Jesse Ventura Quotes

Our nation is not a fully representative democracy if we do not have a one-person, one-vote method of directly electing our president. It disproportionately tilts favor to smaller states with smaller populations.

The popular choice is not elected as president.

The Electoral College is the ink blot on the Constitution

What is the purpose of the electoral college? It has a few purposes. One, it's to restrain pure democracy. Very good, very important, that's a wonderful thing.

The presidential campaign was oriented toward the way we elect the presidency, Electoral College, not the popular vote. The popular vote doesn't matter. This is not a direct democracy. We have a representative republic, and the popular vote doesn't matter and it never has, by design.

If we didn't have the Electoral College there would have been no George W. Bush presidency. Algore would have been elected. The Democrats have not gotten over that, and they never will get over the recount, the aftermath of that election in 2000. They are still animated by it today. It is a significant portion of the rage and anger they carry around with them every day, so they want to get rid of it.

In my view what you can't argue for is a system that is neither decisive nor proportional and can be indecisive and disproportionate at the same time.

A national primary election would electrify the people and give them a larger stake in the outcome.

If we go by the National Popular Vote, we'll get more people voting.

Last I looked - and I'm not a candidate - but last time I checked reading about the Constitution, the Electoral College has nothing to do with parties, has absolutely nothing to do with parties. It's most states are winners take all.

I guess the President says the majority of the people didn't elect him, he doesn't have to listen to 'em anyway.

The 2012 presidential campaign's turn away from the classic, straight-up, American election - where the candidate who gets the most votes nationwide wins - is another sad reminder of the extreme political polarization distorting today's politics. No one talks about a 50-state strategy for winning the presidency these days.

The Electoral College is an antidemocratic relic.

There are few things we will do in America as important as pulling the lever for President of the United States of America.

The debate is ended. Fifty percent plus one vote is all we need to govern this country.

In a democracy, you can be right and still lose power.

Listen, we elected Warren G. Harding. Anybody has a chance.

Since 2000, I have proposed changing the Constitution so that our popular vote decides the presidency.

Part of the elements of the electoral college is creation. Certainly it was created in slave states and them wanting to balance power, but there's not a specific set of the country always determining who the president is.

The people participate in votes in their states to choose electors to elect the president, but the people don't elect the president. We are not a democracy; we are a democratic republic. We have a representation system of government.

The Electoral College is provided for in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution. More space in the Constitution is devoted to laying out the Electoral College than to any other concept in the document.

When 3 million more people vote for a presidential candidate, but that candidate still loses, the system sucks. Period. It's broken. I think it's broken if the candidate loses by one vote and still wins. Losing by 3 million votes, but still winning the election, is preposterous.

Donald Trump went through the process, he earned the vote, and I am not in support of overturning the will of the voters.

And remember, this was a president (George W. Bush) who was selected by the Supreme Court rather than the people.

Donald Trump got almost 3 million fewer votes than Hillary Clinton! He happened to get more in some of the right places. It was just like one of those things where a stock going up and people impose a false sense of order on it. It's really more intellectually honestly viewed as a disorderly process.