Electoral College, love it or leave it?

RFTC

Have not seen this discussed here and i posted something earlier regarding the dynamics for the 2012 election, that thread got locked about 3 minutes later...(due to some other animated discussions)

so who here supports the electoral college and whom does not? would like to read the differing opinions.

btw, 270towin.com is a pretty interactive & historical site that i recently found.

keeponrockin

I don't know why they just don't do a popular vote. Seems to make the most sense.

RFTC

keeponrockin wrote:

I don't know why they just don't do a popular vote. Seems to make the most sense.

agreed, does it not disenfranchise a dem in texas or a republican in say, vermont that their vote is basically meaningless? how bout the states closing poles late, when the media is reporting a win and the individual voter, says "ahh fk it,".

i get the original intent is to have candidates campaign broadly and NOT just focus on the most populist states, but feel it only magnifies the emphasis of mega funding campaigns in just a handful of the 'swing states'...

Who Princess

I read recently that this is something that should have gone away after the Civil War. The Electoral College was originally designed to assist states that had slavery. Those states typically had lower populations, at least of white, property-owning males, who were the only people allowed to vote. The EC allowed those states to have more representation in elections so that the Union wasn't dominated by the interests of the non-slave states. It was a sort of compromise by the Founding Fathers that postponed making a national decision about slavery. What I read was only a brief description and I don't understand all the details, but it made me curious enough to want to learn more about it.

Anyway, for whatever reasons it came about, I think it's long past time to get read of the Electoral College.

mikepegg44

RFTC wrote:

Have not seen this discussed here and i posted something earlier regarding the dynamics for the 2012 election, that thread got locked about 3 minutes later...(due to some other animated discussions)

so who here supports the electoral college and whom does not? would like to read the differing opinions.

btw, 270towin.com is a pretty interactive & historical site that i recently found.

In one sense, I think it is a popular vote. It is a popular vote in the state you choose to live in. We are not the united STATE of america. Each state should have at least a little factor in the election. Otherwise you could probably win an election by dominating in the top ten most populous urban areas. I think it is something like 80% of the population live in urban areas. Those other 20% would never matter, ever. The system isn't perfect, but then again neither is a popular vote. I would rather take the limitations of the electoral college than the limitations of the popular vote.

know1

Get rid of it. There is no need.

Jason P

Get rid of it. The candidates only kiss ass in swing states such as Ohio.

blackredyellow

At one time, it made sense... now it's pointless.

I do think it can be modified, so that it's not a winner take all for the states. I know a few states do split up the electoral votes, and I think all should. Whether it's by percentage or popular vote in the state, or by what candidate wins each congressional district (which, however could cause more gerrymandering of districts), at least it would make more individual votes meaningful.

Kel Varnsen

Jason P wrote:

Get rid of it. The candidates only kiss ass in swing states such as Ohio.

But from my understanding of it, if it was popular vote wouldn't the candidates only kiss ass in heavily populated areas, like the north east, the midwest, Florida, California and North Texas? Do you think anyone would campaign in smaller states if they weren't places where you could pick up a bunch of electoral votes?

Jeanwah

blackredyellow wrote:

At one time, it made sense... now it's pointless.

I agree. Like unions, the electoral college had a purpose when it was started. Now we need to get rid of it.

81

ditch it

Gern Blansten

It's absolutely necessary. Otherwise candidates would pander to only the largest cities and everyone else would be screwed.

plus....it's part of that thing we call "The Constitution"

blackredyellow

Gern Blansten wrote:

It's absolutely necessary. Otherwise candidates would pander to only the largest cities and everyone else would be screwed.

plus....it's part of that thing we call "The Constitution"

But now they only pander to the swing states, so is that much better?

Gern Blansten

blackredyellow wrote:

Gern Blansten wrote:

It's absolutely necessary. Otherwise candidates would pander to only the largest cities and everyone else would be screwed.

plus....it's part of that thing we call "The Constitution"

But now they only pander to the swing states, so is that much better?

In a close election they will....but it is rare to have the popular vote not match the electoral results

Imagine the manipulation that could occur with a popular vote....especially as exit poll data started being reported

SatansFuton

Gern Blansten wrote:

plus....it's part of that thing we call "The Constitution"

Yeah, but that's why we amend the Constitution. If we just left the Constitution the way it was written then women and minorities wouldn't be allowed to vote, slavery would be legal, there would be no term limit for Presidents, and so on. Just because the Constitution says something, doesn't mean it can NEVER be changed less we abandon it, it's not set in stone.

