Electoral College

The Electoral College: Keep or Replace? A Soho Forum Debate

Richard Epstein vs. Lawrence Lessig

|

The Electoral College is the best means of electing a president compared to any others that might be devised.

When Donald Trump won the presidential election in 2016 even though 2.8 million more people voted for Hillary Clinton, everyone from Bill De Blasio, to Michael Moore, to Eric Holder and Bill Maher said that at long last we should abolish the electoral college. Then-California Senator Barbara Boxer introduced a bill to amend the U.S. constitution to do just that.

A Gallup poll from September of this year showed that 61 percent of Americans support abolishing the electoral college in favor of a national popular vote, although it's an issue that breaks along partisan lines. 77 percent of Republicans want to keep the electoral college, while 89 percent of Democrats said that we should get rid of it.

Is the electoral college the best system for electing a president? That was the subject of an online Soho Forum debate held on Wednesday, November 11, 2020. Richard Epstein, a law professor at New York University, defended the system against Lawrence Lessig, a law professor at Harvard. Soho Forum director Gene Epstein moderated.

Lessig won the Oxford-Style debate by gaining 14.29 percent of the audience's support. Epstein lost 2.04 percent of his pre-debate votes.

Narrated by Nick Gillespie. Audio production by Ian Keyser.

NEXT: Virginia Postrel: When Calico Was Treated Like Cocaine

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I’m pretty sure that the nation’s press core have already determined that they pick the next president.

    1. The media is back at it and saying Trump should concede because Biden won the popular vote nationally.

      As the Trump campaign case of massive election fraud gets stronger, the media falls back on ridiculous reasons why we should accept the crowning of biden.

      The trump win in trump vs biden is gonna be very painful for unreason staffers and democrats.

      1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier So i try use.
        Here’s what I do……. WORK24HERE

        1. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regularB office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
          on this page…….CLICK DOLLER 666

    2. Make 6,000 dollar to 8,000 dollar A Month Online With No Prior Experience Or Skills Required. Be Your Own Boss And Choose Your Own Work Hours.Thanks A lot Here……….USA HOME JOB.

    3. Joe Biden announced Job opportunity for everyone! Work from comfort of your home, on your computer And you can work with your own working hours……………VISIT HERE FOR FULL DETAIL.

    4. I am now making more than 350 dollars per day by working online from home without investing any money.Join this link posting job now and start earning without investing or selling anything.

      Follow Instructions Here……. Home Profit System

    5. Start earning today from $600 to $754 easily by working online from home. Last month i have generated and received $19663 from this job by giving this only maximum 2 hours a day of my life. Easiest job in the world and earning from this job are just awesome. Everybody can now get this job and start earning cash online right now by just follow instructions click on this link and vist tabs( Home, Media, Tech ) for more details thanks……  Here is More information.

  2. If they want any say whatsoever, less populous/flyover states should oppose dropping the electoral college.

  3. Doesn’t matter anymore, since our elections are explicitly a sham from those point forward.

    1. This.
      I’ve been saying this since the impeachment, 2016 and partly 2018 were the last real federal elections America in it’s present configuration will have. And that goes for the midterms too.

      There’s too much riding on it for the establishment to let the proles have a say ever again. Trump was an absolute disaster for the aristocracy.

      1. +10000

        This is one of the last opportunities for courts to slow down the commies in the democrat party from burning it all down.

      2. “Trump was an absolute disaster for the aristocracy.”

        Those tax cuts were a terrible blow.

        1. The biggest beneficiaries of those cuts were the proles. Anyway, the American aristocrats don’t give a shit about taxes. That’s what creative accounting and the Caymans are for.

  4. Get rid of the Electoral College! It is full of postmodernist Marxists corrupting the minds of our youth!

    1. Sadly the minds of our youth have neither the concept of Marxism or an understanding of the Electoral College and its design.

    2. You just want people to get electorcuted.

      1. Googling “cutest elector” yielded no results.

        1. That would be Palm Beach County GOP Chairman Michael Barnett. Like a massive cabbage patch kid.

  5. It’s irrelevant because they are unlikely to get 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of states to agree to amend anyway.

    What is relevant is this national popular vote compact, which may end up getting challenged in the supreme court. The court could find the states can collude as the constitution is silent on how states pick electors. That is a dangerous situation that will boil over quickly.

    1. Would a blue state actually adhere to the compact and appoint Republican electors if the Republican garnered a majority? Or would they find a way to weasel out of the compact?

