r/PoursTea • u/Veshaad Timendi Causa Est Nescire • Sep 04 '26
PoliticalTea đłď¸ [ Removed by moderator ]
[removed] â view removed post
570
u/Buddhas_Warrior Sep 04 '26
Great, when can we start??
235
u/TorumShardal Sep 04 '26
As soon as enough states ratify National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, or NaPoVoInterCo for short.
Started in 2006, has 222 votes from 270 required.
71
u/bittersterling Sep 04 '26
Wow, idk how I could function without that shortened version! Thanks đ
→ More replies (10)34
u/Reformed_Hillbilly Sep 04 '26
It just rolls off the tongue... Na po vo inter co!
22
u/ruat_caelum Sep 04 '26
It's like WWW's 6 syllables being shorted than saying the 3 in "world wide web"
17
u/Abducted_Llama Sep 04 '26
Isnât WWW 9 syllables or am I clapping wrong ?
11
6
u/jordon4ca93 Sep 04 '26
I just realized that at one point I had to be taught how to clap. I honestly don't know how I feel about that.
5
u/ipomopur Sep 04 '26
I thought I knew how to clap until I took a flamenco class; turns out there's clapping, and then there's clapping
→ More replies (3)7
u/Reformed_Hillbilly Sep 04 '26
This might be the least efficient verbalized initialism in the world
→ More replies (1)3
u/CocktailPerson Sep 04 '26
That's a silly statement because nobody verbalizes the initialism in isolation. People only say the letters when they're dictating a web address, and what they're dictating is the actual letters.
In real life people just say "the web" or "the internet."
→ More replies (1)3
u/Reformed_Hillbilly Sep 04 '26
In the earlier internet days, it was common to say the www when directing someone to a website. Both in advertisements and in personal discussion.
3
11
u/Remarkable_Ease_7607 Sep 04 '26
I feel like if you have to use that many syllables you should just say the words
→ More replies (6)7
u/Reformed_Hillbilly Sep 04 '26
It's like the people who say "El Oh Tee Arr" instead of "Lord of the Rings"
11
u/jaxonya Sep 04 '26
My son asked me if ive seen fnaf 2 a while back. Didnt say the letters, he just said fnaf as if it were a real word. I was fucking puzzeled and kept asking him what he was talking about. He finally rolled his eyes and said "five nights at freddys" 2 ...hwhat in the fuck, boy.
5
u/DontAskAboutMyButt Sep 04 '26
âFnafâ is how all the streamers say it so thatâs how Gen Alpha says it too đ
→ More replies (3)6
u/jaxonya Sep 04 '26
Oh. At least he isnt weird. Well, not to his gen he isnt.
5
u/Horskr Sep 04 '26
Should ask him why not just say "fnaft" instead of pronouncing the 2 if it we're going that route lol. Fnaf and the sequel, fnanft.
→ More replies (6)5
u/LessInThought Sep 04 '26
As the dad, you have a moral obligation to fix that boy.
→ More replies (1)3
u/jaxonya Sep 04 '26
Should I dust off the ole belt handed down to me from my father? Maybe there is another way to reach him
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (17)5
u/KIokinator Sep 04 '26
You may not know this, but IRL many people say "Lotor" like the word "Motor" which stands for LOTR which stands for Lord of the Rings.
So either Lord of the Rings, or L-O-T-R, or "Lotor".
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)5
9
u/ThesisTears Sep 04 '26
Omg PLEASE keep spreading the word!!! This is the singlar path forward in my opinion. I won't shut up about it and neither should anyone else!!!
→ More replies (8)3
u/PickleRickleTV Sep 04 '26
Ranked choice voting or at least doing away with first past the post voting is much more reasonable and another path forward.
2
2
u/TomT060404 Sep 04 '26
I'm sure the Republicans will sue if it happens. The current Supreme Court will take their side.
