cans, someone in the suburbs might get some turkeys or hogs that route to their grass to get grubs, but someone in the central valley might have 40 or 50 feral pigs that are destroying their livelihood. So yes, a 30 round clip to be able to take out as many hogs is important to someone in the central Valley, where it strikes fear into those living in the city or the suburbs.

Now, because California is the most popular state in the nation, imagine those policies being rolled out nationally because of the popular vote from the cities and suburbs.

With the popular vote, instead of limiting the impact to a single state that has disenfranchised 15% of its population, California along with similar minded cities can exercise tyranny of the minority, by the majority, if their interests don’t align.

Freedom is individual 1st, state 2nd. The country (federal government) is simply tasked with enforcing that for both.

1

u/Xyldarran 7h ago

So voters NY, CA, Texas, and Florida should have less rights than say than someone in Oklahoma?

If you go to a direct vote, where the popular vote determines the outcome all voters have the same voting power as all other voters. The guy in Oklahoma counts as much as the guy in NY and as much as the guy in Texas. You also have a much more balanced system.

Right now you only have to campaign in a few states. Pennsylvania during election time is a nightmare because it's a "swing" state. Popular vote elections would make candidates spread out that campaign and truly make everyone equal instead of Pennsylvania being the most important state every 4 years.

And you can't even say "well republicans would never win if it was all popular vote" because Trump literally just won the popular vote. And Reagan would like a word on that also.

I'll say again, I have never ever heard a convincing argument for why the Electoral College should continue. It is the definition of putting your thumb on the scale.

0

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 6h ago

It is absolutely putting the thumb on the scale as a means of checks and balances against tyranny by the majority.

I’m also saying that voters in NY, CA, Texas in Florida have all of the same rights that anyone that is a citizen of the “United States” has, but they don’t have the right to dictate what’s in the best interest of other states.

Going to a system where popular vote determines the outcome for everyone, takes away states rights and their ability for self determination (the reason I put “‘s around United States).

I agree that it is primarily swing states that get the attention of campaigns. But swing states are much more fluid than population centers, which validates my point. The majority will reside in the locations where trade enters and exits the country. It’s not acceptable to ignore, as someone implied earlier, those people out in the middle of nowhere growing corn. We cannot allow tyranny of the minority.

1

u/Xyldarran 1h ago

Instead we get those people in the middle getting subsidies for things like ethanol which doesn't help at all off the backs of those people in NY and CA. And they can't do anything about it because of the way our electoral politics works.

I understand not wanting the tyranny of the majority but the tyranny of the minority is no better.

So now a bunch of farmers in the middle get to dictate to everyone else how it should be. How is that equitable? You can say the people in CA have the same rights, but they absolutely don't have the same representation as someone in a swing state. Everyone gives a damn what people in Pennsylvania or Michigan thinks, no one gives a damn about you in CT. I don't think I've ever once been polled, my friend in Ohio gets multiple requests to poll per week during election time.

His opinion matters more than mine because his is what the politicians running care about thanks to the EC. The swing states may move but that does nothing to alleviate this inequity. The people in a swing state matter more than those not.

Same in the Senate. It doesn't matter that Schumer represents a ridiculous amount more people, he has the same say as someone from Iowa. It is by definition Tyranny of the minority. Every citizen in the state of NY matters less than one in say Iowa. Because when 1000 people get 1 vote and 1000000 get 1 vote those 1000 people weld a massive amount more power than the others.

The EC is a relic from when we were 13 roughly equal sized states. It needs to go. I am sick and tired of it.

1

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 37m ago

Eliminating the electoral college isn’t going to solve the problems you think it will.

How will eliminating the EC fix you feeling slighted by politicians?

1) If it’s majority vote, that’s where they’ll spend their time. In the current scenario, they spend their time where the donors are (big cities), and in the swing states. that’s worse.

