U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 11-01-2007, 05:00 PM
 
Location: In My Own Reality
1,461 posts, read 1,957,819 times
Reputation: 1635

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
Eliminating the electoral college would, among other things, largely limit the election to urban areas in a handful of states. Our founders realized that this would be hazardous to our national sense of unity and fairness.

For example, the whole purpose of creating a bicameral legislative system was to provide smaller states a fair level of representation through the Senate -- which is balanced by the House's proportional representation, favoring the larger states.

The Electoral College system provides for 50 separate Presidential "elections", thus ensuring that the President must campaign for, and receive, the mandate of the entire country, not just a few densely-populated areas.
Thanks, that does make some sense but I still feel that there should be some way for the people to truly be the deciding factor in who becomes president.
Back when the electoral college was first set up it might have been difficult to make sure that people in more rural areas were aware of all of the issues and candidates and what they stood for but I would think that would not be such a big problem now.
I read somewhere that the popular doesn't even have legal significance. That the Electoral College could ignore the pop vote in casting it's votes. Not that it has happened but it could.

Seems to me that if we are asked to vote that we should know that our vote actually made the difference in who go in office. With the way it is set up now you're just not sure.

The problem may not be that americans are dumb but that many have just given up caring.
I vote because I think I should, because I hope it will make a difference although I do not always believe it does and because I then feel I have the right to kvetch about the folks I did or didn't put in office.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-01-2007, 05:23 PM
 
1,352 posts, read 4,220,909 times
Reputation: 575
I find it quite amusing how some posters take offense to a post summarizing "Americans inability to draw rational conclusions". Many people post responses as if the article named them personally. It just goes to show how self-centered, self-absorbed some people are. Again the main point of this post was not necessarily the newspapers "polls", because I nor anyone of us know what individuals were polled, but the poll was obviously done in order to render an assessment. I don't have to take it literaly word for word however, after thinking about it, I can safely come to the same conclusion if the same questions were asked of CD posters; your co-workers; neighbors; acquaintances; family members, the results would more than likely be the same.

It wasn't posted for the purpose of offending any one particular person/individual/group/party, etc. It was posted for dialogue purposes and to allow people to see past party lines, economical status, etc. No wonder the next generation of children coming up are so screwed up and lagging behind other countries, their arrogance won't allow them to strive, improve, or effect change....such a sad case, but I guess it is what it is.

One thing I can say for certain and Berkshires said it best:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berkshires413 View Post
to Dorothy and all her friends out there - we ain't in Kansas anymore... and this ain't your grandaddy's America, either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2007, 05:29 PM
 
Location: Blankity-blank!
11,449 posts, read 14,271,306 times
Reputation: 6904
What do the simpletons want in a president?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2007, 06:08 PM
 
2,967 posts, read 1,750,137 times
Reputation: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
What do the simpletons want in a president?
They want HillBilly. You know, they want a twofer!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2007, 06:35 PM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
58,002 posts, read 40,738,449 times
Reputation: 29680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
The Electoral College system provides for 50 separate Presidential "elections", thus ensuring that the President must campaign for, and receive, the mandate of the entire country, not just a few densely-populated areas.


What it really does is establish a system where a candidate could hold a substantial lead in popular vote and still lose the election. That's not the idea of a democracy in my opinion. Perhaps in the days of the founders when it could take weeks, even months for news to reach rural areas, when it was impossible to run a campaign that penetrated all areas of the country with equal impact, the Elctoral College may have had a purpose. Today it's nothing but an anachronism. I see no valid reason why anyone's vote should be more important ythan anyone else's.

