Military Review

The US Senate introduced a bill on direct presidential elections.

70
In the United States continues to show a strong reaction to the victory of Donald Trump during the presidential race. Kerosene in the fire poured "refined" the results of voting in different states. If initially it was reported that Clinton had overtaken her main rival by several tens of thousands of votes, now the data is as follows: Donald Trump’s Democratic nominee has exceeded one million votes over 1. Recall that Trump won the election by the number of electors (290 vs. 232).


The US Senate introduced a bill on direct presidential elections.


Against this background, the senator from the state of California with a militant name Barbara Boxer introduced a bill on direct presidential elections to the upper house of the American parliament. In her opinion, it is necessary to get rid of the “archaic” electoral system, which “does not reflect the real opinion of the population on candidates for the presidency.” It is reported by the news agency TASS.

And where was this Boxer before? ..

Senator Boxer:
This is the only institution where you can get more votes and still lose (in the struggle) for the presidency. The electoral college is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect the state of our modern society, and it should be changed immediately.


In essence, this is a proposal for constitutional reform in the United States. In order for the initiative of Barbara Boxer to pass, it must be supported by at least 75% of the US states, and then both houses of parliament. But that's not all. The whole procedure for amending the American Constitution will be delayed for at least seven years after all bureaucratic nuances have been observed. However, in the midst of American political scientists, skepticism is already expressed today that the Barbara Boxer initiative will be considered during the presidency of Donald Trump.
Photos used:
https://www.facebook.com/DonaldTrump
70 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. hirurg
    hirurg 17 November 2016 13: 47
    +7
    Previously, everything was fine. And then it didn’t go according to plan!
    And where is the guarantee that next time everything will be as it should?
    Or will you change the laws again? And it’s better to change the laws right during the elections !!! Then for sure all the rules will be.
    1. Samen
      Samen 17 November 2016 13: 51
      +41
      From "fresh":
      1. OLD FART
        OLD FART 17 November 2016 14: 02
        +9
        Well, do not tell gentlemen .... Everything was legal! Although you didn’t let our observers go to the polls.! bully

        Bravo Putin!
        1. electrooleg
          electrooleg 17 November 2016 14: 38
          +7
          Barbara Boxer VS Vladimir Judo laughing
    2. Chelentanych
      Chelentanych 17 November 2016 13: 57
      +5
      They will then gradually transfer to the monarchy, and there they will transfer the presidency by inheritance. laughing
      1. DIVAN SOLDIER
        DIVAN SOLDIER 17 November 2016 14: 03
        +7
        Well, at least they will have an intrigue !!! And even before the elections, we know who will win .. it seems that people whom you point your finger at will vote for that. Putin will say that his successor is Ulyukaev, we have 90 percent for Ulyukaev and will vote.
        1. Homo
          Homo 17 November 2016 14: 15
          +10
          Quote: DIVAN SOLDIER
          Well, at least they will have an intrigue !!! And even before the elections, we know who will win .. it seems that people whom you point your finger at will vote for that. Putin will say that his successor is Ulyukaev, we have 90 percent for Ulyukaev and will vote.

          Is that you about yourself? So will you vote? And if not, why do you think of others like that?
        2. Mic1969
          Mic1969 17 November 2016 14: 18
          +3
          The main thing that would not have shown in bulk or Yavlinsky.
      2. Giant thought
        Giant thought 17 November 2016 14: 06
        +5
        No one argues that the electoral system in the United States is archaic, and does not withstand any criticism in comparison with modern systems, but the existing mechanisms for changing this legislation are complicated by their multi-level structure that this change cannot be achieved quickly, even if you really want to.
        1. Homo
          Homo 17 November 2016 14: 16
          +3
          And they have everything archaic and the election system and the change of the election system. laughing
          1. soviet skytourist
            soviet skytourist 17 November 2016 23: 21
            +3
            They have a union of independent states, so voters first vote for their representatives [that is, each state as a separate state], and they, in turn, choose the head of the federation. If the law is adopted, this will be the end of state independence, but most likely they won’t agree [Texas wants independence]. They chose the one who should, the crowd is only extras.
    3. vovanpain
      vovanpain 17 November 2016 14: 01
      +16
      In the United States, a violent reaction to the victories of Donald Trump during the presidential race continues to manifest itself.

      That's what Trump is doing life-giving, Yes, now the whole world is sausage. Well, well.
      1. bouncyhunter
        bouncyhunter 17 November 2016 19: 08
        +5
        Yes, now the whole world is sausage.

