https://twitter.com/bethanyhallam/status/1309997916375875586?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1309997916375875586%7Ctwgr%5Eshare_3&ref_url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pennsylvania-lawmakers-topless-mail-in-voting

37 Million a Day Nationwide...

Yeah, I Believe Its Safe to Vote At the Polls!

@mld-woody said:

If conservatives support the idea of more political parties because they think it will only hurt the left, then everyone should just let you think that so that we can get more political parties...

Unfortunately, it’s not up to conservatives or any other political party.

@canton-dawg said:

Couldn’t agree more.

With only two parties, it creates cross contamination within a party.

For example, Bernie Sanders is classified as an Independent but he aligns himself with the Dems.

If he were to run as a third party candidate, he would most certainly pull votes away from the Libs.

The DNC is well aware of it, and that’s why they paid him to go away in 2016.

If conservatives support the idea of more political parties because they think it will only hurt the left, then everyone should just let you think that so that we can get more political parties...

@mld-woody said:

What wouldn't work?

I believe we need more political parties 

Anything you come up with Wile-E...

@mld-woody said:

I believe we need more political parties 

Couldn’t agree more.

With only two parties, it creates cross contamination within a party.

For example, Bernie Sanders is classified as an Independent but he aligns himself with the Dems.

If he were to run as a third party candidate, he would most certainly pull votes away from the Libs.

The DNC is well aware of it, and that’s why they paid him to go away in 2016.

@calfoxwc said:

woody doesn't understand anything, much less anything that doesn't give the left an advantage.

if Pres Trump had won the popular vote too, they would have attacked something else.

Any evidence to back that up? Any at all?

No, of course you don't. You have a one track brain and have lost all ability to think for yourself.

The EC is a broken system. It doesn't matter what party wins or loses next. Or in the last one. The system is still there and greatly flawed. 

@vambo said:

Nope wouldn't work...What about a third or fourth party?

What wouldn't work?

I believe we need more political parties 

if Pres Trump had won the popular vote too, they would have attacked something else.

@mld-woody said:

One of the reasons shown not to change it was "it's hard to change it". That's not a reason. 

First of all, we need to give small states less votes. It doesn't necessarily need to be purely population based, but the +2 skews it pretty hard. 

Second, the "points" you get from each state shouldn't be winner take all. If Cali is 51% D and 49% R how does it make any sense that R gets 0 points for that? State points should be based around the % of the vote you got in that state. 

Both of those changes would help make votes more equal across the country and help make all of the votes matter more.

Nope wouldn't work...What about a third or fourth party?

@vambo said:

And it provided many good reasons why the Electoral College is good but...

It didn't show anything that would be better and that's the point!  And neither have you!

One of the reasons shown not to change it was "it's hard to change it". That's not a reason. 

First of all, we need to give small states less votes. It doesn't necessarily need to be purely population based, but the +2 skews it pretty hard. 

Second, the "points" you get from each state shouldn't be winner take all. If Cali is 51% D and 49% R how does it make any sense that R gets 0 points for that? State points should be based around the % of the vote you got in that state. 

Both of those changes would help make votes more equal across the country and help make all of the votes matter more.

@mld-woody said:

Yes, and it provided many good reasons why the Electoral College is flawed. 

And it provided many good reasons why the Electoral College is good but...

It didn't show anything that would be better and that's the point!  And neither have you!

boo hoo forever and 50 decades.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-the-electoral-college-is-vital-not-outdated

@vambo said:

Yes did you?

Yes, and it provided many good reasons why the Electoral College is flawed. 

@mld-woody said:

did either of you even watch that last one?

Yes did you?

and everybody who disagrees with him.

Just peck peck peck in perpetuum

@htownbrown said:

That's ridiculous.  If not for the electoral college no votes would matter outside of 5 states.

And why do you say that? 

I've also never said I was for a pure popular vote btw

@mld-woody said:

The last point is that the Electoral College makes it harder to cheat. Without it, stealing a vote anywhere could change the election! That's literally admitting votes would matter more without it...

That's ridiculous.  If not for the electoral college no votes would matter outside of 5 states.

@mld-woody said:

Ha, Prager U. The right wing think take that likes to pretend it has some ties to the academic world to make it more legitimate... though it'll also tell you Universities don't matter. 

You gotta love all of the half truths and uncited info

Ex: "Texas used to vote Dem, so all states matter!" Texas hasn't voted Dem in over 40 years. Safe states exist. They don't get campaigned in.

The last point is that the Electoral College makes it harder to cheat. Without it, stealing a vote anywhere could change the election! That's literally admitting votes would matter more without it...

Vambo, I know you can't actually respond to anything directly since you're some broken bot or foreign agent (at least I hope, otherwise that's pretty sad), but neither of those videos directly addressed the hard numbers I provided. Nothing was refuted. 

Math is math and what the EC does is clear. 

You gotta love all of the half truths and uncited info

Ex: "Texas used to vote Dem, so all states matter!" Texas hasn't voted Dem in over 40 years. Safe states exist. They don't get campaigned in.

The last point is that the Electoral College makes it harder to cheat. Without it, stealing a vote anywhere could change the election! That's literally admitting votes would matter more without it...

Vambo, I know you can't actually respond to anything directly since you're some broken bot or foreign agent (at least I hope, otherwise that's pretty sad), but neither of those videos directly addressed the hard numbers I provided. Nothing was refuted. 

Math is math and what the EC does is clear. 

@mld-woody said:

Why would that not ring true? What evidence do you have that I'm lying? 

One person from Vermont has a vote that counts 3x more than a vote in Texas.

Montana is 4x more than Cali. 

Candidates have no reason to campaign in states that they can't win, and they don't. That's the issue with a winner take all system. 

You can win the electoral college with 22% of the vote. 

Etc etc etc 

Are you really an engineer?

@mld-woody said:

Why would that not ring true? What evidence do you have that I'm lying? 

One person from Vermont has a vote that counts 3x more than a vote in Texas.

Montana is 4x more than Cali. 

Candidates have no reason to campaign in states that they can't win, and they don't. That's the issue with a winner take all system. 

You can win the electoral college with 22% of the vote. 

Etc etc etc