Did you understand the Electoral College before watching this?
@f.powell8724 Says:
The electoral college is DEI for rurals
@tejanochapin Says:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgsMGwyxkuw
@Book-g7i Says:
The majority of citizens vote democrat,that’s a fact,and the electoral college is republican
@STho205 Says:
The purpose of the EC to the founders is not exactly correct. Article 1 is the compromise of a congress. How a popular direct vote house and state selected senate would be comprosed. The representation included free men, women who could not vote, children who could not vote and bondsmen/wimen/children who could not vote but counted 3/5 for each bonded or enslaved person. The census count did not include Indians who were treated as sovereign of their own tribes...not part of the US.
The congress only met 4 to 5 months of the year so an executive was needed for full time governance.
There was no way in 1787 and no way still today to have a popular vote across state lines equal that compromise hybrid popular and member state math.
So the EC endures. Children still can't vote. Resident aliens still can't vote. However they are part of the math.
A benefit in the early days was that the EC was a one day congress of non politicians that was better informed about candidates than the average citizen.....so
Citizens elected a EC representative who had one job...to relay the majority wishes of their state and district into a vote for President
@crispinfornoff206 Says:
Do you think dems would be pushing for this if the GOP were winning the popular vote?
@dustyk103 Says:
The EC was designed to thwart ballot box stuffing by illegal and illegitimate votes. So NY and CA cannot stuff ten million fraudulent ballots in their boxes and flip national elections negating the votes of all the smaller states.
@rathofturkey Says:
I would say this NPV has already been established. 4 states that Trump had won in 2016, conveniently had just enough votes to give Biden victory in 2020. And these were states that had serious concerns for voter fraud. Georgia’s “water main break” that never actually happened during ballot counting. Pennsylvania’s putting boards up over counting centers and kicking out only conservative count watchers under the excuse of “covid concerns”. Michigan’s “camera equipment boxes” carrying in thousands of “legitimate” ballots in the middle of the night. And 2 years ago, Wisconsin removed several thousand ballots from the 2020 election results because they were found to be invalid.
@chaddisrud535 Says:
It’s funny how prager can’t get enough of the USA federal government in most of its propaganda videos, but, in this video it mentions State sovereignty.
The President of the United States of America is the President of the United States. Each State is a constituent of that union, not individual citizens. The USA are not one “peoples republic”. Many people don’t understand this. A more fair and reasonable way of voting is to give each State an equal amount of votes, say 100 votes. A State could decide how they want to allocate its votes. The most reasonable way would be based on the percentage who was desired by individual voters. so if 45 percent of votes within a state were for x candidate, 50 percent were for y candidate and 5 percent were for z candidate, that’s how the State would cast its 100 votes. The candidate with the most votes out of 5000 wins. Before someone whines about “my vote in New York counts less than my vote in Wyoming”, realize the president of the USA is not the president of the individual citizens of the USA. S/he is the president of the States and serves them directly. The states (which are the constituents) should have equal votes, not the individual citizens of the States.
@aaronfreeman5264 Says:
So NPV incentivices each state to count each vote multiple times?
@chrisspratlin5656 Says:
Even in the states it should be an electoral college system. Each County should have equal to the counties with large cities.
@floodlime8620 Says:
I’m in favor of NPV, although I appreciate this video! It’s good to learn about both sides.
@donovandownes5064 Says:
Wonder why literally no other country uses this system. Somehow, none of the problems addressed in this video seem to bother politically-stable countries which elect their heads of state based on a national popular vote.
@martins.4423 Says:
I'm coming at this from an outsider's perspective, but I always wondered why even those americans in favor of the EC because of it gives more power to small states wouldn't at least consider implementing something like the Maine system everywhere. As much as people like dunking on California, 6 million republicans voted there and I find it concerning that their vote counts for absolutely nothing.
The European Parliament (for all its other flaws) is elected in a way that might preserve the things about the EC people like. It assigns more seats proportionally to smaller member states, but the composition of those seats is decided proportionally by the votes in those states. Under this system, a third of California's electors would be republicans, allowing those people to be heard.
@BeanBag343 Says:
So, what do our votes do then? Do we vote for our candidate or are we choosing someone to vote for us? I'm just confused about how it works.