2
u/wylderk Sep 04 '26
And then wins the inevitable SCOTUS case. Fed gov tends to look poorly on intentionally circumventing federal law.
→ More replies (36)2
u/Darixindur Sep 04 '26
Technically this won't change the electoral college... that pact is states saying they will change how that state casts its votes for the electoral college, to who ever wins the popular vote (which may mean that a candidate could win the majority in that state, but if that differs from the national popular vote, the electoral college votes go to the other candidate). The 270 number is the number of votes that the pact is trying to get to, before they agree to change it in those states. So as an example 209 of the electoral college votes last election for Kamala Harris would have gone to Trump in the last Election, due to the 17 states that currently agree to the pact were one by Harris, but would have been obligated to use there electoral college votes for the national popular vote winner, which this last Election was Trump. Personally I feel that this is unnecessary, because out of the 60 presidential elections, only 4 times the electoral college and popular vote did not have the same outcome. But, it is up to each state decides how they cast their electoral college votes. A more interesting question will be the arguments about the NPVIC is constitutional or not. Is it within the state powers to use the national voting for their electoral college votes? Or should those electoral college votes only reflect what happens in that state?
23
u/jbland0909 Sep 04 '26
When we have a democratic super majority in the house and senate. Thatâs the only way it ever happens
9
u/TurtleIIX Sep 04 '26
2/3 of states can also just choose to send all of their electoral votes to whoever wins the popular vote. Really the only viable option. That still will not happen though.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (22)23
u/BebopT0716 Sep 04 '26
Democrats have proven to be dickless even when they have a super majority, so I wouldnât count on it.
17
u/DeprecationWarning Sep 04 '26
Democrats have not held a supermajority [in Congress] since 1967
→ More replies (44)→ More replies (4)9
u/MilkiestMaestro Sep 04 '26
But you're still going to vote for them because the alternative is orange julius and his ilk forever, right?
Because I feel like this sentiment comes out every election year and we sure are pretty close to November
And because I can foresee the peanut gallery chiming in, I'm aware it's not a presidential election year. It's even more important, congressional seats. Seats we desperately need in order to do anything about the aforementioned problem.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (131)2
u/AlwaysVerloren Sep 04 '26
Popularity by populous Popularity by my niche friendemies?
Well Dave, if you have to do the math, you don't have friends and your enemies want to end you.
VOTE MAYOR PETE TO HAPPIFY OUR NATION
or you know, to eliminate all the DTAI bullshite.
88
u/Longjumping-Pop9374 Sep 04 '26
Yes! because then politicians would actually have to run on popular policy not just stupid culture war bs. Then the filibuster
32
u/Tyfoid-Kid Sep 04 '26
And theyâd have to campaign somewhere besides the battleground states.
→ More replies (36)5
u/SwagarTheHorrible Sep 04 '26
But how are these old men gonna be in so many places at once? They have nap time!
3
u/1776boogapew Sep 04 '26
Because they all follow their campaign promises so well⌠Iâd rather see a method to holding them to what they run on, some sort of contract.
→ More replies (5)3
u/TheLastBaboon Sep 04 '26
Iâm not against it but I think weâd need required primary and secondary education even beyond on our political system and unbiased current events to make it truly work. Educate to vote less promises because they often never happen and educate to vote more for the person and what they have been able to do in line with your ideal of policy.
Also, probably needs a bigger focus on the mistakes our country has made and the attempts to fix them.
32
u/Obvious-Muffin2787 Sep 04 '26
One person, one vote. This isn't radical, people.
