Is it Time for the Electoral College to Go?

[JoeB131]

It's going to be hilarious if Obama squeaks out a win in the EC but loses the popular vote because the South comes out in droves to vote against him.

Well, it would be amusing to see people who have supported the EC trying to weasel their way out of that one.

I'm totally consistant. I think it's wrong on principle. I voted for Bush, but I think the way he got the office in 2000 flies in the face of the priniciple of democracy.

Of course, four more years of Obama will be a disaster regardless.

 

[dcbl]

...but I think the (Electoral College) flies in the face of the priniciple of democracy.

Maybe it does. BUT, it is entirely consistent with the principles of a representative republic!

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one...

 

[Immanuel]

The Electoral College has long outlived it's usefulness. One of the main reasons the EC was formed was slavery. The southern states liked the fact that their slaves, who would be excluded from a direct vote, would be counted when Electoral College votes were apportioned. (at 3/5ths of course)

Another reason for the EC was our means of communication and "getting the word out". 200 years ago there was no internet or television and the FF were concerned that "the folks" wouldn't know enough about the candidates.

The EC has lost all relevance.

Stop disenfranchising voters and end the EC...

So should we end the senate as well?

Slaves were also counted for representation in the house, it just wasn't for EV's.

The Senate should remain in it's current configuration for the exact purpose of protecting the right of the minority to have a say.

I just don't think that 2 branches of government should be protecting the minority rights of Americans.

The Majority should have more weight.

I have been away for a couple of days on an interview, so maybe this has been said later, but the majority does still have more weight. That is why larger states such as California and New York have more delegates i.e. more electoral votes. They just don't have total control between them which they should not have.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

This is also why today's Obama supporters want to eliminate the EC. They think it is going to be hard to win the red states and figure they are likely to loose a few of the blue states, but by damned if they can get the popular vote and not have to worry about Florida, Ohio and Texas, they might just be able to steal another election right out from under the countries nose.

Immie

Steal another election? After Gore v. Bush you say that with a straight face?

Bush didn't steal it. Every recount gave him the win. Gore thought, much like Al Franken did later, that if I scream long enough and cry loud enough, they will finally give me the win. It almost worked too.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

The system was set you long ago with the states were very isolated from each other.

Today with modern travel they are merely hours apart by plane.

They are much more interdependnet than they were in the day.


Giving people in Wyoming same power in the senate as California is just absurd

The system was set up at the founding because 18th century politicians were just as ruthless and self interested as they are today. A few colonies could hold the whole process hostage if they didn't get all or most of some payoff they wanted, the disproportionate Senate setup was one of them.

And you actually think that has changed today?

Please!

Nothing has changed at all.

Now what Democrats want to be able to do is allow California and/or New York to hold the rest of the country hostage and that is exactly what would happen with the elimination of the Electoral College. It is also the reason that Democrats want to eliminate the EC.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

In this thread we have all the liberals insisting we should AMEND the Constitution. In the other thread they are all bemoaning the right wanting to Amend the Constitution. Can we say Hypocrite yet?

I don't get the impression that the liberals want to undergo an attempt the amend the Constitution, a feat that in this case would be doomed to failure because it would remove even what slight influence the smaller states have right now over the presidential elections, rather than amending the Constitution they just want to discard the EC without entangling themselves in such worthless endeavors as an amendment to the Constitution.

What on earth gives you the impression that liberals want to amend the Constitution?

For those who think the EC is a waste, let me inform you that the EC was a compromise between the colonies. The bigger colonies were for exactly what the liberals want to do right now, mob rule and the bigger states have all control. The smaller colonies said, and I paraphrase, 'no f'ing way'! Thus the compromise.

There is no way the smaller states are going to agree to such an amendment and basically relegate themselves to third world status in Ameica.

Immie

 

[Big Fitz]

I truly feel for the poor libbies if the EC is eliminated. Because the grassroots is riled by Obama's long unemployment lines and huge budgetary issues that makes us pay so much in interest, we're going to be paying more for interest than government salaries really, really soon. Here's what the libbies will get if you eliminate the EC:

Go Rick Perry! Republicans in 2012!
​

I love them county election maps. Puts it all into perspective quick. Only the urban blue counties want the EC to go, because it dampens their power.

 

[bripat9643]

Yum, yum...hyperbole for breakfast. My favorite. Goes really well with my coffee...

That's what libs always say when the idiocy of their "logic" is pointed out.

 

[bripat9643]

Well, it would be amusing to see people who have supported the EC trying to weasel their way out of that one.

I'm totally consistant. I think it's wrong on principle. I voted for Bush, but I think the way he got the office in 2000 flies in the face of the priniciple of democracy.

Of course, four more years of Obama will be a disaster regardless.

Two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner, that's the only 'principal' of democracy. Why anyone thinks democracy should reign supreme is what I can't fathom.

 

[bripat9643]

Protects the smaller states from what? The electoral college reverses the popular vote outcome once every 100 years.

So what?

It protects them from the mobs of parasites that live in urban areas.

 

[Big Fitz]

Protects the smaller states from what? The electoral college reverses the popular vote outcome once every 100 years.

So what?

It protects them from the mobs of parasites that live in urban areas.

