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.
The electoral college did it's job as it was designed to do.
It gave the undereducated and ignorant an equal voice is electing the POTUS.
When it was enacted it was a good idea because everybody is entitled to vote even those who have no idea about the person they are voting for.
They never counted on the uneducated outnumbering the educated.
Unfortunately in many states education takes a back seat to more important things like winning college sports teams. Especially in Southern colleges. They send more people to the NFL and NBA then they send to advanced universities.
This is what brought is George Bush and Trump.
I know in NC the Republicans like to keep the voters stupid so they keep voting Republican
So it should be kept but tweaked so we don't keep getting any more Trumps or W's.
The electoral college did it's job as it was designed to do.
It gave the undereducated and ignorant an equal voice is electing the POTUS. When it was enacted it was a good idea because everybody is entitled to vote even those who have no idea about the person they are voting for.
When it was enacted, only those with land could vote. Also, slaves were 3/5 of a person constitutionally, women couldn't vote, black men couldn't vote (until 1870 technically, but in reality 1965).
So yes, let's go ahead and default to the founding father's intentions.
It really is amazing how anyone would be okay with dynamically scaling power across the people. The electoral college is an antiquated system that disproportionately gives power to smaller states per person.
For instance, in Wyoming there are 3 electoral votes. When compared to the population, this is 143,000 people per electoral vote.
In California there are 55 votes, that's 500,000 people per electoral vote. That means that the people of Wyoming have 3.5x the voting power of Californians. In what world is this a fair system? Only a handful of states decide the election, which means those running don't even need to bother with the majority. What a nonsense system!
The electoral college did it's job as it was designed to do.
It gave the undereducated and ignorant an equal voice is electing the POTUS.
When it was enacted it was a good idea because everybody is entitled to vote even those who have no idea about the person they are voting for.
They never counted on the uneducated outnumbering the educated.
Wow. I haven't seen something so ridiculous in quite a while. I'm sure you'll be outdone by someone, somewhere today, but for the moment, you hold the lead in my "brazenly stupid comment of the day" contest.
There has to be some form of EC or California would decide almost every election. I do think changing the winner takes all part of it which occurs in 48 states should change. It makes no sense when one candidate barely wins a state that the votes on the losing side do not count.
There has to be some form of EC or California would decide almost every election. I do think changing the winner takes all part of it which occurs in 48 states should change. It makes no sense when one candidate barely wins a state that the votes on the losing side do not count.
What makes FAR more sense is proportional allocation of votes. This would give a huge incentive to get people to vote AND is much more representative of all people. It still doesn't account for the disproportionate power per person, which I believe would ideally be solved with one man one vote. At the very least though, the votes should be divided up against the electoral college based on the number of votes to each candidate.
As Bentbow and InformedConsent said, we are a constitutional republic, not a democracy.
Our republic is made up of individual states, whose electors vote for the president based on what the majority of those states' voters want (that's the democratic part).
That's the way this country was set up, and if the anti-Trumps don't like it, too bad.
I'm quite sure that if Trump had won the popular vote but lost the electoral college vote, the anti-Trumps would be telling us what I'm telling them now.
Well, maybe not in the detail I'm providing. It would be more like "Electoral college good --ugga ugga!"
As Bentbow and InformedConsent said, we are a constitutional republic, not a democracy.
Our republic is made up of individual states, whose electors vote for the president based on what the majority of those states' voters want (that's the democratic part).
Faithless electors. They exist.
We don't vote for presidents, they do. In some states, they don't even have to vote for a candidate that is running.
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.