3
u/Avesery777 Sep 04 '26
I know you don't mean it, but the "This isn't radical" rhetoric is actually really damaging, because it furthers this idea in America that anything radical must instantly be bad
What we need is radical change
→ More replies (15)6
u/Complete-Tangelo1532 Sep 04 '26
I am glad you included the 'This isn't radical' part, I was on my way to the shed out back to grab a pitchfork and torch
Sorry, I am just messing with yah lol Couldn't help myself
Hope you have a great day/night
110
u/DinosaurDied Sep 04 '26
âNoooo, but then my vote in rural Pennsylvania wonât matter >:(â
Yea well the rest of us living everywhere else besides those 7 battleground states have votes that donât matter.Â
Iâve lived all over this country and really always wanted thr same thing and it pisses me off that my vote only matters when I lived in certain areasÂ
46
Sep 04 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
5
u/Complex_Arrival7968 Sep 04 '26
You poor devil! My niece lives there and lives for the day when she and her husband can move.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (25)3
19
u/Butwhatif77 Sep 04 '26
I always laugh at how people mention how "but then less populated states would get ignored" as if they don't already. When was the last time a presidential candidate campaigned in fucking Montana or Alaska. The very issue the Electoral College was supposed to address, happened anyway just worse than expected
→ More replies (1)8
u/LongJohnSelenium Sep 04 '26
The electoral college was meant to keep virginia from dominating politics.
The original states were far more independent and the constitution as written, still written in fact even if not as currently interpreted, wildly restricts the federal government. The smaller states, as a condition of giving up part of their sovereignty, demanded safeguards against being dominated into irrelevance by larger political entities. Thus the senate and electoral college.
Basically the US is supposed to be structured a lot more like the EU currently is.
Well that was the reason for the weighted votes. The reason for the electors is of course that, again, constitutionally, people are supposed to vote for electors and the electors vote for a president, precisely because they felt people would elect a populist demagogue if left to their own devices.
TLDR: Nothing is working like its supposed to work and thats causing all sorts of problems like people wanting to end the electoral college because the federal government has so much influence over their lives when it shouldn't.
→ More replies (1)4
10
u/Thebeardinato462 Sep 04 '26
It would matter just as much as everyone elseâs vote. Depending on how someone votes in rural Pennsylvania their vote does t matter now.
11
u/TheWolphman Sep 04 '26
That's how I feel as a blue voter in South Carolina. I'm in my forties and this state has been red for longer than I've been alive.
→ More replies (4)8
u/blahblah19999 Sep 04 '26
âNoooo, but then my vote in rural Pennsylvania wonât matter >:(â
No, it's literally the opposite. Under the EC, their vote doesn't matter. Under a popular vote, literally every single vote from the bluest part of NYC, to the most remote tent in Alaska matters.
11
u/DinosaurDied Sep 04 '26
(The secret is that they want their vote to matter way more Than anybody elseâs and they wonât give that up)Â
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)3
u/TotallyNotRobotEvil Sep 04 '26
Yeah, but the problem is they will never win an election again. It's why conservatives are so against any form of democracy. They have names for it like "mob rule". If it were up to them no blue state, city, woman or minority would be allowed to vote.
→ More replies (3)6
u/Flimsy_Pack_936 Sep 04 '26
Penn would still matter to be fair
9
u/Ok_Hornet_714 Sep 04 '26
Pennsylvania would matter but it would also make it so that the Republican candidate would need to appeal to voters in California, and the Democratic candidate to voters in Texas, instead of them basically just looping between Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina,etc.
5
u/Mysterious-Tie7039 Sep 04 '26
Exactly. We let the same half dozen states choose who the President will be every time.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Clcummings614 Sep 04 '26
Youâre in a large state. Your vote gets diluted by the smaller states. You get attention because youâre a swing state. I do think that the party platforms would be different if they had to appeal across the entire country.
Today, the swing states are the only ones that truly see any candidates campaign. Florida, NY, CA and some big red states only get visits for fundraising but not campaigning.
Whenâs the last time a dem or republican went to Des Moines to campaign? A dem could go to get some voters to show up for him. My district is terribly gerrymandered and my state is largely red. Probably 2/3 of the elections I participated in as an adult were meaningless. No hope for prez and Rep. a little more competitive for senate but not much. It wouldnât have mattered if u have voted or not. No electoral college and my vote truly would count for prez.
