Is it Time for the Electoral College to Go?

[Seawytch]

The Electoral College has long outlived it's usefulness. One of the main reasons the EC was formed was slavery. The southern states liked the fact that their slaves, who would be excluded from a direct vote, would be counted when Electoral College votes were apportioned. (at 3/5ths of course)

Another reason for the EC was our means of communication and "getting the word out". 200 years ago there was no internet or television and the FF were concerned that "the folks" wouldn't know enough about the candidates.

The EC has lost all relevance.

Stop disenfranchising voters and end the EC...

 

[martybegan]

The Electoral College has long outlived it's usefulness. One of the main reasons the EC was formed was slavery. The southern states liked the fact that their slaves, who would be excluded from a direct vote, would be counted when Electoral College votes were apportioned. (at 3/5ths of course)

Another reason for the EC was our means of communication and "getting the word out". 200 years ago there was no internet or television and the FF were concerned that "the folks" wouldn't know enough about the candidates.

The EC has lost all relevance.

Stop disenfranchising voters and end the EC...

So should we end the senate as well?

Slaves were also counted for representation in the house, it just wasn't for EV's.

 

[Full-Auto]

The Electoral College has long outlived it's usefulness. One of the main reasons the EC was formed was slavery. The southern states liked the fact that their slaves, who would be excluded from a direct vote, would be counted when Electoral College votes were apportioned. (at 3/5ths of course)

Another reason for the EC was our means of communication and "getting the word out". 200 years ago there was no internet or television and the FF were concerned that "the folks" wouldn't know enough about the candidates.

The EC has lost all relevance.

Stop disenfranchising voters and end the EC...

Just admit you wish to do away with the republic and move to a pure democracy. Because that is what you are proposing.

 

[Seawytch]

The Electoral College has long outlived it's usefulness. One of the main reasons the EC was formed was slavery. The southern states liked the fact that their slaves, who would be excluded from a direct vote, would be counted when Electoral College votes were apportioned. (at 3/5ths of course)

Another reason for the EC was our means of communication and "getting the word out". 200 years ago there was no internet or television and the FF were concerned that "the folks" wouldn't know enough about the candidates.

The EC has lost all relevance.

Stop disenfranchising voters and end the EC...

Just admit you wish to do away with the republic and move to a pure democracy. Because that is what you are proposing.

Yum, yum...hyperbole for breakfast. My favorite. Goes really well with my coffee...

 

[Sallow]

The Electoral College has long outlived it's usefulness. One of the main reasons the EC was formed was slavery. The southern states liked the fact that their slaves, who would be excluded from a direct vote, would be counted when Electoral College votes were apportioned. (at 3/5ths of course)

Another reason for the EC was our means of communication and "getting the word out". 200 years ago there was no internet or television and the FF were concerned that "the folks" wouldn't know enough about the candidates.

The EC has lost all relevance.

Stop disenfranchising voters and end the EC...

So should we end the senate as well?

Slaves were also counted for representation in the house, it just wasn't for EV's.

The Senate should remain in it's current configuration for the exact purpose of protecting the right of the minority to have a say.

I just don't think that 2 branches of government should be protecting the minority rights of Americans.

The Majority should have more weight.

 

[Full-Auto]

The Electoral College has long outlived it's usefulness. One of the main reasons the EC was formed was slavery. The southern states liked the fact that their slaves, who would be excluded from a direct vote, would be counted when Electoral College votes were apportioned. (at 3/5ths of course)

Another reason for the EC was our means of communication and "getting the word out". 200 years ago there was no internet or television and the FF were concerned that "the folks" wouldn't know enough about the candidates.

The EC has lost all relevance.

Stop disenfranchising voters and end the EC...

Just admit you wish to do away with the republic and move to a pure democracy. Because that is what you are proposing.

Yum, yum...hyperbole for breakfast. My favorite. Goes really well with my coffee...

Cute, but that is what your asking for.

 

[Seawytch]

Just admit you wish to do away with the republic and move to a pure democracy. Because that is what you are proposing.

Yum, yum...hyperbole for breakfast. My favorite. Goes really well with my coffee...

Cute, but that is what your asking for.

No actually, I'm not. I do not support a "pure democracy" and direct voting for everything, just our elected representatives. The reasons the EC were put into place are now moot.

