• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Moscow Mitch, Leningrad Lindsey and I’ll frown at you are all in trouble

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


Feb 15, 2002
If California had gone red would that have changed the outcome? What if Texas went blue, you think that would have made a difference? By your logic we can say that any state with enough EC votes to change the election is the only one that mattered. You can chop the numbers any way you want, but the bottom line is the EC worked exactly as it was intended to.
Actually, if it had worked as originally intended, Trump would not be President.


No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
That's incorrect. It's not an unintended consequence as that's how the system was designed. Everyone knew it was a possible outcome since the day it was written down. What we're seeing in recent elections is greater political polarization, not a failure of the system.
It was designed to accommodate slave states. When the EC & the popular vote don't agree, it allows minority rule & denies legitimacy to the winner in the eyes of the majority. That's extremely problematical when the winner has an unpopular right wing agenda, like Trump.