Dear Friends:
The more your inquisitive reporter learns about the United States of America the more confused I become!
What I'm talking about is the "Electoral College" system of electing a President.......... which after a court ruling this week doesn't make any sense at all! (It only made a bit of sense before, but absolutely NONE now!)
O.K. Here we go:
The "Electors" (538 people picked from among the candidate's supporters) vote for whoever gets the most votes in that district......... or State........ or whatever????
BUT: Because of "Gerrymandering" .....certain political parties have an edge in certain districts, which means that the "popular" vote (the most votes) doesn't always determine who the Elector will cast his or her ballot for!
That's why Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Al Gore in 2000 both won the popular vote but lost the election!
Are ya with me so far?
O.K. Now it starts to get really weird:
In the 2016 election, one of the Electors didn't vote for Hillary Clinton or Donald Drumpf like they were supposed to.................... instead he crossed out Drumps name and wrote in John Kaisic!!!!!!
This led to a court challenge and this happened:
The court says that the "elector" (who usually votes for their candidate if they won the popular vote in that district) doesn't really have to vote that way..........! Instead, they can vote for who they want to vote for!!!!!! (So the guy's vote counts for Kasich.)
THIS MEANS THAT INSTEAD OF WINNING THE POPULAR VOTE BY THREE MILLION AND STILL LOSING.... LIKE CLINTON........ SOMEONE COULD LOSE THE POPULAR VOTE BY TENS, OR EVEN HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS..... BUT STILL HAVE THE ELECTORS MAKE THEM THE PRESIDENT..... IF THEY CHOSE TO CAST THEIR BALLOTS THAT WAY!(What this now means is that a President or political party could theoretically bribe or threaten the "electors" in the Electoral Colleg to voe a certain way no matter what the popular vote was!)
I hope this made sense, but as I said, I'm rather confused this morning!
The more your inquisitive reporter learns about the United States of America the more confused I become!
What I'm talking about is the "Electoral College" system of electing a President.......... which after a court ruling this week doesn't make any sense at all! (It only made a bit of sense before, but absolutely NONE now!)
O.K. Here we go:
The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. You help choose your state's electors when you vote for President because when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate's electors.NOW, here's the low-down on the way it was........... and the way it is NOW!
The "Electors" (538 people picked from among the candidate's supporters) vote for whoever gets the most votes in that district......... or State........ or whatever????
BUT: Because of "Gerrymandering" .....certain political parties have an edge in certain districts, which means that the "popular" vote (the most votes) doesn't always determine who the Elector will cast his or her ballot for!
That's why Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Al Gore in 2000 both won the popular vote but lost the election!
Are ya with me so far?
O.K. Now it starts to get really weird:
In the 2016 election, one of the Electors didn't vote for Hillary Clinton or Donald Drumpf like they were supposed to.................... instead he crossed out Drumps name and wrote in John Kaisic!!!!!!
This led to a court challenge and this happened:
The court says that the "elector" (who usually votes for their candidate if they won the popular vote in that district) doesn't really have to vote that way..........! Instead, they can vote for who they want to vote for!!!!!! (So the guy's vote counts for Kasich.)
THIS MEANS THAT INSTEAD OF WINNING THE POPULAR VOTE BY THREE MILLION AND STILL LOSING.... LIKE CLINTON........ SOMEONE COULD LOSE THE POPULAR VOTE BY TENS, OR EVEN HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS..... BUT STILL HAVE THE ELECTORS MAKE THEM THE PRESIDENT..... IF THEY CHOSE TO CAST THEIR BALLOTS THAT WAY!(What this now means is that a President or political party could theoretically bribe or threaten the "electors" in the Electoral Colleg to voe a certain way no matter what the popular vote was!)
I hope this made sense, but as I said, I'm rather confused this morning!
The way I see it anyway!
No comments:
Post a Comment