The Electoral College is a racist construct

[Tilly]

Obviously the person you were talking to is an astute student of history......... NOT!!!!!!

Electoral College - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

Thanks for that. Where is the problem then ? Why doesnt the outcome reflect what the people actually want ?

Majority rule (pure democracy) disenfranchises multiple peoples, the most populous states would always control the election results and could (probably would) control all aspects of the federal government dictating to the less populous states. Not really all that fair, the Electoral College balances it out some, not perfect but better than the alternative.

Annoying when that democracy thing doesnt work out for you. As it stands the majority have been disenfranchised by the minority. Its a bizarre way of doing things.

It's another form of Democracy and contrary to popular belief we're not a democracy per se, we are a constitutional democratic republic exercised directly and indirectly through elected representatives making us a combination of a democracy and a republic. Our founding fathers were aware of both monarchies and pure democratic forms of government (ancient Greece), the evils inherent in both and this is what they came up with. So far it's worked quite well even with it's warts and occasional failings. No system of government survives the theoretic perfection when the practical is applied, people are involved........

I appreciate the point you are making but the end of it is that the person who had most votes lost.
Some Americans are seemingly more equal than others under this system.

The UK system is certainly no better when MPs are elected on as little as 24% of the vote and where nearly 4 million votes gets you only 1 seat.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Thanks for that. Where is the problem then ? Why doesnt the outcome reflect what the people actually want ?

Majority rule (pure democracy) disenfranchises multiple peoples, the most populous states would always control the election results and could (probably would) control all aspects of the federal government dictating to the less populous states. Not really all that fair, the Electoral College balances it out some, not perfect but better than the alternative.

Annoying when that democracy thing doesnt work out for you. As it stands the majority have been disenfranchised by the minority. Its a bizarre way of doing things.

It's another form of Democracy and contrary to popular belief we're not a democracy per se, we are a constitutional democratic republic exercised directly and indirectly through elected representatives making us a combination of a democracy and a republic. Our founding fathers were aware of both monarchies and pure democratic forms of government (ancient Greece), the evils inherent in both and this is what they came up with. So far it's worked quite well even with it's warts and occasional failings. No system of government survives the theoretic perfection when the practical is applied, people are involved........

I appreciate the point you are making but the end of it is that the person who had most votes lost.
Some Americans are seemingly more equal than others under this system.

Well your opinion is yours, how you view it is how you view it no matter how wrong your view is. I'm not saying this because I voted for Trump, I didn't, I'm saying this because it's actually a more fair system over all and if Hillary had won instead my view of the system wouldn't change. Heck, I'd be willing to bet if Hillary had received the majority of Electoral College votes you would be defending it against those railing against it.

Not really. It is irrelevant in respect of the recent election because it was fought under those rules.
But looking forward there must be some need for reform to align the actual vote with the outcome.
If people continually vote for one thing and get another then they are apt to feel cheated.

 

[Ringel05]

Majority rule (pure democracy) disenfranchises multiple peoples, the most populous states would always control the election results and could (probably would) control all aspects of the federal government dictating to the less populous states. Not really all that fair, the Electoral College balances it out some, not perfect but better than the alternative.

Annoying when that democracy thing doesnt work out for you. As it stands the majority have been disenfranchised by the minority. Its a bizarre way of doing things.

It's another form of Democracy and contrary to popular belief we're not a democracy per se, we are a constitutional democratic republic exercised directly and indirectly through elected representatives making us a combination of a democracy and a republic. Our founding fathers were aware of both monarchies and pure democratic forms of government (ancient Greece), the evils inherent in both and this is what they came up with. So far it's worked quite well even with it's warts and occasional failings. No system of government survives the theoretic perfection when the practical is applied, people are involved........

I appreciate the point you are making but the end of it is that the person who had most votes lost.
Some Americans are seemingly more equal than others under this system.

Well your opinion is yours, how you view it is how you view it no matter how wrong your view is. I'm not saying this because I voted for Trump, I didn't, I'm saying this because it's actually a more fair system over all and if Hillary had won instead my view of the system wouldn't change. Heck, I'd be willing to bet if Hillary had received the majority of Electoral College votes you would be defending it against those railing against it.

Not really. It is irrelevant in respect of the recent election because it was fought under those rules.
But looking forward there must be some need for reform to align the actual vote with the outcome.
If people continually vote for one thing and get another then they are apt to feel cheated.

Some do feel cheated and some will always feel cheated, such is life.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Thanks for that. Where is the problem then ? Why doesnt the outcome reflect what the people actually want ?

Majority rule (pure democracy) disenfranchises multiple peoples, the most populous states would always control the election results and could (probably would) control all aspects of the federal government dictating to the less populous states. Not really all that fair, the Electoral College balances it out some, not perfect but better than the alternative.

Annoying when that democracy thing doesnt work out for you. As it stands the majority have been disenfranchised by the minority. Its a bizarre way of doing things.