@benharrison1069 Says:
Support and defend the Electoral College and govetnment issued photo ID requirement to vote in all elections.
@owler69 Says:
They don't have the popular vote.
They voted twice, voted three times, voted on behalf of their family members (even if they're dead), voted without an ID or citizenship, voted as minors, brainwashed to vote, brainlessly voted just because a celeb told them to, got pressured to vote by friends out of fear of being canceled (this mostly happens on the left), used fraudulent ballots, got convinced to change their vote because someone gave them a bottle of water while they were standing in a long line. Many republican ballots found in trash.
@MilanTobdzic Says:
The arguments presented in video are not the typical ones in favor of the Electoral College, which is interesting, but I actually find them even *weaker*
@MilanTobdzic Says:
3:00 You are literally arguing in favor of National elections here 😭
@MilanTobdzic Says:
If Democrats were the ones benefiting from the Electoral College, would PragerU still be defending this absurd and antiquated system? If you answer this honestly, that’s all you need to know…
@ReconViper1 Says:
They don't think they are wiser. They want every election decided by a few large cities because they know Democrats will win every time.
@Mr_Fairdale Says:
NPV sounds like a disease. Probably bc it is.
@EF-69 Says:
The electoral college is an essential part of our system of checks & balances. It's a buffer between the voters and a single person in high office compared to 485 representatives. The problem is 48.5 States implement it incorrectly with a winner take all policy. Were it not for this there would never be a discrepancy between the popular & electoral vote. They could fix this with a Constitutional amendment but that will never happen. States won't choose to fix it. This is about controlling elections & dummycrats and republicants have no intention of giving up this power.
@conservativebrotherdaily8252 Says:
NPV will be the death of the very ‘democracy’ the Dems claim they are for. I personally do not like use of word democracy which is code for majority mob rule. U.S. was founded as a constitutional republic which makes electoral college all the more important to protect.
@TheCodybrown Says:
True democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for dinner.
@oldfarmer9004 Says:
It seems to me that Chicago has determined what happens to everyone else in Illinois for as long as I can remember! The people down state have little or no interest in the cesspool of a city that Chicago has become. Our big fat lying left pandering BILLIONAIRE governor is holding us (the rest of the state) hostage.
My wife and I have been traveling around lately to see what we can. We have seen, out in the western part of the state and most rural areas, more republican base people than democrat. It’s all Chicago democrats ruling the state.
@matthewmiller6979 Says:
You notice how the only states that have signed so far a deep blue, weird...
@mrlarry271 Says:
Even if you did get rid of the electoral college and had the popular vote determine the president solely I don't believe that it would benefit Democrats as much as many liberals believe because more conservatives would come out of the woodwork and vote in these very populated blue states instead of sitting out the election as they would feel like their vote actually counts more nationally now which could pretty much cancel out any upside they thought they had through such an action.
@JB-le7kh Says:
I think each state should be equally represented by the EC, not be based on population densities... Like this video explains, each state has differing rules and processes, so if cheating is, lets say, easier in California, why should they effect a less populated state like Indiana where it's, maybe, hard to cheat? I don't like it. Every state (+ DC) should get 1 electorate vote and 1st to 26 wins!
@jeromemccollom936 Says:
The last point was by far the dumbest, candidates RIGHT NOW, only concentrate in swing states because ONLY those states are in play. ALso candidates spend money on state wide offices not just in the biggest cities but in other areas. Do you really think senate candidates in Texas only campaign in Houston or Dallas? or only put up campaign commercials in those markets? Once again her ideology is more important to her then facts or reality
@jeromemccollom936 Says:
Voter fraud, especially voters impersonating other voters, is exceedingly rare. But if it is that "grave" of a problem, why even have elections. Just make someone a lifetime monarch and power passes down their offspring,, won't have to worry about elections and "voter fraud" ever again.