        That’s right - they can get the covert, the orphans and the wretched
    4. Vend
      Vend 17 November 2016 14: 07
      +3
      Quote: hirurg
      Previously, everything was fine. And then it didn’t go according to plan!
      And where is the guarantee that next time everything will be as it should?
      Or will you change the laws again? And it’s better to change the laws right during the elections !!! Then for sure all the rules will be.

      About how Democrats got stuck. If another time it is again past the Democrats, they will make another proposal.
      1. atalef
        atalef 17 November 2016 14: 29
        +10
        Quote: Wend
        About how Democrats got stuck. If another time it is again past the Democrats, they will make another proposal

        Well, before that, all the channels in Russia were spreading - in the USA, the elections are not democratic since Gore scored more votes on 40, but Bush won.
        now it’s somehow stopped talking - Trump won (although Hillary won over 1 million more votes)
        to know why in the United States such a form of election - you need to understand their federal structure and how the states joined the United States.
        In the US, each state is a separate state and often the governor (who is elected) has more power than the president.
        so, in order to exclude the discrimination of small (by number) states in the general federal state, electors (state representatives) vote and the more the population in the state - the more votes per elector - why?
        Yes, because then the candidate and the future president (if there was a simple vote count in the national election) did not have to bother with small states at all.
        It would be enough to hold an election campaign in 10 - the largest.
        The small states did not want to put up with such a position because their bf voice in our country simply would not have been heard.
        Therefore, such a system was invented - I think that is right. maybe, it equalizes the chances of 3's with half of the diggers of Alaska and the millions of residents of the same California or Florida.
        1. OLD FART
          OLD FART 17 November 2016 14: 44
          +7
          Clinton spoke today ... poor old woman! A week in a stupor was ..I feel sorry for her husband Bill .. How would he have not accepted Russian citizenship ..)))

          she’s still a bitch ... We’ll take Bill along with Monica, run!
          1. SMikhalych
            SMikhalych 17 November 2016 19: 56
            0
            He will take the poison faster, or, at worst (not the one he has somewhere there), he will lay the viscar bubble behind his collar than he will think about Russian citizenship)))
            But the snake just hypnotically acts on him yes
        2. dumpy15
          dumpy15 17 November 2016 16: 19
          +3
          I agree with you. I add that the proposed changes to the electoral system
          will lead to a sharp decline in the role of WASP and the inevitable, due to the numerical superiority, political dominance of the Latin American and African American populations.
        3. Camel
          Camel 17 November 2016 22: 43
          +1
          Well, let's just say, it doesn’t quite equalize - the price of the Wyoming elector: 94718 votes per share, but in California the price is different - 70546 per share. But, in Wyoming, you need to huddle approx. half a million voters, and in California there are more than 30 million, and the gap is clearly disproportionate - it’s easier to just occupy the small states (but many) and drive them into the w .. mm .. fellow to nowhere) competitors.
        4. Sergej1972
          Sergej1972 17 November 2016 23: 10
          +1
          Not certainly in that way. The share of small states is overstated in the electoral college, but not so much. The number of state electors is equal to the number of members of the House of Representatives and the Senate. There are 55 electors from California, from small states 3-4 electors. And yes, presidential candidates mostly rely on large and medium states.
          In most states, the power of the governor is weaker than the power of the president of the United States at the federation level. The fact is that at the state level the principle of separation of powers is not carried out not so consistently as at the federal level. In addition, in most states, other officials are elected in parallel with the governor by the population and / or state congresses.
      2. Zulu_S
        Zulu_S 17 November 2016 23: 55
        0
        By the way, this is the second time (over the past 12 years), and again the Democrats have washed away. In 2004, Bush Jr. was elected instead of Kerry, although the majority of voters voted for Kerry, but Bush had more electors. This time it's the same story. And they, damn it, are trying to teach us democracy? At "" "bki, definitely!
    5. kitamo
      kitamo 18 November 2016 10: 35
      0
      Quote: hirurg
      Or will you change the laws again? And it’s better to change the laws right during the elections !!! Then for sure all the rules will be.


      it’s better to change the laws after the elections, but before the announcement of their result, then everything will be fine normally ...
  2. oleg-gr
    oleg-gr 17 November 2016 13: 47
    +6
    How interesting! Inferior democracy, however. Awareness came after more than two hundred years of the existence of the state. This is speed ...
    1. The black
      The black 17 November 2016 13: 57
      +4
      It is not that simple. This bill will require changes in the US Constitution, and there they are very scrupulous. So I think that this issue is very difficult to solve ...
      1. alex73s
        alex73s 17 November 2016 14: 21
        +2
        Quote: Black
        It is not that simple. This bill will require changes in the US Constitution, and there they are very scrupulous. So I think that this issue is very difficult to solve ...


