{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by nallimokmok:
3/2/2016 10:44:43 AM
10
How is this fair?!
The worst part in the american system is that a candidate can have less votes than another one but still lose to said candidate: if 26 states are 60/40 for prez 2 and 24 states are 100% for prez one then prez one has 3 440 votes and prez 2 has 1 560 votes. And prez 2 still wins. Thats how -blam!-ed up the system is. Prez 1 had more than twice what prez 2 has but prez 2 still wins because he's got 26 states and prez 1 only has 24 states. Do you see how stupid this is?
-
That's true... Hai
-
The World's not fair but if you want to bend things to your will you need two things, a Bible and tons of Illegally Laundered Money to Blow off on a Nation Sized Mercenary Force.
-
Your math is a little off but I completely agree with your stance. A president can win without winning the popular vote (George Bush for example), and that's ludicrous.
-
-
Edited by StarvinSasquatch: 3/2/2016 5:16:23 PM[b][/b]
-
It's about population size lmao. FYI Cali has a much larger population than Rhode Island. Thus, we get more delegates and electorates.
-
Could you repeat that in English this time?
-
2 RepliesWhat you've described there hasn't got anything to do (specifically) with the Electoral College system, it's much more relevant to constituency-based FPTP systems (e.g. UK).
-
[b][u]ENGERISH MOTHER-blam!-ER DO YOU SPEAK IT!?!?[/u][/b]
-
3 Replies.... what?
