Why we still need the Electroral College.

Discussion in 'Election Forums' started by Ray9, Nov 26, 2016.

  1. Ray9
    Offline

    Ray9 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2016
    Messages:
    304
    Thanks Received:
    102
    Trophy Points:
    180
    Ratings:
    +582
    The following is a non-scholarly view of why we have the Electoral College and why we should keep it.


    Once again there is an undercurrent of frustration regarding the Electoral College vs. the popular vote in the United States. This controversy seems to crop up whenever the electoral winner has less popular votes than the electoral loser. Superficially viewed this appears to be an overthrow of the collective will of the people but as with many things in life and politics there are complexities to consider. The founders of our country were wary of the direct election of a president by popular vote because of the fear that a factionalized majority could wield too much power outside its sphere of influence. It was a trust issue and the founders, being well aware of the flaws in the human condition, did not want to place their trust in an electoral process contingent on one man one vote to choose a president.


    When the Electoral College was first proposed news didn’t travel very fast at all and neither did people. The telegraph and telephones had yet to be developed and there were no automobiles or trains so travel and communication between states was a major undertaking exacerbated by the fact that much of the population was illiterate or semi-literate. When our constitution was ratified at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 there were about the same number of people in the United States as there are in Los Angeles, California today, around four million. There were just thirteen states concentrated along the eastern seaboard from north to south. Each state was fiercely independent and distrustful of central authority. It would have been next to impossible for a candidate to get to the people in each state with a coherent, informative campaign.


    The founders had a legitimate concern that individual citizens would lack the necessary information and knowledge to make an informed choice for a president and would vote only for a local candidate resulting in thirteen contenders which would mean the state with the most bodies would elect the president who in turn would have little regard for other states. So it was decided to form a group of electors who did have knowledge and possessed the ability to make decisions on behalf of individual voters so that no state could act to put its foot on scale to influence elections. The Electoral College essentially gave weight to states with lower populations, different customs and varied ideas about how the country should proceed. So the primary concern of the founders was a lack of information.


    If we fast forward to contemporary times we see that we still need the Electoral College but for the exact opposite reason-too much information. The founders had no concept of an information age with satellites, television, computers and a world-wide web of internet connectivity where ideas and opinions can travel at the speed of light. They couldn’t predict jet travel or the rise of mass media. But the Electoral College has evolved as a gift to the people that keeps on giving because it acts as a firewall against the propaganda of an embedded status quo that does not have the interests of average people in mind. It has prevented the factionalized majorities of two states, California and New York from imposing their will on the rest of the people. And it’s a good thing we have it because we still see efforts to topple the will of the states. The propaganda of the establishment has unleashed multitudes of Manchurian-candidate citizens drunk with political correctness onto the states where people want to protect their individual liberties and opinions that don’t reflect the body politic of political correctness.


    Reasonable citizens are horrified at the response of the losing side of this election. They are witnessing brazen attempts to delegitimize a legitimate election. Everything from communists under the bed to the rise of a dictatorship is being thrown at the result. Political correctness has produced a kind of mass delusional paranoia among factions of the electorate and we should be thankful to the founders that we have the Electoral College to counteract the propagandized psychotic-like hysteria that infects our society
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Billy_Kinetta
    Offline

    Billy_Kinetta Paladin of the Lost Hour Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2013
    Messages:
    21,237
    Thanks Received:
    4,168
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +24,580
    The reasons so many are surprised by the Electoral College are that they are incapable of understanding the logic behind it, or never heard of it in the first place.

    This is intentional, of course.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. GHook93
    Offline

    GHook93 Aristotle

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    19,125
    Thanks Received:
    3,310
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +5,945
    We should not go popular vote until we get some tight voter ID laws.

    I think we should keep the electoral colleges but forget the winner take all. Make them based on the voting area.


    Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
     
  4. candycorn
    Offline

    candycorn Alis volat propriis

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    40,025
    Thanks Received:
    4,810
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +13,427
    I think we should keep the EC but add in getting the plurality of the Popular Vote as a requirement to winning the Presidency. Why not make it both the will of the majority of the voters (as shown through the EC) and the will of the plurality of the voters (as shown through) popular vote? If they are in disagreement, the current system we have to where no candidate gets 270 kicks in.
     
  5. Billy_Kinetta
    Offline

    Billy_Kinetta Paladin of the Lost Hour Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2013
    Messages:
    21,237
    Thanks Received:
    4,168
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +24,580
    Unconstitutional.
     
  6. bear513
    Online

    bear513 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2012
    Messages:
    29,973
    Thanks Received:
    3,998
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +18,138
    Why don't we just give them more EC votes? I heard the arguments that people in say wyoming have a more of a voice.
     
  7. EverCurious
    Offline

    EverCurious Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2014
    Messages:
    8,614
    Thanks Received:
    1,449
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Alaska
    Ratings:
    +5,426
    How about no more winner take all AND strict voter eligibility testing of some kind (I personally think voter ID is the easiest but everyone shits kittens over that)

    IF we are going to play with PV then we have to ensure that only citizen's would be voting /and/ we have to ensure that their votes would "count" in the EC. How many R's in CA didn't bother voting because they know they were going blue as a state?
     
  8. Derelict_Drvr
    Offline

    Derelict_Drvr Silver Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2016
    Messages:
    1,113
    Thanks Received:
    197
    Trophy Points:
    90
    Ratings:
    +1,032
    A bit of trivia-

    Since 1789 there have been 57 Presidential elections or re-elections. Of those 57, 8 (Including Hillary v Trump) were not decided by the popular vote.

    There will always be statistical anomalies.
     
  9. Derelict_Drvr
    Offline

    Derelict_Drvr Silver Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2016
    Messages:
    1,113
    Thanks Received:
    197
    Trophy Points:
    90
    Ratings:
    +1,032
    I dunno. By your method, the Party holding the most seats in the House would, of course, choose their candidate, so Trump wins anyway.

    Take the recent election. If the election results were reversed all the way around, Trump would still wins. So, in essence, 2.4 million people + 239 House members would over-rule the votes of a majority of states and their 64 million voters. That doesn't seem quite right,or fair to me either.
     
  10. BuckToothMoron
    Offline

    BuckToothMoron Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2016
    Messages:
    4,784
    Thanks Received:
    836
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Ratings:
    +4,550
    The fact that the spread of news/ media/ information was not readily available at the time is only a very small reason the founders rejected a popular vote in favor of the electoral system. They feared (for good reason) absolute majority rule.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
should we still have electoral college
,
why keep the electoral college
,

why should we keep the electoral college

,
why we need electoral college
,
why we should keep the electoral college
,
why we still need the electoral college