        You are right, who suggested amending the Constitution, they quickly ended their political careers
    2. DMoroz
      DMoroz 17 November 2016 14: 03
      +4
      So they bear defective democracy all over the world? Let then no one else is taught how to build it, if they do not have their own full-fledged ...
    3. Azim77
      Azim77 17 November 2016 16: 00
      0
      Of course inferior. They don’t even have opposition. There is no one to give cookies to.
    4. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 17 November 2016 17: 05
      +2
      They value stability in Russia, right?
      When the political system of presidential elections works 250 years without failures
      (coups, revolutions, coups), this is called stability.
      When in the USA it is possible to bring to the bank the hundred-year-old dollars found
      in the attic, and they will be taken into account, this is called stability.
      It turns out that the USA is the most stable country in the world. wink
      1. Volodin
        Volodin 17 November 2016 17: 31
        +8
        Quote: voyaka uh
        It turns out that the USA is the most stable country in the world.


        It turns out that this is so ... But the stability of the United States is maintained at the expense of maintaining instability in others, and you yourself know that very well.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 17 November 2016 18: 16
          +1
          Well, they have many allies: Japan, England, Australia, Canada, Germany, Italy, Holland ... a long list. These do not complain about America.
          They have good relations with India ... even reconciled with Vietnam.
          But not to please everyone, of course request .
          1. Navigator Basov
            Navigator Basov 18 November 2016 00: 01
            0
            Mother / grandmother England, cousin-criminal Australia, sister sister Canada - all fragments of the same empire; the rest are “allies” under the duty of occupation, who again built under the strict guidance of the Fourth Reich, now the economic way (learned). Who is there to complain? Italy, Japan, Holland complained at the end of the 1930's, or what? At the same time, US support is issued for the entire progressive world.
            https://topwar.ru/8612-chetvertyy-reyh-i-evraziys
            kiy-soyuz.html
          2. Arameev
            Arameev 18 November 2016 00: 32
            +1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            These do not complain about America.

            about Europeans (with the exception of England), I would not say so unambiguously wink
      2. dima-fesko
        dima-fesko 17 November 2016 18: 46
        +1
        As in the old joke:
        There are 2 comrades. How are you? Everything is bad: there are problems at work, my mother-in-law was tortured, there is no health, children of spinal nodules, etc. And you have? Similarly!
        Meet after a certain time! How are you? You know, there is a certain stability .....
      3. Zulu_S
        Zulu_S 17 November 2016 23: 59
        0
        And the Civil War in the XlX century does not count ?!
      4. kitamo
        kitamo 18 November 2016 10: 56
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        It turns out that the USA is the most stable country in the world. wink


        slavery was abolished, blacks and other Jews were given civil rights ... Lynch court was canceled ...
        not ... stability there and does not smell ...
  3. Monos
    Monos 17 November 2016 13: 49
    +12
    which does not reflect the state of our modern society, and it must be immediately changed.


    Still does not reflect! Here is an interesting infographic I found:



    I think everything is clear and without translation.
    1. soviet skytourist
      soviet skytourist 17 November 2016 23: 32
      0
      Who will be president and when crises and terrorist acts will be solved long ago does not always work, but so far it works.
  4. Scoun
    Scoun 17 November 2016 13: 49
    +2
    Colleagues from the design department doubt that the amendment will give a ride)))
    He looked, she’s from the camp of the Democrats, and now the Republicans have the majority and have little faith in what they will give rise to this bill ...
    Although who knows, if they begin to support the riots in every possible way ... then it might take a ride in order to calm the rebellious guardianship. )))
    Barbara Boxer is among the most liberal US senators. References
    1. Sagittarius
      Sagittarius 17 November 2016 14: 52
      +1
      Actually, the US election system needs to be changed, otherwise the 21st century will be outside, and here the 18th century electoral system.
      1. Zulu_S
        Zulu_S 18 November 2016 00: 02
        +1
        Yes, to hell with them, let them choose as they want, and whom they want! The main thing is that YOU DON'T CARE WITH US with your sermons!
  5. dik-nsk
    dik-nsk 17 November 2016 13: 55
    +5
    it is necessary to get rid of the "archaic" electoral system

