(01-12-2019, 07:41 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(01-12-2019, 04:20 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: Not really, you argue for the sake of arguing, molding your position to whatever is expedient for you to continue to be contrarian. The purpose of the EC and our Federalist society is well known and has been the most successful government in human history, we good here instead of taking on the failed concepts of mob rule that you endorse.

Is this thread about the getting rid of the Electoral College or about me?
128,838,342 votes were cast for either Clinton or Trump in 2016.
4% of those were in Illinois.
6% of those were in New York.
10% of them were in California.
All together, those three states accounted for 20% of all votes cast for Clinton or Trump.
You claimed that those three states would control the outcome if we went to a National Popular Vote.  
But even if every voter in those states all voted for the same candidate, that candidate would only have 20% of the nationwide vote.  And Clinton "only" won 63% of those votes - those states would have only got her 13% of the total votes.  
Do you still think those three states control the outcome?
Or would you like to take that argument back?

So I can see why you want to make it about me.  You can win against me.  Tell the other posters I'm just annoying, have a laugh.
But your argument can't defeat this math.