    2. It’s illegal for states to form compacts without Congressional approval.

    3. Congress also gets a say in how states run federal elections.

    4. The Court said this year that a state can force Electors to vote as the people of the state chose. It didn’t say they can force Electors to vote against the people of the state.

      1. The state legislators pick the electors.

        Do you see what will happen? Republican state legislatures will pick a slate of Trump electors, who are forced to vote trump because of state laws, because of massive democrat election fraud.

        Article I and II grant this power to state legislatures and congress.

        1. The Reps will pick people who want to vote for Trump. No reason to force them.

  6. It’s irrelevant because they are unlikely to get 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of states to agree to amend anyway.

    Indeed, the number of states that want to become depencies of California is not that great. The fact is that in most elections where the Democrats “win the popular vote” the votes necessary for that to happen came from California.

    If CA wants to set up a Progressive Utopia, let them do it on their own. Let’s not let them impose it on the rest of us.

    1. “the votes necessary for that to happen came from California.”

      No they don’t. All votes are equal. California certainly has a lot of Democratic votes, but its votes are not special super duper extra hefty votes.

      1. My understanding is that overwhelming majority of the votes cast against Trump were because of a huge uptick in support for Biden in California.

        “Braun says Trump and Biden are tied on the popular vote … without California”

        https://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/10/braun-says-trump-and-biden-tied-popular-vote-without-california/6235884002/

        1. I butchered that statement, but maybe you get the gist of it.

          If it weren’t for California, that popular vote for Biden would have been substantially less–Isaac Bartram is right, as usual, California is mostly what we’re talking about when we’re talking about the difference in the popular vote.

          1. And if it hadn’t been for Texas and Florida, Trump would have lost in an electoral landslide and a much larger popular vote loss. And if Biden lost California, Trump would win the electoral college. It’s really a silly argument, cherry-picking states to make your candidate look better. Biden’s strategy works partly because he has a safe reservoir of 55 electoral votes with a 4-5 million vote margin, and Trump has a chance because he has Texas.

            1. “It’s really a silly argument, cherry-picking states to make your candidate look better.”

              You don’t seem to be following the discussion. Here, I’ll outline it for you.

              1) Should we keep the Electoral College?

              A) It doesn’t matter if we should, getting rid of the Electoral College because it would require 3/4 of the states to willingly give their influence away to California–and there’s no good reason why that many of them would want to do that.

              i) Is California’s portion of the popular vote really that significant?

              a) Yes, and here’s a citation to give you a sense of how big.

              You see, no one was cherry picking states to make any candidate look better. And if you can’t follow a discussion like this, then maybe you should get off the internet and go read a book.

              1. Your argument is shit, because you are saying that voters in California matter less than voters in other states.

                And no, getting rid of the electoral college does not require 3/4 of the states. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact only requires that the electoral votes of the states that agree to this compact add up to 270. Currently, 15 states have agreed, for a total of 196 votes.

                1. “Your argument is shit, because you are saying that voters in California matter less than voters in other states.”

                  This is idiotic.

                  1. All anyone is asking for is that votes count equally. You guys constantly throw up this objection about the existence of California. There has to be a most populous state. There are plenty of Republicans who live in California who might like their votes to count too.

                    1. The only thing dumber in this discussion, than the assumption that the smaller to midsize states will giving up their power under the current system in order to make Tony happy, might be the assumption that some smart person would bother arguing with Tony about the rationality of something its constitutionality. Why would anyone bother doing that?

                    2. Your argument about the dynamics of political interest is fascinating I’m sure, but all you’re talking about is the difficulty of achieving the better system.

                      I’d like to hear an argument for exactly why a Montanan deserves to have 40 times the electoral and governing power that a Californian gets. Does it have to do with buttes?

                    3. The idea that smaller states will give up their superior position for an inferior position–because that’s what you want–is childish and stupid.

                    4. As I already said, I understand the difficulty.

                      Of course, all it would take to change attitudes is if the Republican ox got gored by the EC a few times.

                      It’s cute that you pretend it’s about the interests of small states and not those of the Republican party.

                    5. “It’s cute that you pretend it’s about the interests of small states and not those of the Republican party.

                      Here’s where Tony tips his hand as to his own personal motivations. Progs always project their thoughts and actions onto their opponents. They have a hard time imagining alturistic motives that aren’t mandated by a higher authority and can’t figure them in.

                    6. Tony, as long as you dismiss the significance and integrity of States as political entities, it makes no sense to discuss the EC with you.

