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.
This happens on both sides, don't cherry pick because it suits an agenda, like yours for instance. In blue states where there is a Democrat majority they manipulate the districts just as much.
I seem to remember a lot of purging of military votes a while back, wonder by which party though... Oh that's right, the one that the military typically doesn't vote for.
Everything is cyclical and it will eventually change. Just a couple generations ago the South was solidly Democrat.
As for the ID part, you have to show an ID to function in society on a daily basis. Voting should be no different. It is the price we/you/I pay for maintaining any sense of legitimacy and avoiding even the appearance of impropriety.
As if we're all going around voting on a daily basis...............
The very few legitimate errors that have been proved, in the voting rolls, (as opposed to the unproven claims of vast error, and worse), should be the price we pay to keep the government from intruding on our most sacred duty as citizens. I'd have thought that should be obvious to the conservative conspiracy types.
It occurred to me that votes could still be counted state by state, but still allow election by popular vote.
I would base election by popular vote on a candidate getting a definite majority of the votes. That is, if all the votes are aggregated across the whole country, and a definite majority went to one candidate, that candidate would win.
Counting popular votes state by state, however, would allow the EC to continue as a back up plan. If no one candidate had a majority of the popular vote, the EC would be activated.
Why bother with the EC as a back up plan? To keep the election from being thrown into Congress, which I would expect to turn into a partisan war, or grid lock.
popular vote: the voting public is not smart enough for a popular vote. the electoral college is a fail safe and the population if smart enough would endorse the electoral college prinicipal.
popular vote is a true democracy ideology, nothing more than mob rule
Not to mention it keeps the two party system in power.
The Electoral College is a key element in the system to prevent to masses from having any real power over the plutocrats that own the nation and rent the government. If the masses had any real power Monsanto would have never been allowed to monopolize farming in the US or lie to the public about the actual effects of its evil wizardry.
popular vote: the voting public is not smart enough for a popular vote. the electoral college is a fail safe and the population if smart enough would endorse the electoral college prinicipal.
popular vote is a true democracy ideology, nothing more than mob rule
Exactly! And the American public is getting progressively dumber and dumber each election cycle!
Now that voting season is soon upon us for a new President the controversy of the Electoral College (hereafter called EC) will arise as it always does.
While there are many reasons for the EC, one is so that a "popular son" candidate can't pile up votes. For example, if one of the teams running consisted of candidates from California and New York and the other two from N. Dakota and Wyoming, there could be several million additional votes for the former as they come from heavily populated states. Another reason was so that smaller states wouldn't be so insignificant and issues of such states would have to be addressed by the candidates.....
That said, many people prefer a straight up popular vote. The general thought is that Presidents should be elected by a majority of the voters. However, this is derailed when the President elect wins only a plurality of the vote.
Another issue that can effect either side, but is more directly towards the EC is that if a candidate fails to win enough electoral votes the race goes to the US House and then partisan politics can rear its ugly head.
Now, for me, I prefer the EC (so everyone knows where I stand).
But what are your thoughts?
The system is rigged as is.
I would only allow US natural born citizens to vote and then go by the popular vote. Majority wins. That is democracy.
The USA has never been a democracy and it's worked great as a Constitutional Republic for 240 years. No need to change. I think the popular vote winners lost electoral college twice, big deal.
Yes he did. He should have been president in 2004.
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.
Multiple Voting Systems for President