Last edited by burdell; 11-01-2007 at 06:45 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2007, 09:08 AM
 
Location: Near Manito
19,489 posts, read 20,821,173 times
Reputation: 13751
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
What it really does is establish a system where a candidate could hold a substantial lead in popular vote and still lose the election. That's not the idea of a democracy in my opinion. Perhaps in the days of the founders when it could take weeks, even months for news to reach rural areas, when it was impossible to run a campaign that penetrated all areas of the country with equal impact, the Elctoral College may have had a purpose. Today it's nothing but an anachronism. I see no valid reason why anyone's vote should be more important ythan anyone else's.
I understand and appreciate your opinion, but I disagree, nonetheless. If the Constitution said that the candidate with the most votes was to be declared the President, you would be correct. However, it does not. It says that the candidate receiving the majority of electoral votes is to be named the President.

If you want to change the system, you should work to amend the Constitution. After all, substantial alterations have been made to affect the election of Presidents: remember that the original constitutional principle concerning Presidential elections stipulated that the candidate receiving the seoncd-highest total of electoral votes was named the Vice President. That was a mess, was recognized as suxh, and was remedied by the XII Amendment.

Your point concerning the "unequal importance" of votes is well-taken, but consider how often that threshold is crossed: e.g., Senatorial elections, in which the scattered folks from Wyoming have just as much power and representation as the sun-tanned masses of Californians!

As I posted above, keep in mind how the Electoral College attempts to reflect the demographic balance of our bicameral legislative system. Just as with the House and Senate, the College balances the greater number of Electoral votes wielded by larger states, with the protections given to the smaller states by separating the Electors into 50 groups.

Until there is overwhelming sentiment to the contrary (or perhaps a repeat of the 2000 election! ), the creaky old Electoral College -- with its insistence on numerous mini-elections which ensure some measure of importance to all voters, no matter how remote, is the best system we could have in a nation as diverse and dynamic as ours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2007, 09:12 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
58,002 posts, read 40,738,449 times
Reputation: 29680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
What do the simpletons want in a president?


After almost seven years you have to ask?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2007, 09:18 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
58,002 posts, read 40,738,449 times
Reputation: 29680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post

As I posted above, keep in mind how the Electoral College attempts to reflect the demographic balance of our bicameral legislative system. Just as with the House and Senate, the College balances the greater number of Electoral votes wielded by larger states, with the protections given to the smaller states by separating the Electors into 50 groups.

.

I just see no reason to believe that the Electoral College is more capable of representing demographics (literally:characteristics of the population ) than the popular vote. If the president represents allegedly represents all the people it would seem only fitting that all the people had an equal vote in electing that president, currently they do not.

Last edited by burdell; 11-02-2007 at 09:33 AM.. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2007, 09:27 AM
 
Location: Arizona
5,396 posts, read 7,054,067 times
Reputation: 1197
I think back in the day when there were striking regional differences... the electoral college made more sense. Today we are pretty homogenous across the country... WalMart - McDonalds -Home Depot. When people vote for the President they are more concerned with National foreign policy issues, national economic issues, and for some, social/moral issues. I don't see the relevance of any of that with the state that you live in. I think it is more unfair for "red" people in "blue" states and for "blue" people in "red " states. Thier votes essentially become irrelevant and every election gets to be decided by the handful of swing states that could tip either way. Why should Florida or Ohio voters get to hold all the power to decide the Presidency?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2007, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Near Manito
19,489 posts, read 20,821,173 times
Reputation: 13751
Quote:
Originally Posted by bily4 View Post
I think back in the day when there were striking regional differences... the electoral college made more sense. Today we are pretty homogenous across the country... WalMart - McDonalds -Home Depot. When people vote for the President they are more concerned with National foreign policy issues, national economic issues, and for some, social/moral issues. I don't see the relevance of any of that with the state that you live in. I think it is more unfair for "red" people in "blue" states and for "blue" people in "red " states. Thier votes essentially become irrelevant and every election gets to be decided by the handful of swing states that could tip either way. Why should Florida or Ohio voters get to hold all the power to decide the Presidency?
You seem to be essentially saying that our political climate is static, and that voting patterns never change. That is simply and demonstrably not true. The Electoral College system, which requires that the candidates wage credible campaigns in each state, is fairer and more accessible to more voters than a remote national campagin focusing on a relatively small number of highly-populated urban areas.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

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