                    7. I do not believe in the relevance of federalism with respect to the presidency. State and local governments should have jurisdiction where it makes sense. But we only get one president, and there is simply no ethical or sensible case for why the one preferred by fewer Americans deserves to win over the one preferred by more. Since the sole remaining function of the Electoral College is to sometimes choose the loser over the winner, I fail to see what state interests are even remotely addressed.

                    8. So let California submit their electors proportionally.

                      P.S. The EU is set up largely the same way…the EU doesn’t want to be completely under the power of Germany’s population any more than the US wants to be under California’s.

                      The apportionment of seats within the European Parliament to each member state of the European Union is set out by the EU treaties. The allocation is malapportioned, i.e. the number of seats is not proportional to the size of a state’s population, nor does it reflect any other automatically triggered or fixed mathematical formula. According to European Union treaties, the distribution of seats should be “degressively proportional” to the population of the member states. In practice, seats are exclusively allocated via negotiations and political horse trading between member states.[1] The process can be compared to the composition of the electoral college used to elect the President of the United States of America in that, pro rata, the smaller state received more places in the electoral college than the more populous states.

                      smaller states (Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands) were concerned about being under-represented and hence they were granted more seats than their population would have allowed.

                      Under the Lisbon Treaty, which first applied to the 2014 Parliament elections, the cap on the number of seats was raised to 750, with a maximum of 96 and a minimum of 6 seats per state. They continue to be distributed “degressively proportional” to the populations of the EU’s member states.

                    9. Is the EU an example of a well functioning government to you?

                      I know how the system works. I am trying to explain why I think the system you are describing is a bad one.

                      And the authors of the constitution knew why too loose a confederation was a bad idea, considering they tried it and it failed.

                      The logic extends naturally. We only get one president. He is not identified with any states. The state-based system is antiquated and ridiculous and undemocratic. Other than that, it’s great.

                    10. Tony the sensible case is that the presidency was designed to represent the states in international affairs not to be a national ruler.

                    11. I’m glad we agree that the EC has long outlived any usefulness it may have once had. That it exists solely because one political party can only win the presidency with the affirmative action the EC delivers. That in a normal system, if Republicans wanted to win elections, they would have to appeal to an actual majority of voters.

            2. It’s not silly at all when 4 million of Biden’s 5 million vote margin comes from one state.

          2. No, he’s not right. California votes only matter because there were other states with Biden votes. You can’t say California votes were more important than the other votes. It took ALL the votes to create the total.

            1. Biden beat Trump by more than 5 million votes in California.

              If you don’t understand why it would be stupid for 3/4 of the states (where the margin made up less than that number of votes) to get rid of the electoral college, then you may need to have your think-bone examined.

              P.S. It is also not to their advantage to get rid of the Senate.

              1. Why would Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, et. al. want to give up being a swing state?

                Do you really not understand how the game works to their advantage?

                1. Do you really not understand that a total vote count depends on all votes, equally, and that California’s votes are not paramount?

                  It’s the same nonsense with 5-4 Supreme Court decisions, 5-4 baseball scores, and all sorts of tallies. That fifth vote or run is no more decisive than the first one, or the second, third, or fourth. It took all five to win.

                  1. What is paramount supposed to mean here and why does it matter?

                    The fact is that the smaller states are dwarfed by the size of California’s electorate (as well as Texas’ and New York’s), and they will not vote to give away their power in the electoral college because it is not in their interests to do so. It is childish to pretend that other people will act in your interest and against their own simply because you want them to do so.

                    Meanwhile, the fact of the matter is that California’s 5 million votes for Biden over Trump accounts for almost the entire difference between the two candidates in the popular vote. In 2024, the candidates will be focused, as always, on traditional swing states like Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and maybe new swing states like Arizona, Georgina, and North Carolina. The difference between winning and losing those states is a fraction of California’s 5 million votes. If they were all counted with the same weight, those swing states wouldn’t matter compared to California.

                    Because they’re swing states and there’s an electoral college, not only do they get all the attention from the candidates during the election but also they’re likely to be the beneficiaries of all kinds of spending between election cycles, too. Why would they want to be treated just like everyone else when they can choose to be treated special?

                    Imagine this is a commercial real estate transaction, and your job is to convince me to use you as a developer instead of someone else. You can talk about how much better the world would be if I used you instead of someone else. You can talk about how much better off you would be if i used you instead of someone else. But why would you do either of those things? Only a specifically childish mind thinks in those terms.