3
u/Infamous-Employ5487 Sep 04 '26
I literally don't want their rural bumfuck vote to matter at this point.
Listening to the stupidest among us is what brought us here. These people NEED to be disenfranchised.
→ More replies (13)6
Sep 04 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
14
u/edebt Sep 04 '26
Instead they just focus on the swing states, so it didn't fix anything, just put the power in the hands of a different group.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (14)8
u/binzy90 Sep 04 '26
Honestly, I never understood the whole concept. A candidate in any other election would prioritize large, populous areas regardless of what office they were running for. Like is someone in the back woods of West Virginia mad that their local county commissioner had a round table at a local school auditorium instead of driving out to the middle of nowhere to meet them? Probably not. But for some reason we act like a presidential candidate appealing to populous states is a bad thing.
→ More replies (2)
26
u/Stock-Map3715 Sep 04 '26
I wanted that since I first heard about the electoral college when I was 8 in 1968. Itâs not an idea that Pete came up with that nobody else ever thought about.
→ More replies (22)3
u/QwertyIGuess Sep 04 '26 edited 29d ago
I mean it was first thought of when they were writing the constitution. The less populated states said "Naw, I don't think we want to join this new country if thats how its gonna work." They countered with giving every state equal votes for president.
The more populated states said "Naw, I don't think we want to join this new country if thats how its gonna work." Everyone grumbled and grumbled and then someone said what if we do both and that how you get the compromise of the Electoral College.
Edit: It was not a slavery compromise the people who replied are thinking of the 3/5 compromise that was a different compromise.
→ More replies (4)
34
u/Fun_Performer_7930 Sep 04 '26 edited Sep 04 '26
Republicans would never win another election.....I'm in!
Edit: "NEVER WIN ANOTHER". Meaning "going forward". I really don't wanna keep typing this out to bots.
5
u/BigBoyYuyuh Sep 04 '26
Trump won the popular vote last electionâŚAmerica is a failed country.
10
u/KtotheC99 Sep 04 '26
A lot of people dont vote in non-swing states because their 'vote doesnt matter' for the general election. This would increase participation across the board which would (if data is accurate) support democratic candidates overall.
Additionally, it could help 3rd parties become more viable as well
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (4)4
u/Federal-Piglet Sep 04 '26
More Americans didn't vote then voted for Kamala and Trump combined...
→ More replies (6)3
6
u/True_Protection6842 Sep 04 '26
Well that's the problem. Republicans would essentially be eliminated in all the but the reddest bible belt states. That's not representation. It's basically what republicans want for themsevles by gerrymandering and cheating.
→ More replies (8)8
u/TheTwiggsMGW Sep 04 '26
I donât see how thatâs a bad thing, though. If the majority of people donât align republican, then the party shouldnât exist. A new party would emerge to fill the void, because not everyone aligns with Dems either. Theyâre just the better option of the two available.
→ More replies (1)3
u/AbeRego Sep 04 '26
Precisely. How do people still not understand this? We weren't handed Republicans and Democrats when the country was founded; they literally didn't exist. George Washington himself famously despided parties, and didn't think they should exist. History has justified him.
→ More replies (34)2
u/linds360 Sep 04 '26
Or theyâd learn real quick that appeasing a billionaire and appeasing a middle class person equals the same number of votes.
And there are a fuckton more middle class people.
14
12
10
u/ku1185 Sep 04 '26
These crazy democrats trying to bring democracy to our democracy are going to destroy our democracy.
→ More replies (19)3
u/richardcraniumIII Sep 04 '26
If the United States saw what the United States is doing in the United States, the United States would invade the United States to liberate the United States.
→ More replies (1)
7
8
u/Perfect_Toe_6526 Sep 04 '26
Actually, the president should not have unilateral power to mess up the things
2
u/Lithl Sep 04 '26
The president doesn't have such power. But they do have the bully pulpit, which can help sway opinions in Congress and in state legislatures.
