The Real Reason for the Electoral College? Slavery

GaryDog

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Messages
4,369
Reaction score
530
Points
195
The real reason we have an Electoral College: to protect slave states

In a direct election system, the South would have lost every time because a huge percentage of its population was slaves, and slaves couldn't vote. But an Electoral College allows states to count slaves, albeit at a discount (the three-fifths clause), and that's what gave the South the inside track in presidential elections. “And thus it's no surprise that eight of the first nine presidential races were won by a Virginian. (Virginia was the most populous state at the time, and had a massive slave population that boosted its electoral vote count.)”

This pro-slavery compromise was not clear to everyone when the Constitution was adopted, but it was clearly evident to everyone when the Electoral College was amended after the Jefferson-Adams contest of 1796 and 1800. These elections were decided, in large part, by the extra electoral votes created by slavery. Without the 13 extra electoral votes created by Southern slavery, John Adams would've won even in 1800, and every federalist knows that after the election.

And yet when the Constitution is amended, the slavery bias is preserved.
 
OP
GaryDog

GaryDog

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Messages
4,369
Reaction score
530
Points
195
Not saying a vote for Trump was necessarily racist. Just pointing out the origins of the EC. If you take personal offense, that says a lot more about you.
 

tigerred59

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2015
Messages
21,138
Reaction score
2,777
Points
290
The real reason we have an Electoral College: to protect slave states

In a direct election system, the South would have lost every time because a huge percentage of its population was slaves, and slaves couldn't vote. But an Electoral College allows states to count slaves, albeit at a discount (the three-fifths clause), and that's what gave the South the inside track in presidential elections. “And thus it's no surprise that eight of the first nine presidential races were won by a Virginian. (Virginia was the most populous state at the time, and had a massive slave population that boosted its electoral vote count.)”

This pro-slavery compromise was not clear to everyone when the Constitution was adopted, but it was clearly evident to everyone when the Electoral College was amended after the Jefferson-Adams contest of 1796 and 1800. These elections were decided, in large part, by the extra electoral votes created by slavery. Without the 13 extra electoral votes created by Southern slavery, John Adams would've won even in 1800, and every federalist knows that after the election.

And yet when the Constitution is amended, the slavery bias is preserved.
Yet another reason to amend the Constitution....Old ideology that need a upgrade, starting with stupid white people shouldn't be allowed to vote
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
69,511
Reaction score
23,769
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
The real reason we have an Electoral College: to protect slave states

In a direct election system, the South would have lost every time because a huge percentage of its population was slaves, and slaves couldn't vote. But an Electoral College allows states to count slaves, albeit at a discount (the three-fifths clause), and that's what gave the South the inside track in presidential elections. “And thus it's no surprise that eight of the first nine presidential races were won by a Virginian. (Virginia was the most populous state at the time, and had a massive slave population that boosted its electoral vote count.)”

This pro-slavery compromise was not clear to everyone when the Constitution was adopted, but it was clearly evident to everyone when the Electoral College was amended after the Jefferson-Adams contest of 1796 and 1800. These elections were decided, in large part, by the extra electoral votes created by slavery. Without the 13 extra electoral votes created by Southern slavery, John Adams would've won even in 1800, and every federalist knows that after the election.

And yet when the Constitution is amended, the slavery bias is preserved.



Yeah, this is a BS meme that you progressives have been bleating for a few days now. If you bother to actually READ the Federalist Papers it becomes patently clear that you, and your handlers are full of poo.... Here's a link to the relevant papers, and the historical overview from de Tocqueville. Please be advised, these were EDUCATED men who wrote these letters. There are BIG words in them. Complex words. Progressives like you seem to have a hard time understanding them. Perhaps you should get some remedial ENGLISH education? Just a thought.



The Federalist Papers - Congress.gov Resources -

The Federalist Papers - Congress.gov Resources -

Tocqueville: Book I Chapter 15
 

tinydancer

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
51,846
Reaction score
12,810
Points
2,220
Location
Piney
1787. Year it was approved. In 1789 there were only 5 free states and 8 slave states.

I'm not buying into this bullshit at all that the EC was designed for southern slave states considering slavery was still allowed in New York, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland.