    But is it anything that Trump called this system undemocratic even during the election campaign, and the clique sang along with Clinton, who approved everything?
    ps Trump will also go down in history as the president who changed the electoral system, will rise to the level with Roosevelt (after all, only after electing him 3 times, they made a change to the US constitution, and the ban prohibits more than 2 elections)
    1. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 17 November 2016 23: 12
      +1
      Roosevelt was elected 4 times.
  6. gabonskijfront
    gabonskijfront 17 November 2016 13: 59
    +5
    Goodbye America, this is not the country that we loved in childhood, the country of brutal cowboys, blue jeans and "rockerol". This is the country of homosexual meat, Latin American drug trafficking and black turnips.
    1. Volodin
      Volodin 17 November 2016 14: 15
      +5
      Quote: gabonskijfront
      America, this is not the country that we loved in childhood,


      Heavy you had a childhood ...
      1. lis-ik
        lis-ik 17 November 2016 14: 29
        +1
        And it seems to me that the person was simply nostalgic with the song "Nautilus" Goodbye America .... and nothing more.
    2. Zulu_S
      Zulu_S 18 November 2016 00: 10
      +2
      Brother, scratch your turnip, or whatever you itch, and next time do not write to Avboy. That's right - a cOvboy, from "cow" - a cow. And in order not to itch too much, remember: the ditties of the American blacks and all our timati are called rap.
  7. cedar
    cedar 17 November 2016 14: 02
    +3
    This shrewd electoral system in America is modestly called "indirect democracy."
    And this curve in an arc of "democracy" Amrekan plutocrats climb to establish everywhere and everywhere.
    We got to Russia ...
    1. soviet skytourist
      soviet skytourist 17 November 2016 23: 48
      0
      is called modestly - "indirect democracy".
      It’s for sure who will allow the people to bother themselves with democracy.
  8. Altona
    Altona 17 November 2016 14: 03
    +5
    Late to drink Borjomi. In addition, the introduction of such cardinal innovations in fundamental laws can cause tectonic shifts in other provisions of American law. This can cause a split in society. That is, not everything is so simple. This time, propaganda worked according to the number of population, next time it will work differently. Then they considered fair the proportional principle, now majority. Some states may simply rebel, who already do not consider the feds to be representatives of their state. Maybe they seem to some to be marginalized, but they are well-armed marginalized. For example, out of 4000 people in the town of Lula in Georgia, about 2500 are Georgia’s people's militia (note that in Georgia a citizen must have 2 12-caliber barrels to protect his family and hunt). Got it, Carl! That is, only in little Lula we have 2 full regiments. So Ferguson will seem to the federals simply a nirvana in comparison with what they can arrange for the Baptist communities of Georgia, which have huts in abandoned mountain farms.
  9. Vadim237
    Vadim237 17 November 2016 14: 05
    +7
    Something tells us that these constantly changing, upward, the number of votes of Clinton's voters is an ordinary information crap, like all election forecasts, that she will win.
  10. Engineer
    Engineer 17 November 2016 14: 05
    +4
    Will not pass. This system was invented by the founding fathers, and this is sacred in the United States. Moreover, this is not the first time a president has come to power with fewer goals among the population.
    1. EvgNik
      EvgNik 17 November 2016 14: 28
      +3
      Quote: Engineer
      Moreover, this is not the first time the president comes to power, fewer goals in the population.

      Shrinkage, shaking, juggling.
      I really wanted to fight.
  11. Lelek
    Lelek 17 November 2016 14: 21
    +2
    [Quote] [/ quote]

    For what they fought, they stumbled on that. America loudly declared the perfection of its electoral system, now came to its senses, having received a click on the nose. Only this "epiphany" has a bad smell on the eve of the inauguration of the new president. yes
  12. jovanni
    jovanni 17 November 2016 14: 32
    +1
    Oh look, and the Americans are gradually starting to move towards democracy! Rather, they want to start moving. True, not all, but for now, boxers ...
  13. uskrabut
    uskrabut 17 November 2016 14: 37
    +4
    "In her opinion, it is necessary to get rid of the 'archaic' electoral system, which" does not reflect the real opinion of the population on candidates for the presidency "

    C'mon! Well this is the most democratic procedure in the world, pa-ta-mu-shta a-mi-ri-kan-ska-i !!!
    1. soviet skytourist
      soviet skytourist 17 November 2016 23: 52
      0
      The rest also vote for the one who is promoted on TV, and who probably doesn’t decide to show on TV.
  14. japs
    japs 17 November 2016 14: 46
    +7
    It's too late to drink Borjomi when the eggs have fallen off.
  15. Taygerus
    Taygerus 17 November 2016 14: 55
    +1
    late the train has already left laughing
  16. Polite Moose
    Polite Moose 17 November 2016 14: 57
    +2
    "... it is necessary to get rid of the" archaic "electoral system, which" does not reflect the real opinion of the population on candidates for the presidency. "

