Electoral College

[JOEBIALEK]

The debate has started again as to whether the US Constitution should be amended in order to change the presidential election process. Some promote
eliminating the Electoral College in favor of a direct popular vote for president while others believe the Electoral College should remain unchanged. Just as compromise solved the initial problems of the framers so it is that compromise can solve this problem. The solution is to change the electoral votes to electoral points and reward each candidate a percentage of points based on the percentage of popular votes received in each state.

This would eliminate the "winner take all" system thus allowing for all the votes to count. A voter is more apt to believe their vote counted when a percentage of popular votes are taken into account rather than the "all or nothing" system currently in existence. Further, this new system would integrate the desire for a popular vote for president with the need for the individual states to determine who actually gets elected.

As for political primaries the number of delegates awarded in each state should be determined by the percentage of votes won by each candidate.

For 2016 multiplying the percentage of votes each candidate received {in each state} times the number of electoral votes {in each state} results in the following: Clinton 256.985 and Trump 253.482.

 

[fncceo]

The debate has started again

Among whom? No one is seriously debating this. But ... if YOU want to change the Constitution, just get 2/3rds of the states to come on board and you'll get your wish.

 

[jwoodie]

According to the U.S. Constitution, the President is to be selected by the States, not the general public. The Electoral College was simply the means of apportioning this voting power between large and small states, and certifying these votes to the national government.

The Founders were well aware of how the rabble could be roused. That is why they limited direct popular elections to the House of Representatives. The ill-conceived 17th Amendment (1913), which extended this procedure to the election of U.S. Senators, has unfortunately caused these elections to now be dominated by out-of-state money and special interests (especially in smaller states).

Direct popular election of the President would be the final step in converting our representative form of government into a mobocracy.

 

[Pogo]

According to the U.S. Constitution, the President is to be selected by the States, not the general public. The Electoral College was simply the means of apportioning this voting power between large and small states, and certifying these votes to the national government.

The Founders were well aware of how the rabble could be roused. That is why they limited direct popular elections to the House of Representatives. The ill-conceived 17th Amendment (1913), which extended this procedure to the election of U.S. Senators, has unfortunately caused these elections to now be dominated by out-of-state money and special interests (especially in smaller states).

Direct popular election of the President would be the final step in converting our representative form of government into a mobocracy.

Like the rest of the world that elects their heads of state have?

Oh wait, not all of them. Besides us there's ................... Pakistan.

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

no

 

[Pogo]

A voter is more apt to believe their vote counted when a percentage of popular votes are taken into account rather than the "all or nothing" system currently in existence.

EXACTLY -- it would put way more voters in play since everybody would now have a reason to vote at all, which is certainly not the case for "locked" states. I've been pointing this out for years as the primary, though not the only, ill effect of the EC as practiced.

This would eliminate the "winner take all" system thus allowing for all the votes to count.

Actually it's not the EC itself that requires this wacko system --- it's the states that caved in to it. Kind of a "mobocracy" to quote a previous poster with his rectum speaking. One state did this "winner take all" crapola to protect the power of its 'favorite son' candidate, then the next state figured "well we gotta do it too" and pretty soon there was poo in the whole pool. Ridiculous.

James Madison, one of the guys that actually created the EC, tried to make that winner-take-all practice illegal as he could see where it was heading ---- even though his own state stood to lose influence by abandoning it.

It's ludicrous that my state goes to Congress and says "wow, literally everybody in our state voted for Donald Rump" and Virginia goes "wow, what a coincidence, literally everybody in our state voted for Hillary". Well no --- we didn't.

 

[Pogo]

The debate has started again

Among whom? No one is seriously debating this. But ... if YOU want to change the Constitution, just get 2/3rds of the states to come on board and you'll get your wish.

Plant your head in the sand all you like but I've got sixty polls taken over the years that ALL say the People, in every state, agree it needs to be fixed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The debate has started again as to whether the US Constitution should be amended in order to change the presidential election process. Some promote
eliminating the Electoral College in favor of a direct popular vote for president while others believe the Electoral College should remain unchanged. Just as compromise solved the initial problems of the framers so it is that compromise can solve this problem. The solution is to change the electoral votes to electoral points and reward each candidate a percentage of points based on the percentage of popular votes received in each state.

This would eliminate the "winner take all" system thus allowing for all the votes to count. A voter is more apt to believe their vote counted when a percentage of popular votes are taken into account rather than the "all or nothing" system currently in existence. Further, this new system would integrate the desire for a popular vote for president with the need for the individual states to determine who actually gets elected.

As for political primaries the number of delegates awarded in each state should be determined by the percentage of votes won by each candidate.

For 2016 multiplying the percentage of votes each candidate received {in each state} times the number of electoral votes {in each state} results in the following: Clinton 256.985 and Trump 253.482.

The solution is to change the electoral votes to electoral points and reward each candidate a percentage of points based on the percentage of popular votes received in each state.

Every liberal state that wants to do that.....should.