RFTC

Gern Blansten wrote:

It's absolutely necessary. Otherwise candidates would pander to only the largest cities and everyone else would be screwed"

i agree but at same time, some larger states are completely conceded in the current system. someone mentioned the split vote that maybe 2 states currently use, nebraska & maine? not sure how they broke off from all or none structure. would that not be a compromise?

Flagg

Leave it and go with the popular vote. I don't really feel like voting for the president most of the time because of the Electoral College. My state is going red pretty much no matter what so what difference does it make if I vote Republican or Democrat. It makes the entire presidential election a battle for the few swing states.

polaris_x

Gern Blansten wrote:

In a close election they will....but it is rare to have the popular vote not match the electoral results

Imagine the manipulation that could occur with a popular vote....especially as exit poll data started being reported

gore won the popular vote vs. bush ...

LikeAnOcean

I'm on the fence on this. I'm pretty sure the electoral college is meant to keep hystaria from electing a president.. For example, lets say 51% of the population live in California. Those 51% unanimously vote for a guy who is going to invest all of the countries money and resources into fixing California and ignore the rest of the nation.. Basically it keeps everything in check..


On the other hand I agree that if you live in a state that always swings one way, your vote doesn't feel like it makes much a difference in the final result..

know1

Gern Blansten wrote:

It's absolutely necessary. Otherwise candidates would pander to only the largest cities and everyone else would be screwed.

plus....it's part of that thing we call "The Constitution"

Candidates are actually on TV and internet these days if you can believe it. They weren't when the electoral college was instituted.

Jason P

I think "Term Limits" is a more important issue to address then the electoral college, now that I think about it.

brianlux

It really is amazing that the Electoral College still exists. This reminds me of the first thing my first college instructor told us during the first Education class I took at Sonoma State which was basically that institutions are static and that we should not expect to be able to see or make changes happen in anything but a very slow manner... if ever. Talk about a burst bubble.

Never-the-less, I say dump the E.C. and go with popular vote.

RFTC

know1 wrote:

Gern Blansten wrote:

It's absolutely necessary. Otherwise candidates would pander to only the largest cities and everyone else would be screwed.

plus....it's part of that thing we call "The Constitution"

Candidates are actually on TV and internet these days if you can believe it. They weren't when the electoral college was instituted.

ding, ding, ding, after original post, i was like, we HAVE freaking evolved to the point that no one should be unaware of a candidates ideology, background, etc.

Hinn

The bigger question is being missed here...

if the electoral college is no more, on election night what would the TV pundits do with all that time they'd otherwise spend on explaining how this absurd system works and why it's in place?

brianlux

Hinn wrote:

The bigger question is being missed here...

if the electoral college is no more, on election night what would the TV pundits do with all that time they'd otherwise spend on explaining how this absurd system works and why it's in place?

No doubt they would find something equally absurd to explain/(not explain).

chadwick

let's get kat and sea to shut the thread i fired up shut down and use this thread... i did a search and nothing came up when starting the thread.

Johnny Abruzzo

I posted this a few months ago:

http://community.pearljam.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=185851&p=4319713&hilit=NATIONAL+POPULAR+VOTE#p4319713

If you don't like the electoral college write your state reps & governor and tell them to adopt the NPV initiative. They will probably get back to you and let you know if/why they do or don't support it.

mikepegg44

polaris_x wrote:

Gern Blansten wrote:

In a close election they will....but it is rare to have the popular vote not match the electoral results

Imagine the manipulation that could occur with a popular vote....especially as exit poll data started being reported

gore won the popular vote vs. bush ...

and that was the 4th time it has happened in 200+ years


I think the problems with EC are much more muted than what would happen to presidential politics if they changed to merely a popular vote.

we are a federalist system, any attempts to change that are suspect in my opinion of course. I see the reason people want a change, I just don't think anyone would like the new system any more...do we really want major metropolitan areas and large populated regions getting all the empty promises?

chadwick

please i am begging for someone/anyne to help me understand how our votes matter. the electoral college is unfair, out of control, and not understood. wtf? i am actually upset because all this time i thought our votes mattered when in fact they do not matter at all. what the hell is going on with the brain washing of us all?

rollings

Some people need their brains washed.

It's all the dirty minds in this great country of ours

chadwick

don't forget... rock the vote!