 

[martybegan]

The Electoral College has long outlived it's usefulness. One of the main reasons the EC was formed was slavery. The southern states liked the fact that their slaves, who would be excluded from a direct vote, would be counted when Electoral College votes were apportioned. (at 3/5ths of course)

Another reason for the EC was our means of communication and "getting the word out". 200 years ago there was no internet or television and the FF were concerned that "the folks" wouldn't know enough about the candidates.

The EC has lost all relevance.

Stop disenfranchising voters and end the EC...

So should we end the senate as well?

Slaves were also counted for representation in the house, it just wasn't for EV's.

The Senate should remain in it's current configuration for the exact purpose of protecting the right of the minority to have a say.

I just don't think that 2 branches of government should be protecting the minority rights of Americans.

The Majority should have more weight.

There have been only 2 or 3 times where the "minority" won the election, and in both cases the split was basically 50-50 in the popular vote, down to tenths of a percent.

The president is elected by a preponderance of the states, weighted by population, but normalized to even the spread out. In each state you have a direct vote to determine which candidate your state votes for (or in the case of some states which candidate your district votes for).

There is majority rule in each state or district. Only then does the EC take over and determine who is president by a population weighted poll of each state.

 

[Contumacious]

The Electoral College has long outlived it's usefulness. .

The Electoral College vs. Mob Rule

by Rep. Ron Paul, MD

Today's presidential election is likely to be relatively close, at least in terms of popular vote totals. Should either candidate win the election but lose the overall popular vote, we will be bombarded with calls to abolish the Electoral College, just as we were after the contested 2000 presidential election. After all, the pundits will argue, it would be “undemocratic” to deny the presidency to the man who received the most votes.

This argument is hostile to the Constitution, however, which expressly established the United States as a constitutionally limited republic and not a direct democracy. The Founding Fathers sought to protect certain fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of speech, against the changing whims of popular opinion. Similarly, they created the Electoral College to guard against majority tyranny in federal elections. The president was to be elected by the 50 states rather than the American people directly, to ensure that less populated states had a voice in national elections. This is why they blended Electoral College votes between U.S. House seats, which are based on population, and U.S. Senate seats, which are accorded equally to each state. The goal was to balance the inherent tension between majority will and majority tyranny. "

The Electoral College vs. Mob Rule by Ron Paul

.

 

[martybegan]

Yum, yum...hyperbole for breakfast. My favorite. Goes really well with my coffee...

Cute, but that is what your asking for.

No actually, I'm not. I do not support a "pure democracy" and direct voting for everything, just our elected representatives. The reasons the EC were put into place are now moot.

You keep dodging the sentate question.

 

[Sallow]

So should we end the senate as well?

Slaves were also counted for representation in the house, it just wasn't for EV's.

The Senate should remain in it's current configuration for the exact purpose of protecting the right of the minority to have a say.

I just don't think that 2 branches of government should be protecting the minority rights of Americans.

The Majority should have more weight.

There have been only 2 or 3 times where the "minority" won the election, and in both cases the split was basically 50-50 in the popular vote, down to tenths of a percent.

The president is elected by a preponderance of the states, weighted by population, but normalized to even the spread out. In each state you have a direct vote to determine which candidate your state votes for (or in the case of some states which candidate your district votes for).

There is majority rule in each state or district. Only then does the EC take over and determine who is president by a population weighted poll of each state.

So what's the problem with getting rid of it?

You guys constantly say that the Majority are with you. Yet you consistently move to block votes and keep antiquated counting systems in place...for what exactly?

41% of the people in this country that can vote, do.

That something you guys support?

 

[Seawytch]

Cute, but that is what your asking for.

No actually, I'm not. I do not support a "pure democracy" and direct voting for everything, just our elected representatives. The reasons the EC were put into place are now moot.

You keep dodging the sentate question.

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware there was a question about the Senate. Each state get's two. What's the problem?

 

[martybegan]

No actually, I'm not. I do not support a "pure democracy" and direct voting for everything, just our elected representatives. The reasons the EC were put into place are now moot.

You keep dodging the sentate question.

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware there was a question about the Senate. Each state get's two. What's the problem?

Its the same problem you seem to see with the presidential elections. The representation in the senate is not in proportion to population.

So should the senate be abolished?