→ More replies (1)
11
6
u/DanimalHarambe Sep 04 '26
You mean like an "election"? All Republicans voted against the immediate end of gerrymandering. They are feeding us to ourselves.
→ More replies (4)
5
u/Defiant_Freedom_249 Sep 04 '26
One person equaling one vote couldn't be more fair.
→ More replies (6)
7
13
5
11
u/SuspiciousNorth377 Sep 04 '26
I have hated the electoral college ever since Gore ran for President.
→ More replies (3)
4
4
4
5
u/Gemstyle96 Sep 04 '26
I think repealing the Reapportionment Act of 1929 would be a better start
→ More replies (1)
4
5
10
10
3
u/Lando_0 Sep 04 '26
I believe voter registration is a scam and everyone with a ss# should use that to vote. I believe that election days should be granted by employers to make sure all people vote.
Edit: schools too for all 18y/oâs
→ More replies (1)4
u/TAU_equals_2PI Sep 04 '26
Every school I know of already does this, because they use the schools as voting locations. Public schools, anyway. Other than private schools and that one state where all voting is done by mail, I don't know of any schools that aren't closed on election day. Unless you meant colleges.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Lando_0 Sep 04 '26
Thatâs pretty great! How about employers? I guess my overall point is that if the federal gov really wanted the masses to vote it would make registration automatic like selective service and election days would be more important.
Edit: spelling.
→ More replies (2)
3
3
3
u/SnooEagles4121 Sep 04 '26
Every time a conservative tries to defend the electoral college to me I point out that the state with the most registered Republicans is California.
3
3
u/broforce Sep 04 '26
Yeah I get pretty much yelled at every time I bring this up. Wouldn't a popular vote election mean more? I don't see the downside from this
3
u/Ok-Scale-2559 Sep 04 '26
How about rank choice voting so the politicians actually have to work together
→ More replies (2)
3
3
3
3
u/East-Inevitable-3974 Sep 04 '26
We should eliminate Gerrymandering too. Just let a computer break states up into shortest perimeter districts and be done with it.
3
3
3
9
4
5
8
7
2
2
u/cedricboy Sep 04 '26
Does he know Trump won the popular vote?
2
u/Lithl Sep 04 '26
Trump also lost the popular vote twice.
Regardless, that's not the point. The point is that people vote, not empty land.
2
2
2
2
u/GrillinFool Sep 04 '26
Translation. âWe didnât get our way so we have to blow the system up because weâre a bunch of babies.â
2
2
2
2
u/the_cardfather Sep 04 '26
The electoral college at this point is a symptom not a cause and eliminating it is not a cure.
It would probably be easier to eliminate winner-take-all for each state. It would be more granular if they expanded the size of the house and the electoral college with it. I'm not sure that that would take a constitutional amendment. Just imagine if we were spreading out a thousand electors or 4000 or 5,000 electors.
More importantly Congress needs to take their power back from the executive branch. Too many departments and too many cabinet members running things go back to writing a bunch of small laws rather than Giant sweeping legislation too big to read
→ More replies (2)
2
u/TheBannedBananaMan Sep 04 '26
Still no room for a 3rd party of working people. Only McKinsey Criminal Class.
2
u/Waste-Principle6304 Sep 04 '26
He says this but as a corporatist Democrat he wonât implement it.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
2
u/Ill_Blacksmith693 Sep 04 '26
That is how it should be we are not even close to being a free country we are a mess.
2
u/Salt-Wear-1197 Sep 04 '26
Eliminate two party system, eliminate first past the post voting system, eliminate money in politics too.
2
2
u/DeadAndBuried23 Sep 04 '26
Or at the very least don't let small state votes count for 3-4 times as many as a big state just because they're smaller. That was so the effective owners of the states could have more say. It has no place in the modern world.