Only fleas hate flea collars. And stupid animals forced to wear them for their own safety.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Protects the smaller states from what? The electoral college reverses the popular vote outcome once every 100 years.

So what?

It protects them from the mobs of parasites that live in urban areas.

How, exactly? By preventing Democrats from getting elected?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I truly feel for the poor libbies if the EC is eliminated. Because the grassroots is riled by Obama's long unemployment lines and huge budgetary issues that makes us pay so much in interest, we're going to be paying more for interest than government salaries really, really soon. Here's what the libbies will get if you eliminate the EC:

Go Rick Perry! Republicans in 2012!
​

I love them county election maps. Puts it all into perspective quick. Only the urban blue counties want the EC to go, because it dampens their power.

The only perspective on those maps is how elections would turn out if dirt voted instead of people.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's going to be hilarious if Obama squeaks out a win in the EC but loses the popular vote because the South comes out in droves to vote against him.

A long lost bit of memorabilia from the 2000 election was that prior to the election, one of the scenarios that got quite a bit of punditry play was, ironically,

that GORE might lose the popular vote and win the electoral college. And better yet, at that time, the rightwing propaganda machine was already working up talking points to badmouth that in the event it happened.

 

[Big Fitz]

I truly feel for the poor libbies if the EC is eliminated. Because the grassroots is riled by Obama's long unemployment lines and huge budgetary issues that makes us pay so much in interest, we're going to be paying more for interest than government salaries really, really soon. Here's what the libbies will get if you eliminate the EC:

Go Rick Perry! Republicans in 2012!
​

I love them county election maps. Puts it all into perspective quick. Only the urban blue counties want the EC to go, because it dampens their power.

The only perspective on those maps is how elections would turn out if dirt voted instead of people.

So much for improving the tone, eh? The truth's a bitch, ain't it?

 

[Freedomlover]

Do we need it anymore? Gallup polls have show than the American people prefer Direct Elections for President over the indirect Electoral College.

It used to be necessary, back when we couldn't talk to each other by picking up a phone and we didn't have nationwide 24/7 news coverage.

California just became the latest state to vote to give all their electoral votes to the candidate that wins the popular vote, joining seven other states that have done so.

Is this the beginning of the end for the EC?

No! The arguement is still the same as it was 1789. The large population states will dominate the small states, which would render them almost helpless in picking a president. Who is going to go to North or South Dakota, Vermont, Maine, ect. while campaigning for president? No one, because they will concentrate all their resources on the large states to pile up votes to win. The Electoral College balances this all out and pretty much makes the candidates campaign in just about all the states to gain the edge they need to get elected.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Protects the smaller states from what? The electoral college reverses the popular vote outcome once every 100 years.

So what?

Wow. Even your math is wrong.

Presidents have won office FOUR times without winning the popular vote. The USA is LESS THAN 400 years old.

I know that my friends on the left would LOVE to be able to do some hard campaigning in the top ten metropolitan areas & ignore the heartland to win an election. I know they would.

I KNOW that my friends on the left are outraged that the good people of Wyoming essentially have a voice that is 3 times stronger than it would be without the electoral college.

And I also know that the electoral college is the driving force behind why candidates must pay attention to the needs (or at least pay lip service to the needs) of citizens in small population states.

Missourian is right about another thing as well. IF we split electoral votes for each state, the votes that republicans get from CA would MORE than make up for the votes that Dems pick up in a dozen states. So PLEASE Brother Fox, don't throw me in that briar patch...

lastly, unless & until you can get a constitutional amendment passed to eliminate the EC, it's a moot point. And to get that amendment passed, you'd have to get the support of about 9 smaller states that would LOSE power by supporting such an amendment!

So it's a moot point.

Liberal bedwetting & distortion of the facts in:

3

2

1

...

What makes the people of Wyoming special, that they deserve some sort of affirmative action beyond the generally accepted justice of one person one vote?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I love them county election maps. Puts it all into perspective quick. Only the urban blue counties want the EC to go, because it dampens their power.

The only perspective on those maps is how elections would turn out if dirt voted instead of people.

So much for improving the tone, eh? The truth's a bitch, ain't it?

You're retarded for thinking that map proves something. I've been laughing at that map for 7 years now. The first guy I saw post it was one of the looney moderators over at hannity,

he wasn't much brighter than you are.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[


We have a federal government system...constitutionally...the sooner you accept that, the happier you'll be.

So what? Argentina has a federal government system and elects its President directly. Who told you a federal government had to have some sort of cockeyed electoral college vote?

The Constitution of the United States.


Article 2, Section 1...

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:




Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
​

.
.
..
.
..
Do you have any other questions that prove beyond a shadow of doubt your absolute and total ignorance of the subject?


Here is a link to the 12th Amendment...educate yourself. U.S. Constitution - Amendment 12 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Try to be relevant once in your life.

 

[elvis]

I love them county election maps. Puts it all into perspective quick. Only the urban blue counties want the EC to go, because it dampens their power.

The only perspective on those maps is how elections would turn out if dirt voted instead of people.

So much for improving the tone, eh? The truth's a bitch, ain't it?

NYcuminhisrear improve the tone? Are you kidding?