this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2026
45 points (100.0% liked)
Slop.
832 readers
578 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
?
Electoral college is a technicality, Hilary won the popular vote
it's not a technicality it's the whole thing
ok but it seems to me as an outsider though if you have a vote that someone wins then you have another layer on the vote that ensures slave owners control the country that is a technicality. Death to the USA
just the system working as designed. If you hate yourself and want to read correspondence from the bourgeoise founders of the state, several of them were anti-democracy and designed things to keep the rabble under control.
George Washington rabidly foaming at the mouth that Governor Dunmore encouraging slaves to seek freedom was the greatest threat to liberty. They weren't interested in equality. They were only interested in being the ones in power.
They don't teach that here
That's true but I also think technicality is a fair word for it, even though it fails to capture just how depraved the system was
technicality to me connotes an obscure detail. all the news coverage is full electoral vote maps and 270 to win etc.
in this frame the technicality would be that people actually vote for a slate of electors who then vote for who gets the state's electoral votes, and they are allowed to do chicanery in between you filling in an oval and the points actually being assigned to candidates, but there have been almost zero faithless electors historically.
Yeah I'm not disagreeing, I just think it's fair to believe it's bullshit that the person with the most votes doesn't win.
it's especially bullshit after the civil war was partially resolved. It maybe made more sense when the states were meant to be more independent, but (speaking with extreme liberalism) they should've gotten rid of it when they changed to direct election of senators.
Technically
No, that's just what the election is. Just because it should work by popular vote doesn't mean it not doing so is a technicality, it just means it's a bad system for our purposes.
Sure whatever you say. Fuck the English language and I resent knowing it to be employed.