                    No, if you want me to use you as my developer instead of someone else, then you need to convince me why it’s MY best interests to use you. If you come in and tell me why it’s in your best interests for to hire you, I may feel morally compelled to call your boss and let him know that he has someone with a childish mind working for him. Your proposal is unworthy of serious consideration. Grow up. The world is not here for your benefit.

                    The reason to buy yourself a Roku player isn’t so that Roku can top their earnings estimates for Q4. The reason to buy yourself a Roku player is so that you can save hundreds of dollars a month by switching from cable.

                    If Georgia wants to be a swing state in an electoral college system, why does it matter what you want? Is it really hard for you to understand that what other people want is so much more important in predicting their behavior compared to what you want, that what you want isn’t even really worth considering? Why would Georgia, with its 14,000 ballots separating the candidates, want to be an irrelevant drop in the bucket compared to California’s 5 million separating the candidates, when Georgia can choose to be a swing state in an electoral college instead?

              2. What is so magical about pure democracy that makes it the system we should strive for in every office across the nation? Is it the absolutely predictable outcome where whomever promises the most bread to the peasants wins office? Is that not how it works now?

                Hey, while we’re blowing up the electoral college that’s been tried for over 200 years with a system we’ve never tried why not institute mandatory voting? It’s so European it has to be great, right?

                Do we want to be a canton of Switzerland?

                Say, does that mean we’d be using the same immigration controls as Switzerland as a compromise?

                1. Pure democracies have largely been compromised by communists and socialists effectively creating authoritarian regimes that “vote”.

                  Even America has to fight every election to keep the commies at bay in our republic.

    2. A more relevant question might be whether California should be free to can secede from the union, and if so, how they plan to compensate the United States for all the military bases, national parks, and interstate highways that were built and maintained at federal taxpayer expense.

      That rationalization would be entertaining to hear after progressives have scuttled everything from the San Fernando Valley seceding from Los Angeles County to the break up of southern and northern California into two states.

      1. how they plan to compensate the United States for all the military bases, national parks, and interstate highways

        I suppose the precedent would be Guantanamo. Who says we have to give them up? More fun is the massive surge in unemployment as the entire defense establishment in the people’s republic of Pacifica lose their US security clearance along with their job.

        1. Does the Republic of California open its border with Mexico?

      2. Ken, there is a historical precedence (if in reverse) when Texas joined the US. Given the choice of surrendering Texas land holdings so the US would absorb their outstanding debt, the Texans elected to keep their land–and sell it to private buyers.

        So besides removing all the portable property, like planes and ships (see the scenario in David French’s recent Divided We Fall), we could let California own the federal infrastructure there, but also own their state debt. And their share of federal debt could be zeroed out with pending federal benefits to noble citizens of the new Cali Peoples Republic.

      3. I think the absence of California from the union would be more than enough compensation for all those things. Hell, we could pay them to leave and still be getting a good deal.

      4. Just let them leave. Don’t worry about compensation, they paid their taxes. Evacuate all the military bases. The national parks weren’t built, they are natural. The highways are in bad shape. Let California maintain them.

        The USA doesn’t need California, and California doesn’t need the USA. Maybe Oregon and Washington will join them.

        1. Please don’t leave me here with these fuckwits!

        2. Does the US get to repatriate all the Californians that moved to other states when their utopian policies turned dystopian for them?

  7. How many people who want to eliminate the EC, for reasons of Democracy!, also want to eliminate the Senate?

    And how many of them, whether they will admit it (or even be conscious of it) want to eliminate Congress altogether? Just a Dear Leader, “elected” by popular vote?

    We can call this the kindergarten view of governance. Or the totalitarian method.

    1. “We can call this the kindergarten view of governance. Or the totalitarian method.”

      Progressives have no sense of legitimacy. They have no conception that it can break down and there are negative consequences associated with that breakdown in legitimacy either.

      Their whole purpose is to inflict their idea of the greater good on the people who oppose them. Democracy is just a convenient excuse. When’s the last time we’ve heard a progressive argue that the right of stupid people to say and believe awful things should be respected?

  8. If you look at it’s original function it is good. The President is not supposed to be a national leader to individuals. The President is supposed to represent the states in international affairs which is why the state Legislators appoint the electors. There is no constitutional right of the people to vote for the President!

    1. The role of the president has changed in 200 years, hence the EC needs to go.

      1. No the role of the president has not changed. You are living in an alternate reality – clearly you are mentally ill or incompetent. The electoral college stays, and the left wing end their assault on the constitution.