@jeromemccollom936 Says:
These separate state elections "cannot and do not interfere with each other", other then when the Republican Texas attorney general wants my vote in Wisconsin, plus votes in Pennsylvania and Georgia thrown out in the 2020 election because he didn't like the application of our state laws. So much for that "principle". By the way,, if a state did violate it's own state law, it's not the Texas AG or the federal courts role to jump in
@jeromemccollom936 Says:
If Kamala Harris loses the popular vote and wins the electoral college (which can happen) then I predict many conservatives ] will turn on a dime and oppose the electoral college, once they believe it doesn't help them but hurt them
@jeromemccollom936 Says:
Encourage coalition building, what are you talking about, politicians ignore 80% of the states for the 20%, and sometimes less, of states that are swing states. The vast majority of states are ignored and those states that are not ignored are more likely to have a bigger population then the average state, such as Georgia, Ohio or Michigan. It' like her ideology is more important then basic facts
@terrorists-are-among-us Says:
They're like "We just need criminals fleeing justice to cross the border, plus some terrorists, and all of the entitled people to make demands. They don't need to be productive, they just need to give us power while we promise them free stuff then let them wallow in feces while publishing the photos as the reason government needs more money and power.". The more people they have on the streets, the more will beg for their help. While they laugh all of the way to the bank 🤮 Remember that you're a Bigot 🤡
@jscharlie2350 Says:
I wonder if a legal argument can be made that NPV is unconstitutional
@dazvaz144 Says:
Videos message: stop npv. Great, thanks. How?
@michaelpfister1283 Says:
The key reason is the fact that the elections are decentralized. That point cannot be stressed enough.
@TheJeep1967 Says:
I'd like to see the political leanings of all the people who are pushing NPV. I would think they are all Leftists calling themselves Democrats. NPV is a not very well disguised attempt to manipulate our election system in a way that gives all the power to the big, high population cities to the detriment of everyone else.
@melainewhite6409 Says:
*Here's the flaw nobody sees or at least nobody acknowledges:* election offices _don't_ bother to count such as provisional ballots if they couldn't change an election outcome. A candidate winning the electoral count (and hence the Presidency) but loosing the popular vote may have in reality also won the popular vote because votes for them weren't counted since they won the electoral count anyway.
@billd7453 Says:
A president could promise everything to just a few states and win an election every 4 years. Popular vote is BS. With the Electoral college the small states matter.
@Joemama.. Says:
More right wing propaganda garbage by PragerU
@jackmandu Says:
How about a new movement for a true Electoral College where each Confessional district’s vote goes to the candidate who won and the 2 votes for the state go to the candidate who won the popular vote of the state. That would really shake things up.
@mikemallery913 Says:
Critics cry about small states gaining too much power but really when you looknat how the vote goes, without the EC, the majority of people in 85% of the country broken down to the county level would have no say in the choice for president. The high populations in LA and NY who currently vote the same, would pick our president. If that were the case today, deciding by the popular vote which is swamped by the people in 15% of the country by land, why would the people that live in thebother 85% of the country not want to cut ties to those areas? Our candidates would only need to campaign in NY and LA.
@garciaglz3556 Says:
The idea of the electoral college is for the candidate to care after all and every single state of the union, not just those with lots of people!
@crowmob-yo6ry Says:
I say we need to abolish the winner take all rubbish and adopt a parliamentary system with proportional representation and more than just two parties to choose from.
@JohnNY11205 Says:
Thanks for the info. Now what can be done to stop NPV?
@finalfant111 Says:
Fact is, a national popular vote will basically mean all major cities in the US will become our "National Capitols" that will control the outcome of every election. This will mean that city people will determine what is best for farmers, ranchers, miners, and small towns across the United States. Congratulations, welcome to the hunger games, here are your districts and your capitol will be LA or New York. Anyone that is for a national popular vote need to stop and think for a moment one key point, that applies every where else in the US:
Los Angeles has more people in one metro area of a single state than the entirety of North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas combined. Let that sink in. That one city has more population than 4 ENTIRE STATES. That means the people of a coastal city where the dominant income comes from tech and tourism will determine the policies that will affect people in land locked states that are dominantly agriculture. Those people will have NO voice. EVERY SINGLE PERSON in those states could vote RED and it wouldn't matter. You want to talk about "My votes doesn't matter?" Well with a national vote, that literally would be the case.
@stefansipl6736 Says:
Is this a Trumpists‘ page? How do you assume countries like Germany can survive with a NPV in place?
@jacobbehunin Says:
So what happens if a Republican wins the popular vote in California? Like she said. Do you really think the Leftists in leadership would accept that? I feel like it would get repealed immediately if they happened.
LATEST COMMENTS