 

[Sallow]

This is also why today's Obama supporters want to eliminate the EC. They think it is going to be hard to win the red states and figure they are likely to loose a few of the blue states, but by damned if they can get the popular vote and not have to worry about Florida, Ohio and Texas, they might just be able to steal another election right out from under the countries nose.

Immie

Steal another election? After Gore v. Bush you say that with a straight face?

 

[Seawytch]

You keep dodging the sentate question.

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware there was a question about the Senate. Each state get's two. What's the problem?

Its the same problem you seem to see with the presidential elections. The representation in the senate is not in proportion to population.

So should the senate be abolished?

No. Each state gets two, regardless of population. That's not how the EC is broken up is it? A state with a population of 500,000 get's three EC votes, but a state with 70 times the population does not get 70 times the EC votes does it?

 

[sitarro]

Very much so.

It goes against the types of government they favor..like Monarchy.

LOL Okie dokie TM

Well it sure seems like the case. Time and time again conservatives talk about how the "majority" of Americans support their causes but do their damnest to assure that the real majority of American votes are invalid.

And while they are doing that..they want to make sure it becomes harder for folks to vote.

Some 41% of the people eligible to vote..actually do. It's the lowest amount in countries that are on our level.

So why is that?

Oh yeah..it's because conservatives prefer governments that don't have a democratic element.

The Democrats want to make it easy for the dumbest, laziest, dimwits.... legal or illegal.... pedophiles or murderers, felons of any kind(in prison too) to vote.......that's their constituents. They aren't above driving school buses through black neighborhoods and offering to stop at Churches after they vote, lunch on them......just be sure to remember who is doing you this big favor when you vote.......how incredibly racist and insulting for them to think they can buy those people's vote with a fried chicken dinner........ but they do it in every election.

Conservatives would like to see informed, intelligent people who make sure they are ready to vote and look forward to it every election because it is what this country is about........ they don't need a fried chicken lunch or a bus ride with mouth pieces telling them who to vote for.

 

[NYcarbineer]

As I've said before...we are a federal government system, as in a federation of states.

The Electoral College protects smaller states voices from being drowned out by the larger more populous states.

No it doesn't. The popular vote winner wins almost every time anyway. When has the electoral college really helped the smaller states?

Name all the elections where that happened.

You've missed the point entirely.... as usual.

There is no point if both election methods produce essentially the same results.

 

[Full-Auto]

Yum, yum...hyperbole for breakfast. My favorite. Goes really well with my coffee...

Cute, but that is what your asking for.

No actually, I'm not. I do not support a "pure democracy" and direct voting for everything, just our elected representatives. The reasons the EC were put into place are now moot.

They are as relevant as they were then. You may say you dont support a pure democracy but I havent seen you once speak out against the end around this admin does to congress.

Making you suspect.

 

[NYcarbineer]

We are not a fucking democracy, idiot. We are a Republic.

We are a democracy, retard. Democratic republics are democracies.

In a constitutional republic we have rule of law. You don't have that in anything else.

The states aren't republics. Are you saying we don't have rule of law at the state level?

 

[Ame®icano]

uh huh, its bitch huh?

when it all becomes clear, you've put your faith in a self interested poseur of mediocre talent and intellect. Ahh the humility that requires to swallow eh?

all of sudden, darn, these 230 year old systems, they just don't seem to work.... or, the system is just to big for one man to handle * sniff sniff*...you guys drag this shit out every time you have had your asses handed to you, and you see it coming down the pike again...the electorate gives you the boot....horror of it all..

What in the name of the baby Jesus are you talking about? The guy I voted for won the last presidential election.

oh please, the only time the system ever needs to change is when things go south, you had it all, lost the house, the senate is looking iffy and the pres, well, he's heading for an iceberg.

the media has surfaced this crap and here, you ride right along , this isn't the only thread were in you have made comments that the system is screwed; the evil TP has "taken over" prevented the system ( well really YOUR party ) from doing exactly what it wants, so its time to drag out the shibboleth, the system needs to change, it sux when the worm turns, and exploring a change up in the elec. college, crying about filibusterers, advise and consent confirmations, the supreme court....etc etc ...its all part and parcel of the same whine.

I said it earlier in the post and now again: Every time left wants to change the constitution and generally any rule its for one reason only - to benefit from it in elections.

It's not accident that left started talking about changing rules now. Last midterm election opened their eyes and they realized thing wont go as smooth as they expected in the next election. I think they're afraid of outcome...