        1. It is the right that have been trying to expand the power of the president.

          1. I’m not even sure how you can say such a thing? Did you think Trumps De-Regulation platform was all about growing the power of the President. Next thing you know you’ll be telling everyone their shoes belong on their head.

          2. “I’ve got a pen and a phone”

            Lol, the “right”. Okay Jeff.

          3. “It is the right that have been trying to expand the power of the president.””

            Classic example of a partisan person ignoring the trespasses of their team and blaming the other team for all trespasses.

            SNL did the School House Rock parody of I’m just a bill. But if you remember, that was done under Obama.

            1. For those who haven’t seen it.
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUDSeb2zHQ0

      2. “The role of the president has changed in 200 years”
        Yes, it’s become imperial and hegemonic taking to much power away from congress.

        “hence the EC needs to go”
        What? No, fuck, how the hell did you get there? That’s a post hoc fallacy.
        The presidency and congress need to reassume their original roles, not turf the electoral college.

      3. hence the EC needs to go.

        Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Delaware, and Maryland would like to have a word with you.

        1. ^EXACTLY!!! Why Anti-Americans are filling up America is nothing short of the “conquer and consume” goal-post of destruction.

      4. “The role of the president has changed in 200 years, hence the EC needs to go.”

        And yet the role of the EC is the same as it always was–to balance out the power of the most populous states.

        Oh, and this won’t be as much of a problem next time since California and New York are likely to lose four seats in the House after the census–with two probably going to Texas, one going to Arizona, and one going to Florida.

      5. Such a well thought out, convincing argument. Are you going to hold your breath and stomp your feet until it happens?

    2. The smaller states wouldn’t have joined the union if they were just going to be bullied by Massachusetts and Virginia in 1789, and they aren’t about to bend over for California and New York today for the same reason.

      That’s why we have a bicameral Congress. Add in the census and slavery, and that’s why we have the Electoral College, too.

      It’s ultimately the same reason the UK wanted out of the EU. You need to make the pot sweeter for those who aren’t big enough to take on France, Italy, and Germany working together, and if you don’t give them something better than what they’ve already got, they’ll keep what they’ve got.

      No sense in pretending its about anything else but the self interest of the voters and the states in question.

      1. People don’t even understand how the 16th and 17th amendments screwed the whole system up.

        1. It’s funny, too, because we understood it well enough when we were writing Germany’s post World War II constitution. The Bundesrat is like Germany’s version of the U.S. Senate–the way the U.S. Senate was before the 17th Amendment.

          “Each state delegation in the Bundesrat is essentially a representation of the state government and reflects the political makeup of the ruling majority or plurality of each state legislature (including coalitions).

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundesrat_of_Germany

          If you want to make sure the federal government doesn’t get out of control, you check it by giving the state legislatures the power to appoint their own senators to an upper house.

          Americans still understood that principle well enough when we were drawing up the German constitution. We were interested in making sure a strong executive didn’t reemerge in the aftermath of World War II, and subjecting anything he (or she) wanted to do to the consent of an upper chamber made up of appointees from the state legislatures does nicely.

          It’s still working nicely today. Merkel was forced to promise not to seek office in the election of 2021 when her party lost a state election in Hesse.

          I once found myself in a bit of an argument with a Park Service historical tour guide at Hearst Castle. I’m oversimplifying a bit, but I took issue with his explanation that Hearst championed the 17th Amendment, which made the Senate democratic. Some of the Brits on the tour were taking issue with me until I explained that our tour guide apparently didn’t think the U.K. was a democratic country–since they elect their Prime Minister in the same “undemocratic” way we used to elect our senators.

    3. The EC is not some grand design. It is the result of a process. The states formed the federal government, not the other way around. And the states would not have joined the US of A if it was going to be ruled by the national popular vote. It’s why there is a bicameral legislature, with the states represented in the upper house.

      And the amendment rules pretty much guarantee the EC will never go away, because the lower population states will never cede the power they have now.

      1. Except the states aren’t represented anymore that’s one of the problems.

  9. nice post
    But Donald Trump seems can not win this time
    https://hippopower.id/

  10. Sidney Powell had an interview in The Epoch Times today
    I think you need to give them your email to read but the key points for me were…
    1. They are going to trial within a couple of weeks with “more evidence now than half the prison population is imprisoned on”
    2.”We have evidence now of information from the systems going to three or four different foreign countries during the time of the election, those countries themselves could have watched the live votes come in and changed the numbers.” said Powell “There’s significant evidence of foreign interference from the worst communist countries on the Earth with our election.”

