How to fix the Electoral Vote. Every State should have one vote

[TNHarley]

States are our unit of government. The Federal government was supposed to be a thin layer over the States primarily providing for our defense and little else. Power was to remain in the States where the people could decide what sort of government they want and have control over that.

In the UN, bigger countries get no more say than small ones. We pay the majority of UN bills ourselves and we get nothing for it. Why should California get over 18 times the votes Alaska gets? Each one is a State. Why do California and other big States get disproportionate rule over the small States? Neither should have more say over the other who our leader should be than the other.

In the legislature, there is no such problem. Big States can't run roughshod over the small ones because of the Senate and the small ones can't dominate the big ones because of the House. But for President, we have no such protection. Each State should get one and only one vote

How about this:

Eliminate the electoral college altogether. Who ever wins the majority of the states via popular vote wins the election. If both candidates win 25 states each, then we could use the standard already in place. Let congress be the tiebreaker.

Fuuuuuuuuuck a popular vote.

 

[kaz]

States are our unit of government. The Federal government was supposed to be a thin layer over the States primarily providing for our defense and little else. Power was to remain in the States where the people could decide what sort of government they want and have control over that.

In the UN, bigger countries get no more say than small ones. We pay the majority of UN bills ourselves and we get nothing for it. Why should California get over 18 times the votes Alaska gets? Each one is a State. Why do California and other big States get disproportionate rule over the small States? Neither should have more say over the other who our leader should be than the other.

In the legislature, there is no such problem. Big States can't run roughshod over the small ones because of the Senate and the small ones can't dominate the big ones because of the House. But for President, we have no such protection. Each State should get one and only one vote

All you have to do is get a Congressman to sponsor an Amendment to the Constitution, get it passed by the Congress and approved by the states. Starting now!

Of course it would take a Constitutional Amendment. I didn't say how we get there, only the way I think it should work. I mean duh

You are entitled to your opinion. That and $5 will get you a cup at Starbucks.

Yes, God forbid we discuss things here. Its not like it was the point or anything.

This has been discussed and discussed and discussed and discussed and discussed and..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................discussed.

Who advocated one vote per State?

And I clearly and accurately titled the thread, so **** you. Don't click on threads accurately marked then keep arguing you don't want to discuss it. Cut the stupid shit. Discuss it or go away and when you see it again, the thread will still be accurately entitled

 

[Auld Phart]

Someone does not understand the way the world works. Yikes.

Why don't you tell us how the world you live in works

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So whoever gets the majority of our 57 states, wins

 

[Boss]

I totally agree on appealing the 17th amendment. That one was worse than the Income tax, and for the reason you said. Power divided is power checked. Senators should be responsible to State legislatures. Eliminating that check and balance is one of the greatest mistakes we ever made. As for you wanting to move towards the PV, again, I totally disagree with your view California should have a disproportional say in how other States operate

Oh no... I DON'T want to move to a popular vote! NEVER!!

What I was saying was, the Electoral Votes should be proportional to the popular vote in each state. Some states do this and some don't, it's winner-take-all. I think it's more fair to apportion the Electoral Votes according to the popular vote instead of the winner taking ALL the electors of any state.

Some Liberals are currently pushing an idea to have their respective states adopt a resolution to appoint electors to the candidate who wins the national popular vote. I disagree with that strongly.

Your idea shifts the power in favor of the states TOO much in my opinion. Why should a state with 200k people have the same "voting power" as a state with 38 million people?

 

[kaz]

States are our unit of government. The Federal government was supposed to be a thin layer over the States primarily providing for our defense and little else. Power was to remain in the States where the people could decide what sort of government they want and have control over that.

In the UN, bigger countries get no more say than small ones. We pay the majority of UN bills ourselves and we get nothing for it. Why should California get over 18 times the votes Alaska gets? Each one is a State. Why do California and other big States get disproportionate rule over the small States? Neither should have more say over the other who our leader should be than the other.

In the legislature, there is no such problem. Big States can't run roughshod over the small ones because of the Senate and the small ones can't dominate the big ones because of the House. But for President, we have no such protection. Each State should get one and only one vote

that doesn't "fix" the electoral college, dum dum. the votes of someone in north Dakota shouldn't be worth more than the vote of someone from new York.

or does the concept of one person, one vote confuse you?

Here's an idea. Address my argument in the OP

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The Electoral has been used for like forever and the one side loses due to it and then they demand change...stop trying to out think wise men who came up with a good system that ensures a few densely populated states can control the vote of an entire nation.

Also, get over it already, she lost

 

[Lakhota]

Popular vote is the only fair way to elect a president. One person - one vote.

