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.
Why do we have electors that do not believe in the electoral process? They need to be replaced.
Actually that is the fun thing about the electoral college, we simply vote to advise our electoral voters on how to vote. That in no way is a guarantee that our electoral voters will vote the way we want them to. Obviously, almost all of them will vote the way their state instructed them to vote, and those that defect from who they are suppose to vote for won't be enough to swing the vote.
If you don't like that about the electoral college, then maybe it is time to update it to better represent the people. Let's start with having electoral votes evenly represent the people of the country rather than favor some states more than others simply because they have less people in their state.
If you don't like that about the electoral college, then maybe it is time to update it to better represent the people. Let's start with having electoral votes evenly represent the people of the country rather than favor some states more than others simply because they have less people in their state.
Democratic ec voters from red states have no vote. Democrat ec voters from blue states are already voting for Clinton. Unless a large block of republican voters think Hillary should be president nothing will change.
Actually that is the fun thing about the electoral college, we simply vote to advise our electoral voters on how to vote. That in no way is a guarantee that our electoral voters will vote the way we want them to. Obviously, almost all of them will vote the way their state instructed them to vote, and those that defect from who they are suppose to vote for won't be enough to swing the vote.
If you don't like that about the electoral college, then maybe it is time to update it to better represent the people. Let's start with having electoral votes evenly represent the people of the country rather than favor some states more than others simply because they have less people in their state.
My source on page 1 said 29 states are legally tied to the election results.
I guess they can break the law...
Again - it's not all about people... it's people and states. It is equally unfair to have about 5% of land represent 100% of America's land. It's a hybrid system. The system protects you from tyranny from the left or the right.
Michael Banerian wants to show that young adults still have faith in the political system, but he said his selection as one of Michigan’s 16 Electoral College voters has prompted emails urging him to vote for Democrat Hillary Clinton and even threatening death.
On Dec. 19, the 22-year-old Banerian is scheduled to join 15 other Michiganians to cast their electoral votes for Republican President-elect Donald Trump. But Trump’s opponents have deluged Banerian and other GOP electors with pleas and nasty emails to reverse course and cast their ballots for Clinton, according to the Michigan Republican Party.
“You have people saying ‘you’re a hateful bigot, I hope you die,’ ” he said. “I’ve had people talk about shoving a gun in my mouth and blowing my brains out. And I’ve received dozens and dozens of those emails. Even the non-threatening-my-life emails are very aggressive.”
...
Another elector, Kenneth Crider, said he hasn’t received any death threats or intimidating emails but has gotten more than 300 emails from people in other states asking him to vote for Clinton instead of Trump on Dec. 19.
The 51-year-old heating and air conditioning professional from Livonia said many of the emails were from teachers and professors trying to explain to him the gravity of the situation, urging him to change his mind.
Now this is not a problem of the system. This is a problem about whiny spoiled brats that lack self-control.
This NYT link states 100% reporting and Trump ahead by about 11,000: http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/michigan. Perhaps it has not been called because it automatically triggered a recount?
From the article above...
Trump won by a little more than 13,100 votes in Michigan, according to unofficial results scheduled to be certified by Nov. 28. Michigan law requires the state’s 16 electors to cast their votes for the presidential candidate who wins the majority of voters, said Secretary of State spokesman Fred Woodhams.
The genius of this is that it's based on state charters, not the will of the currently in power congress.
I am still reading through the site, but sure, something like that would be a good idea, though I think the biggest issue would be that it could make things more complicated, which at that point, might as rely solely on the popular vote.
My source on page 1 said 29 states are legally tied to the election results.
I guess they can break the law...
Again - it's not all about people... it's people and states. It is equally unfair to have about 5% of land represent 100% of America's land. It's a hybrid system. The system protects you from tyranny from the left or the right.
I guess this is where we disagree, I do think it is unfair to have someone in a less populated state have more power when it comes to electing a president than those in a more populated state. It is also unfair to have the minority representing the majority by having a larger say with their vote. I think the only fair solution is a system that represents a one for one. If you want to combine that with a proportional system and do away with the 270 benchmark to win, I would also support that too.
Actually that is the fun thing about the electoral college, we simply vote to advise our electoral voters on how to vote. That in no way is a guarantee that our electoral voters will vote the way we want them to. Obviously, almost all of them will vote the way their state instructed them to vote, and those that defect from who they are suppose to vote for won't be enough to swing the vote.
If you don't like that about the electoral college, then maybe it is time to update it to better represent the people. Let's start with having electoral votes evenly represent the people of the country rather than favor some states more than others simply because they have less people in their state.
The POTUS is not about representing the people. The POTUS is about representing the individual states joined together as one union.
The POTUS is not about representing the people. The POTUS is about representing the individual states joined together as one union.
Dude, these people never paid attention in civics class.
They just know they lost and a different system looks like it might have yielded a different result.
That's as far as the critical thinking goes.
But I do applaud your effort.
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.