File:US Slave Free 1789-1861.gif - Wikipedia
 

peach174

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
26,435
Reaction score
6,973
Points
290
Location
S.E. AZ
1787. Year it was approved. In 1789 there were only 5 free states and 8 slave states.

I'm not buying into this bullshit at all that the EC was designed for southern slave states considering slavery was still allowed in New York, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland.

File:US Slave Free 1789-1861.gif - Wikipedia
It's not.
It was designed for minority movements to have a chance, if we went to far left or right, in order to restore balance.
In this case the 70's movement went to far to the left and they were defeated.
 

Tennyson

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2015
Messages
310
Reaction score
12
Points
51
But an Electoral College allows states to count slaves, albeit at a discount (the three-fifths clause), and that's what gave the South the inside track in presidential elections.
I am not sure who wrote this piece, but the three-fifths clause is in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3. The presidential election and electoral votes are in Article II.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

There may be a roundabout way to attribute electoral votes by the number of districts, but that was too far in the distance and implausible.

And thus it's no surprise that eight of the first nine presidential races were won by a Virginian. (Virginia was the most populous state at the time, and had a massive slave population that boosted its electoral vote count.)”
The winner of the presidential race has nothing to do with where a candidate was from, but who and what states voted for the candidate. James Monroe, a Virginian, received 231 electoral votes and John Quincy Adams received 1. Monroe received 84% of the popular vote. Thomas Jefferson, a Virginian, received 162 electoral votes against 14 in 1804. Jefferson received 72% of the popular vote. He dominated in each state, big and small, north and south, other than Connecticut. How did Virginia play into this?
 
OP
GaryDog

GaryDog

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Messages
4,369
Reaction score
530
Points
195
The real reason we have an Electoral College: to protect slave states

In a direct election system, the South would have lost every time because a huge percentage of its population was slaves, and slaves couldn't vote. But an Electoral College allows states to count slaves, albeit at a discount (the three-fifths clause), and that's what gave the South the inside track in presidential elections. “And thus it's no surprise that eight of the first nine presidential races were won by a Virginian. (Virginia was the most populous state at the time, and had a massive slave population that boosted its electoral vote count.)”

This pro-slavery compromise was not clear to everyone when the Constitution was adopted, but it was clearly evident to everyone when the Electoral College was amended after the Jefferson-Adams contest of 1796 and 1800. These elections were decided, in large part, by the extra electoral votes created by slavery. Without the 13 extra electoral votes created by Southern slavery, John Adams would've won even in 1800, and every federalist knows that after the election.

And yet when the Constitution is amended, the slavery bias is preserved.



Yeah, this is a BS meme that you progressives have been bleating for a few days now. If you bother to actually READ the Federalist Papers it becomes patently clear that you, and your handlers are full of poo.... Here's a link to the relevant papers, and the historical overview from de Tocqueville. Please be advised, these were EDUCATED men who wrote these letters. There are BIG words in them. Complex words. Progressives like you seem to have a hard time understanding them. Perhaps you should get some remedial ENGLISH education? Just a thought.



The Federalist Papers - Congress.gov Resources -

The Federalist Papers - Congress.gov Resources -

Tocqueville: Book I Chapter 15
Perhaps you should read the words of James Madison himself:

Why James Madison Wanted to Change the Way We Vote For President - FairVote

In 1823, Madison wrote a remarkable letter to George Hay explaining his views of the Electoral College, his strong opposition to states voting as winner-take-all blocs and his view of the origins of the winner-take-all rule. In addition to disenfranchising districts that voted against the preference of the state, Madison worried that statewide voting would increase sectionalism and the strength of geographic parties. He wrote that his views were widely shared by others at the Constitutional Convention, and that the winner-take-all approach had been forced on many states due to its adoption in other states: "The district mode was mostly, if not exclusively in view when the Constitution was framed and adopted; & was exchanged for the general ticket [e.g., winner-take-all rule] & the legislative election, as the only expedient for baffling the policy of the particular States which had set the example."
 
OP
GaryDog

GaryDog

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Messages
4,369
Reaction score
530
Points
195
I am not sure who wrote this piece, but the three-fifths clause is in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3. The presidential election and electoral votes are in Article II.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

There may be a roundabout way to attribute electoral votes by the number of districts, but that was too far in the distance and implausible.
Electoral votes are determined by each state's total number of Senators and Representatives in Congress. Counting slaves (even as 3/5ths) affects that number, which in turn affects the electoral votes for president. Thought this was pretty clear.
 

