Candycorn's Idea for Changing the Way We Elect Candidates For President.

[jotathought]

Then why didn't they use the same electoral college system, for governors, senators or congress people?

Because each office serves a different purpose: Governors and legislators represent the people within a state. The President represents the union of states.

The Electoral College wasn’t about convenience — it was about balance. It ensures that small states have a voice and prevents a handful of large states or cities from deciding every election. That’s federalism by design, not accident.

 

[MarathonMike]

I'm too buzzed right now to reply to this, but I'll get back to it tomorrow.. I think. lol

Why wait? Some say drugs make you more creative than you really are.

 

[candycorn]

Because each office serves a different purpose: Governors and legislators represent the people within a state. The President represents the union of states.

The Electoral College wasn’t about convenience — it was about balance. It ensures that small states have a voice and prevents a handful of large states or cities from deciding every election. That’s federalism by design, not accident.

The electoral college would still decide but do so in partnership with the plurality of the voters. In the 50+ elections we've had, the candidate that received the most votes and the candidate that received the most electoral college votes was the same candidate like 95% of the time. The stipulation that the President receive more votes by the voters will change very little in terms of outcomes. Additionally, it will drive up voter participating since voters will now have a direct impact on the election..

 

[jotathought]

The electoral college would still decide but do so in partnership with the plurality of the voters. In the 50+ elections we've had, the candidate that received the most votes and the candidate that received the most electoral college votes was the same candidate like 95% of the time. The stipulation that the President receive more votes by the voters will change very little in terms of outcomes. Additionally, it will drive up voter participating since voters will now have a direct impact on the election..

That 95% alignment is proof the Electoral College already works. The point isn’t to chase a perfect match — it’s to make sure presidents represent states and citizens, not just the biggest cities.

 

[fncceo]

I think we need to revamp the system by which we elect Presidents.

I think it's working just GREAT!

 

[candycorn]

That 95% alignment is proof the Electoral College already works. The point isn’t to chase a perfect match — it’s to make sure presidents represent states and citizens, not just the biggest cities.

They would not represent "just the biggest cities" since they would have to win the electoral college as well; just as they have done since 1792. Only now they will also have to get a plurality of the votes cast.



Just out of curiosity...

what do you think of getting an odd number of electors on the board to prevent a tie in our two-party system?

what do you think about having 5 super tuesdays set up regionally so more voters get to weigh in on the candidates instead of having IA and New Hampshire weed them out as they often do now?

 

[shockedcanadian]

I think we need to revamp the system by which we elect Presidents.

First and foremost we need to change the number of electoral votes to an odd number. Having the possibility of a tie (269 to 269) is just stupid.

Secondly, we need to expand the requirements to become President Elect from a simple majority of the electoral college (currently 270) to also include a plurality of the popular vote (more votes than anyone else on the ballot nationwide). In this day and age, the will of the people can be known well before the mid-December deadline. If there is a disagreement between the electoral college winner and the popular vote winner, the parameters of the 12 amendment kick in to decide who is the President-elect.

Lastly, the scheduling of state primaries to award delegates is mind bogglingly idiotic. Iowa or South Carolina, New Hampshire, Nevada…these 3 states get to weed out a very high percentage of candidates before larger populations get to weigh in on their efficacy. What I propose is not one super Tuesday but five of them involving 9-11 states each.

On the 2nd Tuesday in January, February, March, April and May have 9-11 states go to the polls at once. Have the 2nd Tuesday in June as a stand-by in case there are states who couldn’t hold the elections on schedule due to blizzards, tropical storms, etc… Just as an example… (remember this is for the primaries)

January: ME, NH, MA, CT, RI, NY, NJ, PA, DE

February: WA, CA, OR, HI, AK, AZ, NV, ID, UT, MT, WY, NM

March: FL, GA, SC, NC, MD, VA, WVA, KY, TN, AL, MS

April: TX, AR, OK, CO, KS, NE, ND, SD, LA,

May; IL, MN, WI, MI, OH, IN, IA, MO,

States with over 10M in population are listed in bold. You spread out the votes between urban and rural, between large cities and small towns, between industrial and agrarian, between coastal (when you can) and landlocked. Candidates no longer have to jump through hoops to please a single demographic and can play to their strengths.

Money decides governments in the West, it's worse in America than anywhere else.

Without term limits in your congress your democracy is also for sale.

The more I listen to opinions from just the average citizen or historian the less confident I am in the Wests survival and ability to remain free.

The E.C is the best in the world (if with I.D and in person voting), but the big money in the process and media influence skews it in my opinion

 

[jotathought]

They would not represent "just the biggest cities" since they would have to win the electoral college as well; just as they have done since 1792. Only now they will also have to get a plurality of the votes cast.



