*promote I don't think we could promote this video enough. Thank you for this post

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Thursday, November 24th, 2016 1:11pm PST - promote requested by shagen454.

*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by shagen454.

Interesting hypothesis.

She should probably give more credit to the generation above her. It's the same old miscalculation and underestimation I see time and again. The generation above her are just as adaptable, caring, etc as her generation but in different circumstances. They are the ones who brought the world together for her generation to enjoy (they invented just about every high tech thing she enjoys).

Nice condescending line there too, "statistics tell us Trump voters are uneducated". Implying they have no education. Perhaps she should have said less educated.

"Older voters didn't grow up with the internet". True. A group of older voters invented it though. And the rest adapted to using it just fine.

"Teach older folks about climate change". FFS. Really? Perhaps if she looked she'd find that the scientists leading the charge on climate change are "older folks". They've been doing it since before she was born.

"And how to sort out hoaxes on the internet". Like younger people are any better. Lol.

Actually getting a little bored now. She's provided no data to back up anything. Just a stream of consciousness diatribe insulting just about anyone over 40. How thoughtful of her. Not hypocritical at all.

Side note: there was no competition to win the popular vote. You can't win something there is no contest over. Hillary received more of the vote we call the "popular vote". She didn't win anything. Just like you don't win the most yards gained. It is just another metric that has zero bearing on the outcome of the competition.

You don't see a problem with this? I only see a problem in the fact that we did not try to abolish it with Obama. Probably wouldn't have happened. But, not going by the popular vote is undemocratic... fuck the electoral college, everyone's vote should count, I don't give a flying fuck about your rural "underrepresented" state of inbreds. Every vote should count as it is in a democracy....

There is a problem with the first over the line concept, not the representative concept.

A preferential voting system solves this problem. In which case, Hillary still might have lost.

According to what I read, California is among the lowest representatives per voter, not the rural states. The smaller the state, the more representation they get per person...just like in congress.

Right, what I was saying is that rural states have too much representation. But, more importantly what I was implying - is get the hell rid of the electoral college; the very premise is undemocratic.

I am constantly flummoxed by folks' lack of understanding as to the 'why' of the electoral college. Its meant to prevent what's called the 'tyranny of the majority'. Has to become so lop sided that it should be recalibrated? Certainly. Population count increases and decreases should be reflected in the number of electoral college votes, while preserving the initial intent; making sure smaller states have at least some influence and power.

No the electoral college was to prevent those uppity peasants from actually controlling the voting system.