Tennyson

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2015
Messages
310
Reaction score
12
Points
51
I am not sure who wrote this piece, but the three-fifths clause is in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3. The presidential election and electoral votes are in Article II.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

There may be a roundabout way to attribute electoral votes by the number of districts, but that was too far in the distance and implausible.
Electoral votes are determined by each state's total number of Senators and Representatives in Congress. Counting slaves (even as 3/5ths) affects that number, which in turn affects the electoral votes for president. Thought this was pretty clear.
What was pretty clear? Do you think the Southern states had an advantage because of the 3/5s clause regarding electoral votes?
 

koshergrl

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
79,997
Reaction score
13,026
Points
2,190
1787. Year it was approved. In 1789 there were only 5 free states and 8 slave states.

I'm not buying into this bullshit at all that the EC was designed for southern slave states considering slavery was still allowed in New York, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland.

File:US Slave Free 1789-1861.gif - Wikipedia
I imagine the Dems wanted to use their slaves to vote, and had to be stopped. Nothing has changed.
 

Silent Warrior

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
2,467
Reaction score
509
Points
170
Location
Midwest
Without the electoral college the sparsely populated states of the West and Midwest would have little say in the election of a president. Of course this is what the left desires. If we could just shut those pesky farmers up we in the cities could treat them like slaves and demand they feed us etc. How dare they think they are our equals.
 

thanatos144

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2009
Messages
15,327
Reaction score
1,348
Points
215
Location
Stuart Florida
The real reason we have an Electoral College: to protect slave states

In a direct election system, the South would have lost every time because a huge percentage of its population was slaves, and slaves couldn't vote. But an Electoral College allows states to count slaves, albeit at a discount (the three-fifths clause), and that's what gave the South the inside track in presidential elections. “And thus it's no surprise that eight of the first nine presidential races were won by a Virginian. (Virginia was the most populous state at the time, and had a massive slave population that boosted its electoral vote count.)”

This pro-slavery compromise was not clear to everyone when the Constitution was adopted, but it was clearly evident to everyone when the Electoral College was amended after the Jefferson-Adams contest of 1796 and 1800. These elections were decided, in large part, by the extra electoral votes created by slavery. Without the 13 extra electoral votes created by Southern slavery, John Adams would've won even in 1800, and every federalist knows that after the election.

And yet when the Constitution is amended, the slavery bias is preserved.
I cant believe how stupid this post actually is..... Hey genius Slave owning states had higher population then no slave owning states, The electoral college was put in place in part to minimize slavery. So please stop eating all the complete revisionist bullshit your regressive rag VOX spoon feeds you and actually read a non school history book or better yet some original documents.
 

koshergrl

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
79,997
Reaction score
13,026
Points
2,190
Without the electoral college the sparsely populated states of the West and Midwest would have little say in the election of a president. Of course this is what the left desires. If we could just shut those pesky farmers up we in the cities could treat them like slaves and demand they feed us etc. How dare they think they are our equals.
Yup.
As of right now the mainstream press is giving Google/Facebook/Twitter lists of "fake" news sites to delete, block, restrict. All right leaning.
 

xyz

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2016
Messages
6,495
Reaction score
797
Points
195
The real reason we have an Electoral College: to protect slave states

In a direct election system, the South would have lost every time because a huge percentage of its population was slaves, and slaves couldn't vote. But an Electoral College allows states to count slaves, albeit at a discount (the three-fifths clause), and that's what gave the South the inside track in presidential elections. “And thus it's no surprise that eight of the first nine presidential races were won by a Virginian. (Virginia was the most populous state at the time, and had a massive slave population that boosted its electoral vote count.)”

This pro-slavery compromise was not clear to everyone when the Constitution was adopted, but it was clearly evident to everyone when the Electoral College was amended after the Jefferson-Adams contest of 1796 and 1800. These elections were decided, in large part, by the extra electoral votes created by slavery. Without the 13 extra electoral votes created by Southern slavery, John Adams would've won even in 1800, and every federalist knows that after the election.

And yet when the Constitution is amended, the slavery bias is preserved.
That was one of the reasons, another reason was to keep total idiots with no qualifications from becoming president, by the electors denying cretins the presidency.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top