It's another form of Democracy and contrary to popular belief we're not a democracy per se, we are a constitutional democratic republic exercised directly and indirectly through elected representatives making us a combination of a democracy and a republic. Our founding fathers were aware of both monarchies and pure democratic forms of government (ancient Greece), the evils inherent in both and this is what they came up with. So far it's worked quite well even with it's warts and occasional failings. No system of government survives the theoretic perfection when the practical is applied, people are involved........

I appreciate the point you are making but the end of it is that the person who had most votes lost.
Some Americans are seemingly more equal than others under this system.

The UK system is certainly no better when MPs are elected on as little as 24% of the vote and where nearly 4 million votes gets you only 1 seat.

I would agree with that. Many people do not even vote because they feel that their vote is wasted.

 

[Ringel05]

Majority rule (pure democracy) disenfranchises multiple peoples, the most populous states would always control the election results and could (probably would) control all aspects of the federal government dictating to the less populous states. Not really all that fair, the Electoral College balances it out some, not perfect but better than the alternative.

Annoying when that democracy thing doesnt work out for you. As it stands the majority have been disenfranchised by the minority. Its a bizarre way of doing things.

It's another form of Democracy and contrary to popular belief we're not a democracy per se, we are a constitutional democratic republic exercised directly and indirectly through elected representatives making us a combination of a democracy and a republic. Our founding fathers were aware of both monarchies and pure democratic forms of government (ancient Greece), the evils inherent in both and this is what they came up with. So far it's worked quite well even with it's warts and occasional failings. No system of government survives the theoretic perfection when the practical is applied, people are involved........

I appreciate the point you are making but the end of it is that the person who had most votes lost.
Some Americans are seemingly more equal than others under this system.

The UK system is certainly no better when MPs are elected on as little as 24% of the vote and where nearly 4 million votes gets you only 1 seat.

I would agree with that. Many people do not even vote because they feel that their vote is wasted.

That's their problem not mine.

 

[Vastator]

We are a representative republic. Not a democracy. The system is fine, and works as designed.

 

[Yarddog]

Is it ?

I was talking to somebody a few days back and they were assuring me that it is designed to lessen the effect of black votes from urban areas in favour of white voters from more rural areas.

There must be some reason behind a system that doesnt let the winner of an election actually um win.

Obviously the person you were talking to is an astute student of history......... NOT!!!!!!

Electoral College - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

Thanks for that. Where is the problem then ? Why doesnt the outcome reflect what the people actually want ?

Why doesnt the outcome reflect what the people actually want ?

It does. Trump won 30 states, Clinton only 20, and almost 32% more electoral votes than Clinton.

Its bollox though. I understand that Mrs Clinton won 1m more votes than Trump. It sounds like a fix to me.

If those 1m votes were located in just a few large population centers, then it doesn't reflect the will of the entire country. That can also become a form of tyranny when politicians can control those large population centers by offering them benefits. The electoral college prevents something like that from happening. Why not just abolish States altogether then? and just have one mass of citizens known as Americans. This might work in England but not in the US. we are too large and diverse

 

[Unkotare]

Is it ?

I was talking to somebody a few days back and they were assuring me that it is designed to lessen the effect of black votes from urban areas in favour of white voters from more rural areas.

There must be some reason behind a system that doesnt let the winner of an election actually um win.

Obviously the person you were talking to is an astute student of history......... NOT!!!!!!

Electoral College - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

Thanks for that. Where is the problem then ? Why doesnt the outcome reflect what the people actually want ?

It does. If you can't understand our election system, just STFU about it. It's obvious what you're trying to do and why.

 

[Unkotare]

Is it ?

I was talking to somebody a few days back and they were assuring me that it is designed to lessen the effect of black votes from urban areas in favour of white voters from more rural areas.

There must be some reason behind a system that doesnt let the winner of an election actually um win.

Obviously the person you were talking to is an astute student of history......... NOT!!!!!!

Electoral College - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

Thanks for that. Where is the problem then ? Why doesnt the outcome reflect what the people actually want ?

Why doesnt the outcome reflect what the people actually want ?

It does. Trump won 30 states, Clinton only 20, and almost 32% more electoral votes than Clinton.

Its bollox though. I understand that Mrs Clinton won 1m more votes than Trump. It sounds like a fix to me.

Your rump is still sore over Brexit, huh?

 

[Fueri]

There are multiple things about the republic that function like the EC.

the senate, for instance, which has 2 senators per state regardless of population.

All of this caterwauling from the left is simply because they lost an extremely important and pivotal election, but lose it they did.

And to the point of the thread, the 'racist' EC put a black man in office twice. Clinton was a shit candidate, and THAT is why she lost.

 

[Lastamender]

Is it ?

I was talking to somebody a few days back and they were assuring me that it is designed to lessen the effect of black votes from urban areas in favour of white voters from more rural areas.

There must be some reason behind a system that doesnt let the winner of an election actually um win.

Probably because the founding fathers were worried about the Black vote. Oh wait.......