Quote:
Originally Posted by pegwinn
I'm sorry you live in a state where your vote doesn't count at all. I personally believe the "electors" should actually by your congressional rep and the law should require him or her to vote with the population of his/her district.
Actually her vote does count. Since the electors are chosen by the party that wins the nomination and are generally chosen based on their loyalty, they almost always vote the same way that the state votes. There have only been a handful of times when the electors haven't voted the same way as the population, and nowadays that just wouldn't fly.
I'm sorry, I must disagree. Using Jillian as an example, her vote for POTUS doesn't count because she claims to live in one of the non-binding states. How can her vote be considered to count if the electors are not legally bound to honor it. That handful of times is a handful too many IMO. And, it would fly (at least once) because there is no mechanism in place to prevent or punish it.
Quote:
Even though faithless electors have never conspired to fix an election, it doesn't mean it cannot happen. Thus the need to ensure that it cannot.
If the two political parties are conspiring to fix an election, I think we've got larger problems than the electors.
I would tend to agree. But it is within the realm of possibility for the electors to decide to say "hell wit dat" and go on their own. "Thus the need......"
Quote:
Using math the smaller states votes are apparently worth more than yours. Let's remember that your vote for president doesn't count at all unless you are an elector.
Yes, votes in small states ARE worth more than hers (and mine for that matter). Your second statement is incorrect.
I'm sorry, I must disagree. The "value" of the vote is a math issue. It isn't a reality issue. The reality is that smaller states don't have the leverage to make a difference. Hmmmm....... unless all thier electors conspired to...... With respect, you will have to demonstrate that my second statement is incorrect in a factual, practical manner. BTW, I would really love for you to take a shot and prove me wrong. It might go a ways toward removing some of my cynicism.
Quote:
Which means that depending on the smaller state we look at, they could also be worth nothing. Numerical superiority trumps relative value every time. Your state still has more influence in the process than Wyoming.
No, it doesn't. My state has more influence than Wyoming as a whole, but on a per-person basis I don't. I don't really care how much influence the guy down the hall or down the street has, I care how much influence I have.
Fair enough. You don't care. I am cool with that. In that POV this is an apples/oranges thing. But, did you notice that you said I was wrong and then said I was right? Must've been a long day huh?
Quote:
You also mentioned disproportionate representation in the Senate. That's actually a different discussion. There is a thread
It is different, but related. Wyoming is grossly over-represented in the Senate, and the House, it doesn't need to be grossly over-represented in the EC as well.
How so?
Quote:
To put it mildly, a true democracy is nothing more than mob rule. Here are some things that may never have happened had we not maintained a republican form of .gov. BTW I am using those words as descriptors and not as a political party title, Fair nuff?
Yes, Democracy does suck. I am all for a Republic, but the EC doesn't make it a republic, the fact that we vote for representatives to represent us makes it a republic.
I'm sorry, I must disagree but only mildly. The EC is part and parcel of our Republic/Federalist form of government. It's all about checks and balances. BTW, you do know that the only election we were meant to vote in originally was for the House right?
Today was a loooooong day. C'ya round.