 

[kaz]

States are our unit of government. The Federal government was supposed to be a thin layer over the States primarily providing for our defense and little else. Power was to remain in the States where the people could decide what sort of government they want and have control over that.

In the UN, bigger countries get no more say than small ones. We pay the majority of UN bills ourselves and we get nothing for it. Why should California get over 18 times the votes Alaska gets? Each one is a State. Why do California and other big States get disproportionate rule over the small States? Neither should have more say over the other who our leader should be than the other.

In the legislature, there is no such problem. Big States can't run roughshod over the small ones because of the Senate and the small ones can't dominate the big ones because of the House. But for President, we have no such protection. Each State should get one and only one vote

How about this:

Eliminate the electoral college altogether. Who ever wins the majority of the states via popular vote (in each individual state) wins the election. If both candidates win 25 states each, then we could use the standard already in place. Let congress be the tiebreaker.

I'm not sure how that's different than my proposal other than adding the tie breaker. I guess I didn't say popular vote in the States, but that was my intention

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Popular vote is the only fair way to elect a president. One person - one vote.

Whether it be by an illegal or a citizen...right Pokeyhontos ?

 

[kaz]

Popular vote is the only fair way to elect a president. One person - one vote.

That's not how our country was designed. Rather than ignoring that our Constitution was written for ... States ... to be the primary unit of government in this country, you should try to repeal the Constitution and write one that is what you want and isn't the one we have

 

[SYTFE]

Someone does not understand the way the world works. Yikes.

Why don't you tell us how the world you live in works

Well, it sure as shit doesn't work with the EC awarding each state with one ******* vote, cupcake.

 

[kaz]

Popular vote is the only fair way to elect a president. One person - one vote.

Whether it be by an illegal or a citizen...right Pokeyhontos ?

Don't forget we're disenfranchising the dead and pluralistic voters

 

[g5000]

How to fix the Electoral Vote. Every State should have one vote

The Electoral College doesn't need to be fixed. It ain't broken.

 

[Auld Phart]

Someone does not understand the way the world works. Yikes.

Why don't you tell us how the world you live in works

Well, it sure as shit doesn't work with the EC awarding each state with one ******* vote, cupcake.

Oh goody, deflection

(Now how did I know that was going to happen? Experience?)

 

[Lakhota]

Popular vote is the only fair way to elect a president. One person - one vote.

Whether it be by an illegal or a citizen...right Pokeyhontos ?

Don't forget we're disenfranchising the dead and pluralistic voters

Yeah, and don't forget to provide "credible" proof of that.

 

[Boss]

Popular vote is the only fair way to elect a president. One person - one vote.

No, that's called a pure democracy and there is a good reason the word is found nowhere in our Constitution. Our framers FEARED pure democracy because it's "mob rule" and it's important to note, many of your "civil rights" which are so cherished by the radical left, would not exist if we operated on the idea of pure democracy. It is precisely because we have a "republican" (small r) system, that we are able to enact legislation to protect minorities and individuals from the tyranny of the majority,

 

[kaz]

I totally agree on appealing the 17th amendment. That one was worse than the Income tax, and for the reason you said. Power divided is power checked. Senators should be responsible to State legislatures. Eliminating that check and balance is one of the greatest mistakes we ever made. As for you wanting to move towards the PV, again, I totally disagree with your view California should have a disproportional say in how other States operate

Oh no... I DON'T want to move to a popular vote! NEVER!!

What I was saying was, the Electoral Votes should be proportional to the popular vote in each state. Some states do this and some don't, it's winner-take-all. I think it's more fair to apportion the Electoral Votes according to the popular vote instead of the winner taking ALL the electors of any state.

Some Liberals are currently pushing an idea to have their respective states adopt a resolution to appoint electors to the candidate who wins the national popular vote. I disagree with that strongly.

Your idea shifts the power in favor of the states TOO much in my opinion. Why should a state with 200k people have the same "voting power" as a state with 38 million people?

You look at this country and States have been completely undermined of their intended power. You correctly pointed that out with Senators. Since we were supposed to be a collection of States with a think Federal layer, primarily to defend us from foreign threats, why should California have more power over smaller States since they weren't intended to have any power over smaller States?

 

[kaz]

Popular vote is the only fair way to elect a president. One person - one vote.

Whether it be by an illegal or a citizen...right Pokeyhontos ?

Don't forget we're disenfranchising the dead and pluralistic voters

Yeah, and don't forget to provide "credible" proof of that.

Read the 10th amendment, then the 9th. Check and mate

 

[Auld Phart]

Popular vote is the only fair way to elect a president. One person - one vote.

Popular vote is the only fair way to elect a president.

and leave flyover country with no voice in who is elected