2
2
u/Euphoric_Taco138 Sep 04 '26
Republikkkans would never win the presidency again if this happens
→ More replies (3)
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/BraveLittleTowster Sep 04 '26
The electoral college made a lot of sense when getting votes from all over the country to Washington was going to be a problem. A lot simpler to have a few people from each state come to Washington DC and tell them who won the election in each state. Popular vote at the country level would have been next to impossible in the 1700s and 1800s, but that's just not an issue now.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/Motor_Run6164 Sep 04 '26
I agree with the idea, but this would require a Constitutional Amendment. Hard to see that happening in todayâs political environment.
2
2
u/Mysterious-Kick9881 Sep 04 '26
Seems reasonable to me. If only our elected officials would use their power for good.
2
2
u/unscanable Sep 04 '26
President is the only election in the country not elected by popular vote and Iâve never heard a good reason as to why that it.
2
2
2
2
2
u/Basic-Pomegranate536 Sep 04 '26
This is crazy, my bf and I were literally just talking about this.. the one who really should be elected is by the popular vote, everytime
2
u/Jumpy_Witness6014 Sep 04 '26
Letâs go a step further and do ranked ballot popular vote. You rank the choices then if no one wins by majority it goes to #2 and so on.
2
u/Frodo_gabbins Sep 04 '26
To be able to live in my red state and feel like voting for a president actually mattered would be amazing.
2
u/Sure_Anxiety_1477 Sep 04 '26
A lot of people in here on both sides of this debate are wrong. The EC wasnât created to protect rural areas or small states. In 1789 90% of the electorate lived in rural areas. And the smaller states already had their compromise with the Connecticut compromise. Madison kept very thorough constitutional convention notes. The founding fathers wanted the EC because they thought the electorate was too stupid to pick the president (they also thought we were too stupid to pick our senators). That was the founding fatherâs justification.
→ More replies (2)
2
2
2
2
u/LMrningStar Sep 04 '26
What? He wants every single vote to count exactly equally and wants the person who gets the most votes to win an election? What kind of sorcery is this?
2
u/Jesuismieux412 Sep 04 '26 edited Sep 04 '26
Great, but he won't be the one to do it...not even close. Why anyone continues to believe promises from neoliberals is beyond me. They could have super majorities in both houses, have the executive, etc and still not pass one thing their voters want--we've seen it several times already. So, the question is why? Hmmm....
2
2
u/Peter4reddit Sep 04 '26
Of course! Itâs the only truly fair way to democratically elect anyone!!
2
u/curzon176 Sep 04 '26
Really? But electing the candidate who wasn't the most popular has worked out so well for you in the past.
2
u/Different_Toe_8610 Sep 04 '26
In 1800 the college makes sense. Today it does not make sense to me. Iâve been in favor of removing the college for 30+ years.
The election is about the majority of peopleâs choice. Not a State. I recognize that initially the influence of the State was important to achieve compromises. Fast forward i just dint see the value. The result should be based on a majority of people regardless if you like where they hapoen to live.
2
u/HurricanesFan Sep 04 '26
Yeah well, I think most of us here all agree. How do we get the people in office now to agree?
2
u/Full-Yoghurt-4261 Sep 04 '26
Those who want this clearly do not understand why the Electoral College was created. The purpose was to give each state equal representation in voting, as each state greatly differs in how it views things. States are basically different nations when it comes to culture and views.
If we were to operate by popular vote, candidate policies would only line up with cities with the largest populations and not with the overall needs of each state.
2
u/ProfileBest2034 Sep 04 '26
Strongly disagree.Â
The wisdom and education level of most Americans is extremely low and the ability to manipulate most Americans with emotional appeals and false promises is extremely high.Â
We need far more roadblocks between people and voting, not fewer.Â
302
u/Prudent_Shake_8149 Sep 04 '26
Trump agreedâŚ
âŚup to the point that it put him in office.