    What was 2016 about? Some Russian memes? This is allegedly about remote access to the voting machines from foreign enemy countries. If your heart doesn’t stop for a second when reading that you are not a true patriot.

    Forget about Trump, if this isn’t rectified we are screwed. Biden and the people he is with are traitors. I don’t care if I’m going on a list after posting this. Although I probably am, because Reason doesn’t seem to give a damn about any of it.

    1. Well I certainly hope they are successful, but in a few weeks electors vote and this is over. No court is overturning that vote.

    2. But you didn’t believe the stuff about 2016, did you?

      Even if these sad little frivolous lawsuits aren’t able to uncover the real conspiracy, don’t you agree that it would be healthier if everyone accepted the outcome of the election as if this weren’t some third-world shithole?

      What are you gonna do? Declare independence?

      Or are you just basically threatening to participate in maximum hate-filled resistance justified by a flimsy false pretense? The easier not to have to exercise your little brain about anything?

      1. Did you believe this stuff in 2004, 2000, 1988, 1984, 1980, 1972, 1968, 1956, 1952…

        Because Tony you democrat bitches have been complaining about every republican elected in my lifetime.

        And maximum hate filled resistance started with democrats. I literally heard my waitress say Trump was Hitler the day after the election in 2016. I didn’t tip that bitch.

        Maybe you can wrap your little brain around this. We don’t accept the results of the election and we don’t accept democrats in power. Expect resistance.

        1. I’ve complained about elections that deserved to be complained about. In my lifetime that’s 2000, when the popular vote loser was installed by the supreme court. Imagine if it happened to you.

          Also, two wrongs don’t make a right. And you don’t have anything tangible to bitch about. This election was not like 2000. The popular vote winner won and no supreme court installed anyone (yet).

          You don’t accept democrats in power. Okay. What shall I do with that? Anticipate gangs of murderers? If you think you deserve the right to murder people because you don’t like the political party in charge, I’m going to have to politely differ.

          1. Expect resistance, dumbass. If that means some fantasy of gangs to you, well you have 2020 and its left wing “peaceful protestors” as your guide there. I guess you like it when it benefits you. Otherwise I could not care less what you believe.

            1. I thought they were optically bad, to be honest. Black people will never get any help from the government anyway until you dick-substitute therapy guys find some other minority to torment for a change.

              I’m glad we agree that Democrats having political office is permissible under law.

              1. The best thing to help the black community is to end drug prohibition yet not one Democrat ever calls for it. They WANT chaos. It makes it easier to yield power.

                1. Good news.

                  “Former Vice President Joe Biden and running mate Senator Kamala Harris support adult-use marijuana decriminalization, moderate rescheduling, federal medicinal legalization, allowing states to set their own laws and expunging prior cannabis convictions — though not federal legalization.”

                  Not a whole hog, but a hog.

                  That’s the new president I’m talking about. Sounds like progress to me.

                  1. Oh yeah there’s Biden “listening to the scientists” on weed, just like he will “listen to the scientists” on everything else.

                    And according to Biden, the “scientists” have not yet told him if weed is a gateway drug, so no federal legalization.

                    I’m looking forward to the “scientists” providing Biden dictates that are equally just as good on all those other issues.

                    1. We tried listening to Donald Trump’s twitter ejaculations over scientists. Now we’re in a pandemic he can’t control. Coincidence, I think not.

                    2. The scientists mask talismans failed, so why bother listening to them?

                    3. Because they don’t regurgitate falsehoods at such a constant pace as to suggest someone who owns a mask company kicked them in the nuts. Stop lying. If you don’t think you’re lying, stop talking and go read something. Try to have an open mind when all the research contradicts the lies you keep trying to spread.

          2. Poor tony. He hated when the SCoTUS called out democrat election fraud.

            Imagine how mad unreason staffers will be when trump wins trump vs biden because of massive democrat election fraud.

          3. They’re bitching about their candidate losing, which is exactly what democrats do every time they lose elections. Sure, they always have an excuse (“the popular vote!”), but that’s just it: an excuse. Democrats have made it abundantly clear that they have a visceral hated of all republicans, classifying all of them as sexist racist homophone bigots at the drop of a hat. That’s not a function of election mechanics, and they’ve explicitly endorsed violence against political opponents (Antifa isn’t a get-out-the-vote project).

            Democrats pining for civility and acceptance now is too rich.

            1. They’re not just bitching, they’re trying to steal an election.

              False equivalence yourself till you can’t see straight, but this is new, and I’m right to call it out, and your tacit support of it just makes you a traitor like the rest.

