ridiculous popular vote vs. delegates!

Post Reply New Topic

I see that Obama won a state in popular vote, yet Clinton gets the majority of delegate votes? This is what's wrong with the US system...this is why people don't always vote...

I hate where I live, but EACH vote counts...none of this garbage of electoral votes, or winner takes all garbage...everyone knows that their vote counts and that the governor can be elected by just ONE vote...period...

I wonder how much Hillary paid for those electoral votes in states where she is not winning the popular vote...ridiculous!

Anyway, there's my vent...No, I'm not particularly for Obama, but the system is messed up.

Example...Alabama...Obama has so far 56% of the vote vs. Hillary 42%, but she has TWO MORE delegate votes than he does?

I don't know that much about the system, but I'd say it works only for itself. People the system does not work for say it's f*cked up - which it is.

What are the chances of change?

I don't believe in politics.

About 14 percent of delegates aren't even chosen in voting booths. Superdelegates are "the party's top echelon of elected officials who can back a candidate at any time no matter what the calendar, caucus-goer or primary voter says."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18918536/

I agree that a popular vote is more fair. I think in the past the delegates directly voted for the president without any voting from citizens. Then they allowed white American landowners. Eventually they added non-landowners, blacks, those who can't read, women, and recently illegal immigrants in some states. (Illegals aren't really allowed to vote but they aren't allowed to be in the US either yet no one kicks them out. They can vote because Democrats said requiring US-issued ID discriminates against black people)