Electoral College, love it or leave it?

RFTC · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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

RFTC · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

Get rid of it. There is no need.

Jason P · August 2011

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

blackredyellow · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

ditch it

Gern Blansten · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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 · August 2011

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

Electoral College, love it or leave it?

Comments

Categories