              1. No, Tony, you are trying to steal an election.
                We are trying to save the republic.

                1. By burning it to the ground. Maybe future historians will be able to tell the difference between what you’re doing and a coup, but I can’t.

                  Facts matter in court. I’m sorry that’s a hurdle for you. I’m sure you’ll have the opportunity to abolish courts soon enough. For freedom and our cherished system of government, of course.

                  1. “Facts matter in court.”

                    It’s not the facts that matter in court, it’s how you present them to the judge and jury.

              2. Litigating an election isn’t stealing an election. Stealing is defined by law, and lawsuits are not it. That’s just a legal fact, Tony, and if you can’t accept the law, then you’re an anarchist tyrant, and what are we arguing about anyway?

                It’s cute that you think your accusations of treason are taken seriously, what with your devout loyalty to the USA, constitution and all.

          4. “”In my lifetime that’s 2000, when the popular vote loser was installed by the supreme court. “”

            The popular vote doesn’t matter. The fact that you can’t surrender to the fact that it is in the rules of the contest says a lot.

            Bush received more votes than Gore in FL. so Bush won FL. SCOTUS did not give Bush the win.

      2. If you want people to accept election outcomes with quiet dignity, you should have tried that yourself more often.

    3. https://twitter.com/extickerpimp/status/1329867248308166656?s=19

      Seems to me that proving Dominion voter fraud would be super easy. What reason would there ever be to fractionalize/decimalize a vote?

      1. Perhaps Republicans should have gotten on board with Democrats’ attempts to better oversee election infrastructure. I wonder why Republicans wanted to keep election technology open for hacking.

        What about their current behavior suggests Republicans are a tad on the skeptical side when it comes to people simply getting their way when they vote and win?

        1. Wow, if you frame the electoral fraud as blaming Republicans, then Tony suddenly agrees that it’s an insecure joke ripe for fraud.

  11. And how do you determine this? That seems to be the big problem. If they stole it, you’re never going to find the smoking gun. I’d love to see the Trump campaign get Joe Biden on the stand and ask him what he meant by the voter fraud bit. Then they could ask Ron Klain what he meant about rigged elections Read More.

  12. NICE JOB FOR EVERY ONE CHEK DETAIL OPEN THIS LINK…. Here is More information.

  13. Oh I know; Lets have a soho forum debate about destroying the entire USA (defined by the U.S. Constitution) and pretend it could happen without even a Constitutional Amendment..

    [WE] mobs-rule!!! /s

  14. STAY AT HOME & WORK AT HOME FOR USA ►Check it out, and start earning yourself . for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot Here…Click here.

  15. The fact that a libertarian ass rag took the position of Debating this issue, rather than simply defending the electoral college says all you need to know about this piece of trash magazine.

    Majority mob rule with no representation of minority points of view is totally libertarian…

    Are you fucking ignoramuses at reason even trying anymore?

    The majority of us commenter don’t subscribe, don’t donate, and stupid shit like this makes that less likely. In fact it’s THE COMMENTS that most of us come for. We should just start our own message board and say fuck reason.

    Also… Considering like 65% of the reason staff are too full of themselves and their virtue signaling to vote…does that translate to the larger “libertarian” voter populous? HERE’S AN IDEA… MAYBE LIBERTARIANS WOULD DO BETTER IN ELECTIONS IF BETTER THAN 50% WERE MORE CONCERNED WITH IMPLIMENTING CHANGE VIA VOTING THAN WITH VIRTUE SIGNALING. just a thought for you fucking retards at reason.

    1. Well, are you criticizing majority rule or mob rule? Those aren’t the same thing.

      Majority rule is how every election is supposed to work. It’s the entire concept.

      1. And to think once upon a time it was Constitutional Rule’s (ensuring Individual Rights & Freedoms) and Elected Representatives sent to the Union of States in order to uphold that Supreme Rule….

        I guess today the USA is “All Hail the almighty elected Kings!!!” Praise our godly rules anointed to them by [WE] mobs like the godly rulers they are… Bow down to the Gov-Gods of “Democratic Socialism” for yea shall see no more Individuals only [WE] mobs worshiping their Gov-Gods.

        Huh; I wonder how we went from #1 to #2. Or then again; maybe #2 is just a corrupt delusion of the Democratic *Invasion* going on in the USA.

        1. Go to a city council meeting and declare that the 3-6 vote gets to win over the 6-3 vote because otherwise it would be tyranny.

