U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-26-2010, 12:38 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,057 posts, read 29,753,954 times
Reputation: 10455

Advertisements

Well, what about it? We give a lot of lip service to the idea of "one man, one vote." But we don't actually elect our own President directly. I'm not going to re-state the concerns of the Founding Fathers here, but times have changed. Yet the Electoral College hangs on.

C-D denizens, have at it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-26-2010, 04:01 PM
 
Location: NE CT
1,496 posts, read 2,795,258 times
Reputation: 707
I agree the EC is outdated and no longer serves the purpose that the founding fathers designed for it. Furthermore, Senators are no longer appointed by the state governments, so that has changed to popular vote as well. We don't need a system where one wins the popular vote but loses to the electoral college vote.

If they insist on keeping the EC, then states should split the EC votes by districts rather than having a winnner take all method. This would at least be a better reflection of the popular vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2010, 04:42 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 20,335,068 times
Reputation: 8606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred314X View Post
Well, what about it? We give a lot of lip service to the idea of "one man, one vote." But we don't actually elect our own President directly. I'm not going to re-state the concerns of the Founding Fathers here, but times have changed. Yet the Electoral College hangs on.

C-D denizens, have at it!
Part of the reason that the electoral college was started was so that smaller states could have a voice that was louder, compared to states with large populations.

Yes, we do give more electoral college votes to larger states, but the percentage isn't equal to their population.

My feeling is that smaller states already got preferential treatment by giving them an equal amount of Senators to larger states. The electoral college system is taking it to far.

Andrew Jackson wanted smaller southern states to have more of a say, so that he and his party could hold onto the Presidency longer. That was the ultimate purpose of the system we are under. Repeal it, go back to a popular vote system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2010, 04:59 PM
 
9,807 posts, read 12,926,049 times
Reputation: 8127
I always was opposed to the electoral college and believed( naively) that the first time we had an election where the winner of the popular vote lost out, it would be done away with.

I was wrong !

It happened and there barely was a whimper about getting rid of the electoral college.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2010, 11:12 PM
 
Location: Orlando Metro Area
3,455 posts, read 5,596,194 times
Reputation: 2167
I've always used the example of Florida vs North Dakota. Because Florida has way more electoral votes than N. Dakota, everybody but me could sleep through election day and fail to cast their ballots, but my single vote would overrule that of let's say a recrod turnout in N. Dakota where all of the state's 600,000 people registered & showed up to vote. On second thought, maybe I shouldn't use Florida in a debate about the electoral college vs the popular vote, I seem to remeber a little situation with that a few ears back lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2010, 09:58 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,057 posts, read 29,753,954 times
Reputation: 10455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
Part of the reason that the electoral college was started was so that smaller states could have a voice that was louder, compared to states with large populations.
The problem is the Electoral College, not electoral votes. You could eliminate the former, and still retain the latter; it would just require a system where the popular vote awards that state to the particular candidate. EC means, when you get right down to it, that a bunch of people who aren't responsible to anyone are deciding which Presidential candidate will carry the given state. (Yeah, they're supposed to follow the popular vote--but what if they don't? There's no law requiring them to do so).

The reason it was established in the first place was that the Founding Fathers didn't entirely trust the masses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2010, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Orlando, Florida
43,858 posts, read 43,602,201 times
Reputation: 58603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred314X View Post
......................

The reason it was established in the first place was that the Founding Fathers didn't entirely trust the masses.
And with good reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2010, 04:52 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 20,335,068 times
Reputation: 8606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred314X View Post
The problem is the Electoral College, not electoral votes. You could eliminate the former, and still retain the latter; it would just require a system where the popular vote awards that state to the particular candidate. EC means, when you get right down to it, that a bunch of people who aren't responsible to anyone are deciding which Presidential candidate will carry the given state. (Yeah, they're supposed to follow the popular vote--but what if they don't? There's no law requiring them to do so).

The reason it was established in the first place was that the Founding Fathers didn't entirely trust the masses.
The reason the founders did this in the first place is that it was next to impossible to get all of the popular votes counted, and sent to Washington to be counted in front of the legislature as the Constitution dictates.

Today, elections are much more easily read.

The last time an elector voted for someone who didn't win the state, was in 1976, when a Republican elector voted for Reagan, instead of Ford.

The biggest issue for me is the "two vote minimum" provision. States with much smaller populations are mandated to get two votes, regardless of their size. So even if other states have massive populations, small ones still get two votes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2010, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,057 posts, read 29,753,954 times
Reputation: 10455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
The last time an elector voted for someone who didn't win the state, was in 1976, when a Republican elector voted for Reagan, instead of Ford.
That may have been the last time, but the continued existence of the Electoral College means that there's always a chance for a repeat of the result of the 1876 Presidential election--when Rutherford B. Hayes became President, losing the popular vote but taking the Electoral College. And that's not to say anything about the election of 2000, when a straight popular vote could probably have permitted the whole country to live without the horror show that followed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2010, 02:11 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,302 posts, read 3,760,664 times
Reputation: 2524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred314X View Post
Well, what about it? We give a lot of lip service to the idea of "one man, one vote." But we don't actually elect our own President directly. I'm not going to re-state the concerns of the Founding Fathers here, but times have changed. Yet the Electoral College hangs on.

C-D denizens, have at it!
Times have changed? How so to say we should change the system?

I could say times have changed and we need to keep still.

Maybe why do you think it should go away? What about the concept you do not agree with? What about direct elections make it better? Take care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top