Just out of curiosity...

what do you think of getting an odd number of electors on the board to prevent a tie in our two-party system?

what do you think about having 5 super tuesdays set up regionally so more voters get to weigh in on the candidates instead of having IA and New Hampshire weed them out as they often do now?

I have responded to these inquiries ..

• If the electoral college were not in place, the "biggest cities" would decide who the president was.
• Odd number of electoral votes goes to the House of Representatives, where each state still has an equal vote.
• Super Tuesday isn't an electoral college issue. It's how each party manages its nomination process, which can be adjusted, and doesn't require how we select a presidential candidate

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Because each office serves a different purpose: Governors and legislators represent the people within a state. The President represents the union of states.

No shit.I

The Electoral College wasn’t about convenience — it was about balance. It ensures that small states have a voice

They do have a voice, they're called congress people and senators.

and prevents a handful of large states or cities from deciding every election.

They do that now.

Seven swing states set to decide the 2024 US election​

BBC
https://www.bbc.com › news › articles
Oct 31, 2024 — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin could be pivotal in the vote.

That’s federalism by design, not accident.

Yes it was.
An outdated design.


They could easily have electors from the states county commissioners to decide the vote for governors, senators and congress people.

 

[Correll]

You're FOS, TRAITOR.

Who tried to overthrow an election?
Trump and his stupid, gullible cult.

Who is trying to overthrow the next one?

Trump on Texas redistricting: 'We are entitled to 5 more seats'​

View attachment 1188404
Politico
https://www.politico.com › news › 2025/08/05 › trump...
Aug 5, 2025 — Democrats are trying to block the redraw in the state by denying the state legislature a quorum.

That you, your dear leader and his treasonous, gas lighting cult.

Give it up leftard shit talker.

Gerrymandering has been a rule of the game forever. If you want to change it, come up with a plan that doesn't benefit either side and I....


NO, **** that, I'm not open to discussing it now. Right now the important thing to do, is to purge you leftards from civilization.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Give it up leftard shit talker.

As usual, you're FOS.

Redrawing congressional districts take place AFTER a census.

Gerrymandering has been a rule of the game forever. If you want to change it, come up with a plan that doesn't benefit either side and I....

• Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, Montana, and Washington: These seven states have independent citizen commissions with the final authority to draw electoral district maps, free from direct political control.

NO, **** that, I'm not open to discussing it now. Right now the important thing to do, is to purge you leftards from civilization.

Just save yourself the time and aggravation, your utopia awaits, nut job..........

Aeroflot – Russian Airlines: buy air tickets online, book and ...​

Aeroflot
https://www.aeroflot.com
+7 (495) 223-55-55SUAeroflot is among the world's oldest airlines and one of Russia's most recognized brands. It has been named the world's strongest airline ...

 

[jotathought]

They do have a voice, they're called congress people and senators.

Congress gives states a voice in lawmaking. The Electoral College gives them a voice in who leads the nation.

They do that now.

Seven swing states set to decide the 2024 US election​

View attachment 1188770
BBC
https://www.bbc.com › news › articles
Oct 31, 2024 — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin could be pivotal in the vote.

Exactly — and that’s the beauty of the Electoral College -- it forces campaigns to win support across multiple regions, not just rack up votes in the biggest states. Without it, only California, Texas, Florida, and New York would decide every election -- and swing states shift over time.

Yes it was.
An outdated design.


They could easily have electors from the states county commissioners to decide the vote for governors, senators and congress people.

So your fix for “outdated” federalism is… turning every state election into a mini Electoral College? Sounds like progress!!! You’re proving you don’t understand American federalism — the Constitution separates federal and state sovereignty for a reason -- genius.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Congress gives states a voice in lawmaking. The Electoral College gives them a voice in who leads the nation.


Exactly — and that’s the beauty of the Electoral College -- it forces campaigns to win support across multiple regions, not just rack up votes in the biggest states. Without it, only California, Texas, Florida, and New York would decide every election -- and swing states shift over time.


So your fix for “outdated” federalism is… turning every state election into a mini Electoral College? Sounds like progress!!! You’re proving you don’t understand American federalism — the Constitution separates federal and state sovereignty for a reason -- genius.

No, you dumb shit.

Get rid of the electoral college system, period.

If the popular vote is good enough for governors, senators congress people, and every other country on earth, it's good enough for electing a president.

 

[jotathought]

No, you dumb shit.

Get rid of the electoral college system, period.