    The electors had to be chosen more selectively and carefully. Put work with an asset at the forefront. The democrats got used to it. To pour mud on Stalin. Let them now try to refute his thesis: "Cadres decide everything."
  17. mamont5
    mamont5 17 November 2016 16: 53
    0
    Quote: Wend
    Quote: hirurg
    Previously, everything was fine. And then it didn’t go according to plan!
    And where is the guarantee that next time everything will be as it should?
    Or will you change the laws again? And it’s better to change the laws right during the elections !!! Then for sure all the rules will be.

    About how Democrats got stuck. If another time it is again past the Democrats, they will make another proposal.

    In principle, the proposal is worthwhile (US elections are anochranism), but ... there will be other elections - there will be a different strategy.
  18. unsinkable
    unsinkable 17 November 2016 18: 11
    0
    Quote: atalef
    invented such a system

    Dear Atalef, this is a policy where there is practically no truth. But we still speak about the imperfection of the US electoral system, but we do not hide our satisfaction from Trump’s win. Of the two evils, we won the least. (While we think so). And about I think of the electoral system this way: buying a dozen or two electoral votes is easier than a million or two direct voters. Your sympathies are visible with the naked eye. You immediately believed Ms. Clinton’s supporters that it was a million more votes that they took. It is possible. But where facts? hi And let me ask: * Have you pulled into Israel from Russia or from the United States? *
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null 17 November 2016 18: 18
      0
      Quote: unsinkable
      it’s easier to buy a dozen or two more votes than a million or two direct voters

      - electors do not vote "against the grain" (against the will of the voters, that is)
      - there are two ways to vote for electors in a particular state: "winner-take-all" (which is mainly used) and "in proportion to the votes of voters"
      - I think it’s clear from the names that in any case, the election is determined by which candidate won (or by the division of the votes between the candidates) in the state from which these same electors
      - so what about "buy" - this is you ... request
      1. Sergej1972
        Sergej1972 17 November 2016 23: 18
        0
        The second way is when half or a little more of the electors are elected on a winner-take-all basis, and half or slightly less in single-member constituencies. This system is rather semi-proportional. Yes, a minority in the state electoral college is represented. But, ultimately, its representation is still underestimated, and the representation of the party that came out on top is greatly overestimated.
        1. Cat man null
          Cat man null 17 November 2016 23: 21
          0
          Quote: Sergej1972
          The second way is when half or a little more electors is elected on a winner-take-all basis, and half or slightly less in single-member constituencies ...

          Quote: Cat Man Null
          ... there are two ways voting electors ...

          - Do not you think that we are a little about different things are we talking?
  19. Altona
    Altona 17 November 2016 18: 57
    0
    Quote: Scoun
    Although who knows, if they begin to support the riots in every possible way ... then it might take a ride in order to calm the rebellious guardianship. )))

    ------------------------------------
    The people have the right to overthrow an objectionable Government. So, they rebel quite legally.
  20. Altona
    Altona 17 November 2016 19: 01
    0
    Quote: oleg-gr
    How interesting! Inferior democracy, however. Awareness came after more than two hundred years of the existence of the state. This is speed ...

    ---------------------------------
    Why defective? But was it different in the USSR? Same. Otherwise, the RSFSR would have nafig sent to all sorts of Georgia and the Baltic states, which hang out with fashionable pants and wads of money.
  21. bald
    bald 17 November 2016 21: 04
    0
    And the mess went. Oh well. Isn't it time to take up the mind.
  22. Erg
    Erg 18 November 2016 00: 17
    0
    That's it - the train left, I took away the gifts wassat Anyone who is against has the right to "remain silent" ... laughing
  23. MarioG
    MarioG 18 November 2016 00: 52
    +1
    Republicans are the majority, a lady can even dug around with her notes
  24. Arameev
    Arameev 18 November 2016 01: 06
    0
    For Barbara Boxer's initiative to pass, it must be supported by at least 75% of the US states, and then both houses of parliament. But that is not all. The entire procedure for amending the American constitution will drag out for at least seven years after all bureaucratic nuances are observed

    ndya-aaa ... the founding fathers made the constitutional amendment procedure as complicated as possible, and rightly so. the truth, provided that it is carefully worked out when accepted.