Let's get rid of the Electoral College

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

well, in the early 1820's we fucked up the whole basis of the EC by adding codicils in which the winner of the presidential election in a state would be given ALL THE ELECTORS.
That was the beginning of the disenfranchisement of large masses of voters.

I don't see the disenfranchisement. The voters of each state still got to vote for which person would receive the state's electoral votes.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

LARGE POPULATION STATES hhave their citizenry vote impact "Peaked" , and the "winner take all" i definitely NON CONSTITUTIONAL.

The concept of one man one vot doesnt carry on for the Presidential elections, and now that Congress has motly passed its responsibilities to the executive office, its a disgrace

1 Reply

@farmerman,

The disparity in the voting weight is NOT caused by winner-take-all.

Ending winner-take-all will NOT do anything to remedy the disparity.

The disparity in voting weight is caused by the fact that small states are apportioned more representation than larger states.

1 Reply

@bulmabriefs144,

bulmabriefs144 wrote:

You're right, you don't make sense of it.

The electoral college is a mitigating factor to what the founders called "the tyranny of the masses."

Suppose we have a state known as Conservativeland. In Conservativeland, every town but one has a conservative majority. There are 50 million conservatives in all of these other towns together. However, that town has 50,000,001 people. By one extra person beyond the other total, everyone in the entire state has to obey the whims of that town. It wants to raise taxes by 600%? No problem! Build a bridge that only affects that town with the entire state's income? Sure thing! Never mind that six other towns also need bridges, they don't matter.

Is it right that one town can decide policy for an entire state? Or is it more fair that that one town decides just the county surrounding it, and the other counties combined compare their votes with popular vote mixed in? Wait, don't answer that, I know you won't understand.

The Electoral College is an abomination...an ABOMINATION.

There is absolutely no way the state of Wyoming, for instance, should have 3 votes in the Electoral College for its less than 600,000 people (one vote for every 200,000 people)...while the almost 40,000,000 people of California get only 55 (one vote for every 727,000 people).

But I seriously doubt the EC is going away any time soon, because those 600,000 people of Wyoming also get as many Senators as the 40,000,000 people of California.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

The Electoral College can be tweaked to reduce apportionment disparities without ending the protections that it also provides to our democracy.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

you ought to domore reading about how Federalits outguessed the Constitution by imposing a NON CONSTITUTIONAL ploy of winner- take- all.

Your mind is unable to process more than one item culled from your selected woorld view AT A TIME.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Do you really want to spend several days discussing my mental superiority? If so, try to remember that you are the one who raised the subject of my mental abilities.

Winner-take-all is just a system for counting the votes. It is no worse than any other system.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

bullshit. You have no idea of what you speak. You just like to hear yourelf pontificate. When you know of what you speak on this issue, call someone who gives a ****.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

show me where I brought up the subject about your assertions re: your test taking history??? On second thought , find that person who gives a **** and tell them, K?
You are so damned insecure that you use any assertion you can muster.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

show me where I brought up the subject about your assertions re: your test taking history???

You brought up the subject of my mental superiority when you said this:
"Your mind is unable to process more than one item culled from your selected world view AT A TIME."

farmerman wrote:

On second thought, find that person who gives a **** and tell them, K?

You are the one who tried to change the subject to my mental superiority, so I'll address it to you.

farmerman wrote:

You are so damned insecure that you use any assertion you can muster.

It is reasonable for me to set the record straight when people say untrue things about me.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

bullshit. You have no idea of what you speak. You just like to hear yourelf pontificate.

That is incorrect. I am extremely well informed on this subject.

Winner-take-all has absolutely nothing to do with the vote-weight disparity that you are objecting to.

The cause of the disparity is the fact that small states are apportioned more representation per capita.

farmerman wrote:

When you know of what you speak on this issue, call someone who gives a ****.

I know of what I speak on this issue.

0 Replies

The only reason people want to get rid of the electoral college is because they are sore losers. Another reason it exists is to prevent the election of charismatic tyrants. The rational thing to do would be to beef up the security, not to get rid of it.

2 Replies

@Super-Socrates,

Super-Socrates wrote:

Another reason it exists is to prevent the election of charismatic tyrant.

It didn't prevent the election of Trump.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Read the rest of my post.

3 Replies

@Super-Socrates,

More cops, more military, what security are you talking about?

0 Replies

@Super-Socrates,

stupid argument. In 2016 it was only the vote of the electoral college that gave us a charismatic tyrant who lost the popular vote. your argument is nonsense.

1 Reply

@Super-Socrates,

you read the rest of your post. no sore losers here, but people who reject the idea that some people's voters should count m.ore than others, who think one person, one vote is the very essence of america, particularly when the e.c. gave us the person that has won the dubious title of worst president in american history by a wide margin.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

stupid argument. In 2016 it was only the vote of the electoral college that gave us a charismatic tyrant who lost the popular vote. your argument is nonsense.

PRECISELY! [/size]

The composition of the Electoral College (and the Senate) are an abomination to representative democracy.

BUT...I doubt either will be changed...unless a huge Democratic plurality occurs in the Congress under the election processes now in effect. (Which, I acknowledge, seems very unlikely.)

We gotta learn to live with a conservative minority exerting an undue amount of influence over how we are governed.

0 Replies

@Super-Socrates,

The rest of your post doesn't speak to your false assertion that the Electoral College prevents the election of charismatic tyrants.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

The rest of your post doesn't speak to your false assertion that the Electoral College prevents the election of charismatic tyrants.

What is truly funny is that when first elected, Trump campaigned to CHANGE the Electoral College, because he thought it was UNFAIR TO REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES FOR PRESIDENT.

The moron actually thought (questionable word for him) that the EC worked against, rather than for, him!

1 Reply

Let's get rid of the Electoral College

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know