 

[fncceo]

I've got sixty polls taken over the years that ALL say the People, in every state, agree it needs to be fixed

And we ALL know how good the polls are

 

[cereal_killer]

The debate has started again

Among whom? No one is seriously debating this. But ... if YOU want to change the Constitution, just get 2/3rds of the states to come on board and you'll get your wish.

Plant your head in the sand all you like but I've got sixty polls taken over the years that ALL say the People, in every state, agree it needs to be fixed.

pogo still believes in polls

You all need to get over losing badly and try to regroup for 2020, you're going to need it. Life under Trump will last a GOOD (literally) 8 years...believe me

 

[Rexx Taylor]

Hillary lost by 3 to 4 million votes, why cant the Dem's just shut up and go home for another 8 years !!!

 

[Godboy]

According to the U.S. Constitution, the President is to be selected by the States, not the general public. The Electoral College was simply the means of apportioning this voting power between large and small states, and certifying these votes to the national government.

The Founders were well aware of how the rabble could be roused. That is why they limited direct popular elections to the House of Representatives. The ill-conceived 17th Amendment (1913), which extended this procedure to the election of U.S. Senators, has unfortunately caused these elections to now be dominated by out-of-state money and special interests (especially in smaller states).

Direct popular election of the President would be the final step in converting our representative form of government into a mobocracy.

Like the rest of the world that elects their heads of state have?

Oh wait, not all of them. Besides us there's ................... Pakistan.

The world should be emulating us, not the other way around. Why would we want to be like nations that ARENT the greatest nation on earth?

 

[OKTexas]

The debate has started again

Among whom? No one is seriously debating this. But ... if YOU want to change the Constitution, just get 2/3rds of the states to come on board and you'll get your wish.

You might want to read Article 5 again, 2/3rds to propose, 3/4ths to pass. And that ain't gonna happen.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

Maxinne Waters wants to rewrite the whole map of 57 states again and figure out a way to put 270 votes in the 5 blue states

 

[Pogo]

According to the U.S. Constitution, the President is to be selected by the States, not the general public. The Electoral College was simply the means of apportioning this voting power between large and small states, and certifying these votes to the national government.

The Founders were well aware of how the rabble could be roused. That is why they limited direct popular elections to the House of Representatives. The ill-conceived 17th Amendment (1913), which extended this procedure to the election of U.S. Senators, has unfortunately caused these elections to now be dominated by out-of-state money and special interests (especially in smaller states).

Direct popular election of the President would be the final step in converting our representative form of government into a mobocracy.

Like the rest of the world that elects their heads of state have?

Oh wait, not all of them. Besides us there's ................... Pakistan.

The world should be emulating us, not the other way around. Why would we want to be like nations that ARENT the greatest nation on earth?

There's no such thing. Put the comic book down....... nice and slow....

 

[Pogo]

Hillary lost by 3 to 4 million votes, why cant the Dem's just shut up and go home for another 8 years !!!

Actually she won the PV by, last I looked, around 2.9 million. Which gives the Democrat six of the last seven elections.

 

[Pogo]

The debate has started again

Among whom? No one is seriously debating this. But ... if YOU want to change the Constitution, just get 2/3rds of the states to come on board and you'll get your wish.

Plant your head in the sand all you like but I've got sixty polls taken over the years that ALL say the People, in every state, agree it needs to be fixed.

pogo still believes in polls

You all need to get over losing badly and try to regroup for 2020, you're going to need it. Life under Trump will last a GOOD (literally) 8 years...believe me

Yyyyeah umm..... I said SIXTY polls. And that's not an exaggeration, it may be more. Sixty-plus over several decades, that all agree with each other. Not a consensus--- unanimous.

And oh yeah also sixty-plus polls that don't contain an answer anybody would be embarrassed to be honest about.

 

[OKTexas]

Hillary lost by 3 to 4 million votes, why cant the Dem's just shut up and go home for another 8 years !!!

Actually she won the PV by, last I looked, around 2.9 million. Which gives the Democrat six of the last seven elections.

Yeah, take that PV with $7.00 and you might get a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

Hillary lost by 3 to 4 million votes, why cant the Dem's just shut up and go home for another 8 years !!!

Actually she won the PV by, last I looked, around 2.9 million. Which gives the Democrat six of the last seven elections.

Yeah, take that PV with $7.00 and you might get a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

i deducted the illegal alien and dead people votes

 

[Rustic]

According to the U.S. Constitution, the President is to be selected by the States, not the general public. The Electoral College was simply the means of apportioning this voting power between large and small states, and certifying these votes to the national government.

The Founders were well aware of how the rabble could be roused. That is why they limited direct popular elections to the House of Representatives. The ill-conceived 17th Amendment (1913), which extended this procedure to the election of U.S. Senators, has unfortunately caused these elections to now be dominated by out-of-state money and special interests (especially in smaller states).

Direct popular election of the President would be the final step in converting our representative form of government into a mobocracy.

Like the rest of the world that elects their heads of state have?

Oh wait, not all of them. Besides us there's ................... Pakistan.

Quit being a fucking pussy, your about the biggest butthurt motherfucker here. LOL