If the popular vote is good enough for governors, senators congress people, and every other country on earth, it's good enough for electing a president.

“Every other country” — you mean the ones that aren’t even democracies? We’re a republic, genius. Built to prevent the kind of dumb-fuckery like yours that mistakes mob rule for leadership.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

“Every other country” — you mean the ones that aren’t even democracies?

WTF?
Holy ****, you're an idiot.

We’re a republic, genius.

So, how does their voting work?

Built to prevent the kind of dumb-fuckery like yours that mistakes mob rule for leadership.

Like your dear leader and his cult.

What contest in any country, are won by the person who didn't get the most votes?
The governor?
The senator?
The congress person?
State senator?
County commissioner?
Class president?
MVP of a football game?
Number one song on billboard?

 

[jotathought]

WTF?
Holy ****, you're an idiot.

So, how does their voting work?

Like your dear leader and his cult.

What contest in any country, are won by the person who didn't get the most votes?
The governor?
The senator?
The congress person?
State senator?
County commissioner?
Class president?
MVP of a football game?
Number one song on billboard?

Most votes wins” — correct, within each state. That’s the point. You’re mixing up democratic government with democracy, which is exactly what the Electoral College prevents.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Most votes wins” — correct, within each state. That’s the point. You’re mixing up democratic government with democracy,

WTF?

WTF is wrong with your brain dead ass?

How every House member voted to release the Epstein files​

The Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com › politics › 2025/11/18
Nov 18, 2025 — The House voted 427-1 in support of a measure to release files related to the investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

427- 1?
What would be the result in a republic form of government?

which is exactly what the Electoral College prevents.

EXACTLY.
It's corrupt and outdated.

 

[Hafar1014]

WTF?
Holy ****, you're an idiot.

So, how does their voting work?

Like your dear leader and his cult.

What contest in any country, are won by the person who didn't get the most votes?
The governor?
The senator?
The congress person?
State senator?
County commissioner?
Class president?
MVP of a football game?
Number one song on billboard?

We are representative republic that is not a democracy because we dont want to be ruled by idiots like you. Average IQ is 100. So we apportion the votes by state population so the nut states NY CA NJ and MINN who just elected Communist socialist nut jobs dominating every election

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I think we need to revamp the system by which we elect Presidents.

First and foremost we need to change the number of electoral votes to an odd number. Having the possibility of a tie (269 to 269) is just stupid.

Secondly, we need to expand the requirements to become President Elect from a simple majority of the electoral college (currently 270) to also include a plurality of the popular vote (more votes than anyone else on the ballot nationwide). In this day and age, the will of the people can be known well before the mid-December deadline. If there is a disagreement between the electoral college winner and the popular vote winner, the parameters of the 12 amendment kick in to decide who is the President-elect.

Lastly, the scheduling of state primaries to award delegates is mind bogglingly idiotic. Iowa or South Carolina, New Hampshire, Nevada…these 3 states get to weed out a very high percentage of candidates before larger populations get to weigh in on their efficacy. What I propose is not one super Tuesday but five of them involving 9-11 states each.

On the 2nd Tuesday in January, February, March, April and May have 9-11 states go to the polls at once. Have the 2nd Tuesday in June as a stand-by in case there are states who couldn’t hold the elections on schedule due to blizzards, tropical storms, etc… Just as an example… (remember this is for the primaries)

January: ME, NH, MA, CT, RI, NY, NJ, PA, DE

February: WA, CA, OR, HI, AK, AZ, NV, ID, UT, MT, WY, NM

March: FL, GA, SC, NC, MD, VA, WVA, KY, TN, AL, MS

April: TX, AR, OK, CO, KS, NE, ND, SD, LA,

May; IL, MN, WI, MI, OH, IN, IA, MO,

States with over 10M in population are listed in bold. You spread out the votes between urban and rural, between large cities and small towns, between industrial and agrarian, between coastal (when you can) and landlocked. Candidates no longer have to jump through hoops to please a single demographic and can play to their strengths.

As likely has already been correctly, noted – Congressional Republicans and Republican-controlled states would never support the Constitutional amendments needed to bring this about.

Any such change would jeopardize the right’s goal of establishing the tyranny of Republican minority rule.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

We are representative republic that is not a democracy because we dont want to be ruled by idiots like you.

So, a ******* retard like you can't explain the vast differences between the two?

Average IQ is 100.

You need 95 more points to achieve that.

So we apportion the votes by state population so the nut states NY CA NJ and MINN who just elected Communist socialist nut jobs dominating every election

****, appropriating votes by state population that's how you communist TRAITORS won without the majority of voters voting for your communist candidate.