Subj : Peurto Rico
To   : Mike Powell
From : Lee Lofaso
Date : Sat May 18 2019 19:49:04

Hello Mike,

>>The candidates would campaign differently, and visit more places.
>>The electoral college process is far more limiting, resulting in
>>much fewer campaign stops for candidates.
>
>No, you have that wrong.  Remember, that is what Hilarious tried (fewer
>stops) and it DID NOT WORK.  If there was no electoral college, what she did
>would have worked.  She would only need to campaign and play to the areas
>that Bob listed.  She'd never visit Kentucky or any state that surrounds it
>(except maybe Northern Virginia).  She'd certainly have gotten away with
>ignoring Wisconsin and Michigan.

Both candidates would have played the game far differently had
there been no electoral college process.  Who would have won under
those conditions is anybody's guess.  Some would say Clinton, based
on her results from the election held under electoral college rules.
But that is speculative.

Before the election, Donald Trump said publicly he would prefer
a popular vote than the current electoral college process.  After
the election, he changed his mind.  As for who would have won had
it been a popular vote, Trump admitted the race would have been
contested by both candidates differently.

Trump also claimed the election was rigged, with lots of "fake"
votes having been counted for his opponent.  Meaning he was the
one who got the most popular votes.  After all, he counted those
votes himself ...

>>IOW, the electoral college process is nothing more than a polite
>>fiction.  A means to con the electorate into believing it is taking
>>part in a fair election.
>
>The only times it has been "unfair" is when a Democrat has not managed to
> win it.

Gore v. Bush

Total votes cast - 9

GWB - 5
Al Gore 4

The closest election in US history.

--Lee

-- 
Everybody Loves Our Buns

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
 * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)

.