          An election means majority rule. Otherwise we wouldn’t bother with elections. Only the electoral college lets the loser wins, and that’s precisely the reason it’s perverse.

          1. Hurray; You do know there is such a thing as a city council! I would’ve never guessed by the way everything in lefty-land has to be done UN-Constitutional at the federal level.

            So Tony; If the City Council declared by a 6-3 vote that slavery is now re-instated in the City of Detroit; do you think that’s the way it’s suppose to work?

            “majority rule” — Right? Think about the non-sense you spout.

      2. Tony doesn’t believe in protecting minorities.

        THAT is the purpose of the electoral college. The majority has the dominant influence, but not so much that it can run roughshod over different minorities.

        1. A little civics education is a dangerous thing in the hands of the stupid.

          Fuck the electoral college. Nobody does electoral colleges anymore when they write constitutions. Why? Because it’s retarded.

          Protecting minority rights doesn’t mean sometimes they can lose an election and get their way anyway. That’s not how it works. Getting a president of a certain party is not a minority right. You are saying things so absurd it’s pretty much an actual mockery of the democratic system of government. Minority rights. Jesus Christ the stupidity.

          Yes, we have to protect the “minority rights” of the party of white people to get affirmative action for their presidential candidates. What a great deal!

          1. “Nobody does electoral colleges anymore when they write constitutions”

            Except for India, France, Finland, Burundi, Estonia, Kazakhstan, Madagascar, Myanmar, Pakistan, Trinidad and Tobago, Vanuatu, the Irish Senate, Macau, Hong Kong, Guernsey and the Republic of Georgia.
            …Virtually all of whom adopted electoral colleges after WW2 and half in the 1990’s.

            They don’t call you “Lying Tony” for nothing.

          2. Do try and enjoy your election victory at some point in this process.

          3. “it’s pretty much an actual mockery of the democratic system of government.” — TONY; THE USA ISN’T A DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM!!!!

            It’s a Constitutional Union of Republican States.
            You’re trying to pretend the USA is something it’s NOT…

            1. U.S. Constitution Article IV Section 4 —
              “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”

          4. The minority of the population (rural) has fundamentally different needs and interests from the majority of the population (urban).

            That does not mean either rural or urban interests are “wrong” but they are often in conflict. The same goes for high population states vs. low population states. The electoral college is a way to balance and merge these two fundamentally different populations to unity without one stomping over the other.

            The electoral college is a system of unity that makes us stronger. You are only salty because you want to loot my resources and bully me since you are clearly a member of the majority (the mob).

            CELEBRATE UNITY! CELEBRATE PROTECTION OF THE MINORITY! SUPPORT THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE!

            1. Fundamentally (I’d like to add); The real issue with the [WE] mob is the Federal Government has become tyrant. It was only created for nation-to-nation dealings like national defense (being it’s whole purpose for existing). It’s ignorance of the Supreme Law is why we see such USA division today.

      3. “”Majority rule is how every election is supposed to work. It’s the entire concept.””

        Not in a Constitutional Republic. You try to talk like you know a lot but you can’t even understand our type of government. Try that first.

        Democracy is anti-minority.

  16. FFS “We all know why Joe Biden is rushing to falsely pose as the winner, and why his media allies are trying so hard to help him: they don’t want the truth to be exposed” ~ toddler trump BYE DON…………. Read More

  17. Keep it. It kept Hillary Clinton from being president.

    1. Keep it. It stopped G. Holy War Bush from a second term of screaming for the death sentence for trade and production.

  18. Each state gets its electors based on their legislative representation, we are all okay with that. Remove the living, breathing, physical human aspect of the Electoral College from each vote. Take out the middle man so we can all move on to the next presidential disaster!

  19. Only if you are an empathy devoid sociopath with no respect or consideration for those around you……… Read More

  20. And wait you will. If you want drone deliveries, move to Africa, where it makes sense.

  21. NICE JOB FOR EVERY ONE CHEK DETAIL OPEN THIS LINK……… CLICK HERE FOR FULL DETAIL

  22. I was kind of surprised that I leaned toward Lessig’s position after listening to the debate. If only he had been this convincing in arguing Eldred v. Ashcroft.

  23. anyone who wants to get rid of the electoral college fundamentally does not understand why we are a republic or what the dangers are of a pure democracy.

    fortunately, it is unlikely it could ever get passed.

  24. I made it as far as “Narrated by Nick…”

  25. The article is very nice, “thank” you for sharing it! ?
    genymotion crack license key

Please to post comments