65
   

Let's get rid of the Electoral College

 
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Apr, 2023 03:05 am
@chrisb555,
The Trouble with the (Electoral College)


Published Nov 7, 2011


0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Apr, 2023 01:31 pm
The Electoral Collage is a safety valve, to prevent larger states from rolling over smaller states. How would you have felt if the Electoral Collage had rejected 45?
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Apr, 2023 01:35 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

The Electoral Collage is a safety valve, to prevent larger states from rolling over smaller states. How would you have felt if the Electoral Collage had rejected 45?


The Electoral College is an abomination. It gives the individuals in low population states a much greater say in who governs than individuals in high population states.

It should be abolished...but I doubt that will ever happen.
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Apr, 2023 01:47 pm
@Frank Apisa,
One of the few places where we have 180degree opinions based on the same point. Texas's interests are not Iowa's interests.

Texas, California, New York, Ohio shouldn't be able to elect a President on their own, particularly if it's another 45. What if Texas, California, New York, Ohio decide the Union doesn't need a Rhode Island? Majority rules, right?

Texas already decides what more than half the nation gets as text books. Do we really want Texas to decide what else is best for you?
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Reply Mon 10 Apr, 2023 02:55 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:


One of the few places where we have 180degree opinions based on the same point. Texas's interests are not Iowa's interests.

Texas, California, New York, Ohio shouldn't be able to elect a President on their own, particularly if it's another 45.


You are correct. Texas, California, New York, and Ohio should NOT be able to elect a President on their own. I agree completely.

BUT TEXAS, CALIFORNIA, NEW YORK, AND OHIO...are just areas of land. They get no vote at all.

The people living in those states, though, should have as much vote as the people living in Wyoming or North Dakota, for instance.

And right now, because of the Electoral College...each individual living in Wyoming, North and South Dakota, Alaska, Vermont...get as much voting power as 7 to 8 individuals in California. Each individual in those states is 7 to 8 times as powerful in the vote. It essentially is that each individual in those states get to vote 7 or 8 times...while each individual in California is only allowed to vote once.

That simply is not fair.

Nothing will be done to relieve this unfairness...certainly not in the lifetime of anyone presently alive...BUT IT IS NOT FAIR.



tsarstepan
 
  3  
Reply Wed 18 Sep, 2024 11:24 am
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Wed 18 Sep, 2024 12:24 pm
@Frank Apisa,
I remember reading bobsal's comment and wanting to respond to it...and then forgot about it. Thank you for this post, as you've touched on everything I would have tried to say. States don't vote; people do.
Region Philbis
 
  2  
Reply Thu 5 Nov, 2026 09:29 am
Occupy Democrats wrote:
Democrats now control enough states to effectively abolish the Electoral College through the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Republicans did NOT have this on their bingo cards...

Under the Constitution, states control their electoral votes and are allowed to decide how they are allocated during presidential elections. Currently, almost every state gives its votes to whoever wins the state.

In practice, the current system means that a candidate can win the national popular vote, but lose the election because small states like Wyoming exert undue influence on the outcome. That state has 3 electoral votes with a population of just 577,000 people. California has 54 electoral votes and a population of 39.5 million people. So a vote in Wyoming is essentially 3.8 times as valuable as one in California.

Since 1992, Democrats have won the popular vote seven out of nine times.
Under the NPV, states that join agree to give their electoral votes to whoever wins the national popular vote, not just their own state. So a state could go red on the map, but if the Democrat wins the national vote, they still get that state's votes. And vice versa of course.

The crucial mechanism is that the compact doesn't trigger until the member states have a combined power of at least 270 electoral votes, the number needed to win the White House. So far, 18 states plus D.C. have joined, totaling 222 electoral votes. We only need 48 more.

Now is the chance to pass this measure in every state possible. Democrats won both houses of the legislature in Wisconsin for the first time in 18 years (10 electoral votes). We won the Pennsylvania state Senate for the first time since 1993 (19 votes). We now have a trifecta in Michigan (15 votes). And we won the governor’s race in Nevada (6 votes).

10 + 19 + 15 + 6 = 50.
222 + 50 = 272.

And if we hold our lead in the Arizona Senate, that number could climb as high as 283, more than enough to trigger the compact.

In addition to removing an imbalance in our system that favors Republicans, this novel approach would fundamentally change how candidates run their presidential campaigns. Currently, they are incentivized to ignore most of the country. If you live in a “safe” state, red or blue, your vote for President is basically decided before you cast it. Campaigns spend their time and money in a handful of swing states while the rest of us watch from the sidelines. If the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is adopted, they'll have reason to hit every state because they're aiming to win the largest swath of the country as a whole, not just certain states.

States have until July 20, 2028 to join the compact in time for the next presidential election.

We can fix our democracy. The time is now.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Nov, 2026 12:34 pm
We need the Electoral Collage. To prevent Trumps of the future.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Nov, 2026 12:36 pm
@hightor,
So MAGA was a disaster, but at least it was a fair election??????
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/13/2026 at 07:16:38
▲ ▼