Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As some of you know I don't vote & the reason why is because of the electoral college votes. One state can count for 1 vote another might count for 55 votes. Am I the only one who feels that this isn't the way to elect a president?
All those from larger states, whose votes count as a smaller fraction of an elector than that of the average citizen.
All those from reliably red or blue states, because candidates have no motivation to pay attention to their concerns in the campaign.
All those who favor a third party candidate (though this is more an indictment of any winner-take-all system).
So to be specific, if you vote in one of these 12 big states you are getting screwed (increasingly down the list): VA, NJ, NC, GA, MI, OH, IL, PA, FL, NY, TX, CA.
If you live in one of these 21 reliably red states you are getting screwed: AL, AK, AZ, AR, GA, ID, IN, KS, KY, LA, MT, NE, ND, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, WV, WY.
If you live in one of these 17 reliably blue states you are getting screwed: CA, CT, DE, DC, HI, IL, ME, MD, MA, MS, NJ, NM, NY, OR, RI, VT, WA.
And if your state is in more than one list above, you are getting double-screwed.
Actually, living in Texas I miss the political advertising that goes on without end in the battleground states.
It also helps me to address the typical complaint about voting third party that it is throwing away your vote. I just say "Rubio will win Texas no matter how you vote".
Very stupid process- a candidate can have more people vote for them and lose the election! It makes no sense. Why bother tryng to win states like Wyoming, when winning California is as good as 40 Wyomings?!
Its all fixed from the get go,Those few with the real power know exactly who will win this upcoming election.The media playing its non stop political reality show is meaningless, the debates,town halls,caucuses,delegates,super delegates,electoral college,people voting is all a sham/ charade.
Reliance on one person's opinion in a blog might be wrong.
While the electoral college can be problematic, many of the problems have nothing to do with the electoral college at all, but instead have to do with the state-level laws regarding elections. Many of these state-level laws were put in place to give the two major parties a dominating advantage in elections.
Elections aren't just about who wins on election day. Look at the Presidential election that's going on right now. It's a conversation, between citizens and the people who want to represent those citizens. The discourse goes both ways. Candidates bringing up issues, their perspectives, their proposals to deal with issues, are telling us what their ideologies are, what their priorities are, what sort of strategies they embrace. And citizens asking questions, challenging candidates, are telling candidates what their issues are, how they prioritize the many issues faced today, how they want those issues dealt with. It's a conversation that's intended to shape the candidates to better represent the people.
The electoral college is just one part of mechanisms that are intended to give all Americans access to the conversation. In a democracy, urban areas have a natural and inherent advantage. Urban areas face a different set of issues than rural areas, and given the natural advantage that urban areas have in democratic systems, the issues that face rural residents could be entirely ignored. Which wouldn't be very democratic. And would eventually lead to an entire segment of Americans that are virtually disenfranchised because they are perpetually outnumbered.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,348 posts, read 54,477,544 times
Reputation: 40781
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo
How many Senators do you think Texas should have?
The number of Senators and Representatives is fixed by the Constitution as is the existence of the Electoral College, two distinctly different issues. I believe the Electoral College should be eliminated by Amendment.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,348 posts, read 54,477,544 times
Reputation: 40781
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
The electoral college is just one part of mechanisms that are intended to give all Americans access to the conversation. In a democracy, urban areas have a natural and inherent advantage. Urban areas face a different set of issues than rural areas, and given the natural advantage that urban areas have in democratic systems, the issues that face rural residents could be entirely ignored. Which wouldn't be very democratic. And would eventually lead to an entire segment of Americans that are virtually disenfranchised because they are perpetually outnumbered.
How is one person's vote carrying more weight than another's based purely on where they choose to live so very democratic?
How is one person's vote carrying more weight than another's based purely on where they choose to live so very democratic?
Because it's not about just the vote. It's about EVERYTHING beforehand. It's about the exchange between voters and candidates that goes on for months. It's about getting candidates to talk to and to listen to Americans that have a different set of issues than you because they live a different lifestyle than you. Their voices can get lost because in a democracy it's never about one person's vote, it's about bunches of votes. The bigger the bloc you belong to, the more weight your vote carries. And in a democracy, the urban bloc is always bigger. So, the electoral college gives an miniscule weighting to a bloc of voters that are always smaller. In order to include them in a conversation. 99% of the problems attributed to the electoral college have nothing to do with the electoral college at all, they have to do with the state-level laws that were passed to give the two major parties an overwhelming advantage.
If you want to fix the problem, the first thing to do is to identify the problem.
The winner-take-all laws, all state-level laws, are part of the problem. Nothing to do with the electoral college. Nothing to do with federal laws.
The cap on the number of members of the House of Representatives is part of the problem. That cap is what creates an imbalance of power so that representation in the House of Representatives (and therefore in the electoral college) is not the same for every state. And that cap also enhances the power of lobbyists and outside groups to influence legislators.
And the laws, all state-level laws, that govern how we nominate our Presidential candidates, and what hoops they have to go through to get on state ballots, inhibits free and democratic elections. Again, nothing to do with the electoral college.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Something is wrong here.