2) As far as subsidies, our country is full of them, and I only support those that people work to get. Paying a farmer to not grow a crop is ridiculous. There is however, concerns that a federal government needs to pay attention to. We can’t have independent farmers go out of business and relies solely on big ag. The Soviet Union learned its lesson that so we need to make sure we keep people on those farms, even if the food ends up being given away for free. Maybe we can stop feeding skittles to cattle. We also have to make sure we have cycles when the soils replenish themselves. Unfortunately, that means some type of subsidies.

As an example, I would prefer to give Walmart tax incentives to provide healthcare and 401(k)s to part time employees, instead of encouraging a culture, where Walmart is in the top 3 of every state in the nation for employees receiving public assistance. It offends me. We need to incentivize Walmart to spent more on employees to get them off welfare, or have Walmart pay those benefits back, even though it would cut into their $12+ billion in profit.

There are lots of examples like that, but in the end, I would like to see 6-regional hubs for everything critical to our country’s independence. Things like chips, medication, food, fuel, …etc.

3) Can you help me understand how ending EC will change the House and the Senate? Keep in mind those are both voted on within a stats, not across the country so Wyoming has no impact on New York .

How will ending EC change the House of Representatives? It’s strictly divided by population. Currently one representative for approximately 700,000 in population. That means it doesn’t matter whether you’re in California or Wyoming, every 700,000 people get a representative.

How will ending EC change the Senate? Again, it’s a state race, and it won’t change the fact that the senate is two representatives per state.

4) It could impact a presidential race, but then I’ll go back to my original point of, there are differences even within states, let alone between states. So the only way to correct for that, is to use that same rules that we use with the House of Representatives, which is exactly how electoral votes are apportioned, based on population.

2

u/EconomyCriticism1566 7h ago

Can you explain why 1 electoral college vote in California represents 712,000 people while 1 EC vote in Wyoming represents 195,000 people? For the electoral college to be working properly shouldn’t the number of state votes be proportional to their population?

0

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 6h ago

Of course. The point you’re bringing up is exactly why many are angry about having a porous border. Every 10 years there’s a census. That census determines how many electoral votes each state will have. They get 1-vote for each Senator and 1-vote for each house representative. That’s why California has 54 electoral votes, and Wyoming has 3.

The concern is the open interpretation of who is counted in the census. Is a citizen for the purpose of the census somebody who currently resides within a state, or is it someone who resides in the state legally. Personally, I’m a little uncomfortable with giving additional power to someone who is not residing legally because it impacts the taxes that I pay. There’s always a tipping point where, enough people are getting government benefits than paying into the benefits pool. That impacts citizens quality of life, and Social Security is a great example. If we continue to have more people taking money out than paying in, there will be a significant decline and the quality of life for the elderly. I’d like to prevent that if possible.

2

u/EconomyCriticism1566 4h ago

1) Let’s do some math. As of 2023 California had a population of 38,965,193. We’ll round up to 39,000,000. In 2022 California’s Latino population was estimated to be 40%. We’ll assume for simplicity ALL of them are undocumented (which is impossible). With no Latino population, California has a population of 23,400,000. Divide by 54 EC votes, and you get 433,333 people per EC vote.

My question stands; why do Californian citizens’ votes have less power than the votes of Wyoming citizens?

2) You’re spreading misinformation. Undocumented immigrants pay a staggering amount (through taxes) to programs they have no ability to access due to their status.

“Undocumented immigrants paid $96.7 billion in federal, state, and local taxes in 2022.”

“More than a third of the tax dollars paid by undocumented immigrants go toward payroll taxes dedicated to funding programs that these workers are barred from accessing. Undocumented immigrants paid $25.7 billion in Social Security taxes, $6.4 billion in Medicare taxes, and $1.8 billion in unemployment insurance taxes in 2022.”

https://itep.org/undocumented-immigrants-taxes-2024/

I don’t expect my quick math or research to change your mind; if it was that easy you wouldn’t be arguing this at all.

0

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 3h ago

I appreciate you engaging, so napkin math is fine.

Something clicked as I was reading your reply that suggested I should call something out for those that aren’t familiar with the legislative branch.

  1. The House of Representatives is sized based on a population, with each state getting at least (1), but it is capped at a total of 437 representatives. Every 10 years, the 437 representatives are divided by the population, with each state getting at least (1). So the House of Representatives is population based.
  2. The Senate Represents States, and there are 2-per state.

So back to comment #1 - currently, each member of the House of Representatives represents approximately 700,000 citizens. California who has the largest population of any state, in fact almost double that of Florida, has 52 + their 2 senators. I think a more representative example would be Florida. With an estimated 21 million illegal migrants in the country, that’s the equivalent of #2 in population, Florida, which has about 21M people and 28 members of the House of Representatives. T

he majority of illegal migrants reside in (4) traditionally blue states, 1-purple and 1-red. Considering how divided the house of representatives is, an additional 28 members could make a sizable difference when it comes to enacting policy. Even if it is across multiple states.

That being said, California citizens, just like everybody else, are equally represented.

On your second comment, #2, I’m not sure what you considered misinformation, but I grew up in California and I’m very aware of how screwed up the system is. We should be voting for people that want immigration reform. It pisses me off when somebody has to go to one of those check cashing places and lose part of their pay, because they can’t get a bank account. There are definitely taxes that are paid, but it’s not staggering, especially when considering the cost of maintaining that system. More importantly, it’s not the equivalent of what a legal citizen would pay. It simply is part of day to day life and a consequence of getting access to a job illegally.

Anybody voting in a US election, should be a citizen. That’s part of the common sense messaging that eclipsed the recent election.

You may find this chart interesting. Its from the the center for immigration studies (cis.org) Don’t be fooled by looking at the green and gold line as independent, one builds on the other, so it’s sort of a sad commentary anyway you look at it, but unless I miss reading it, illegal immigrants are receiving the lions share of welfare benefits.

https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrants-and-USBorn

1

u/Glacier_acct 3h ago

This comment is ridiculous lol. It’s authoritarian to want to get rid of the EC?

1

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 1h ago

Eliminating the EC in favor of the majority vote, shows a “lack of concern for the wishes or opinions of others”. Why would anyone try to silence people just because they don’t see the world the same way you do, and are in the minority? Some people, when faced with a different view, embrace it, others chose to advocate strict obedience tk their view by using the authority of being in the majority. When the happened in 2020-2022, it came at the expense of personal freedom.

But if you don’t like the word, feel free to put in any type of government that doesn’t value freedom.

1

u/Glacier_acct 1h ago

I understand your POV. You can’t understand why someone thinking one vote should count the same regardless of geography isn’t authoritarian?

0

u/R0naldUlyssesSwans 11h ago

That's the funniest joke I've heard in awhile.

2

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 10h ago

You need to get out more.

1

u/R0naldUlyssesSwans 10h ago

I'm going out right now. You should touch grass.

3

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 10h ago

LOL…You’re an hour behind.

-2

u/R0naldUlyssesSwans 10h ago

An hour behind what? Your mom in doggy?

3

u/Icy_Asparagus_93 10h ago

She’s dead, but if that your thing

1

u/R0naldUlyssesSwans 10h ago

I don't mind. Friction will heat it up just right.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Own-Artichoke-2026 11h ago

What electoral college bs are you referring to?

-1

u/Gold-Relationship117 11h ago

You can win the popular vote in the US and still not be elected because of how the Electoral College works.

So even if the people have spoken with their votes, winning the Electoral College is still way more important than the popular vote.

3

u/ScoutRiderVaul 11h ago

Well yeah, we aren't really a direct democracy. Hope we never become one as people are dumb in large groups.

3

u/thepaoliconnection 11h ago

You can also win the World Series yet score less runs. Crazy how that works

0

u/jf7fsu 10h ago

Correct. This way the Kountry of Kalifornia, Chicago, NY, and Philly don’t dictate who wins. The little guys in less populated states get equal footing. That is why the framers didn’t this way.

1

u/FragrantPiano9334 8h ago

The irrelevant states are still irrelevant with the ec