do you think they shoud do away with the electoral college (Montana, election)
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.
Every state can proportion their electors in the EC any way they choose. Each state chooses their own allotment rules, with two states opting for proportional to the popular vote.
Every state can go ahead and do that if they want, and it is indeed a state level argument.
Yep, which doesn't really impact the fact that it is a hell of a disparity when you have a system where:
Group A provides 40% of the input and receives 2.5% of the output
and
Group B provides 60% of the input and receives 97.5% of the output.
Regardless of what system that is, those are numbers that indicate the system is not in balance/equilibrium.
is was about the small sates like RhodeIsland being able to have a say... equal representation
Under a NationalPopularVote, 100% of the citizens in a state could vote for candidate A and all of the state’s electoral college votes go to candidate B, rending small states powerless and the will of the people in the state irrelevant.
nyc population 8.3 million
Wyoming 544k
Vermont 621k
n. Dakota 640k
Alaska 690k
s. Dakota 821k
Delaware 885k
Montana 974k Rhodeisland 1.01 million
Hawaii 1.2 million
Maine 1.3 million
total 7.8 million
10 states combined less than the population of NY CITY
repealing the electoral college would take away any say of the smaller rural states
look at Chicago...ok the population of Chicago (A CITY) is 2.7 million..the entire STATE of Nebraska is 1.8 million
should a city negate a whole state???
should a urban jungle of 2.6 million out weigh and entire state (of 1.8 million) of rural farms producing all the food for the urban jungle...should those 1.8 million not count just because the city of 2.6 million is more welfare babies
look at Phoenix...ok the population of Phoenix (A CITY) is 1.6 million..the entire STATE of Wyoming is 550k million
should a city negate a whole state???
should a urban jungle of 1.6 million out weigh an entire state of rural farms producing all the food for the urban jungle...should those 550k not count just because the city of 1.6 million says so...awfully fascist to think that way
is was about the small sates like RhodeIsland being able to have a say... equal representation
Under a NationalPopularVote, 100% of the citizens in a state could vote for candidate A and all of the state’s electoral college votes go to candidate B, rending small states powerless and the will of the people in the state irrelevant.
If they did away with the electoral college there wouldn't BE ANY electoral college votes. The people voting in Rhode Island would have exactly the same voting power as a person voting in NYC, as a person voting in Cali, as a person voting in Podunk, nowhere.
The rest of your post was predicated on the assumption that somehow there would still be electoral votes with no electoral college in place thus is irrelevant to the scenario.
Last edited by zzzSnorlax; 06-06-2019 at 01:51 PM..
It's pretty simple. The electoral college is a proxy voting system. The ONLY way for your vote to "not count" is if you vote one way and the proxy vote goes the other way.
If you remove the proxy layer, all votes must count equally by definition.
repealing the electoral college would take away any say of the smaller rural states
That's not true, not true at all. A popular vote would make all 50 states have equal power -- which is no power at all. And that's OK.
The president doesn't represent the states. That's the Senate's job. The president should represent all of us. And the ONLY fair way to elect a people's representative is by direct popular vote.
The only reason the Electoral College was created was to accommodate slavery. [source] It is antiquated and no longer needs to serve that function. It should have been abolished many years ago.
A national popular vote for president would put everyone's vote into one big pot. Everyone's vote would count the same. The city voter would be equal to the rural voter. That's 100% fair.
the nationalpopularvote scheme, is a scheme from soros and the marxists/fascists
the 501(c) organization NationalPopularVote Inc., a George Soros funded who’s who of the progressive left. ...billionaire George Soros fund sand supports the movement via his myriad 502(c) outfits, such as the Progressive States Network and Common Cause.
Under a National Popular Vote, 100% of the citizens in a state could vote for candidate A and all of the state’s electoral college votes go to candidate B, rending small states powerless and the will of the people in the state irrelevant.
the electoral college is there for a reason
..to protect the little guy from the big guys
Plan for Permanent White House control by progressives happening now
Called the “NationalPopularVote Compact” this movement has been in the works nationwide – without public attention – on a state-by-state level since at least 2008.
Like other surreptitious actions against the U.S. Constitution, the NPVC “movement” has several promotional websites claiming to represent “true democracy.”
Why would progressives want to switch to a NationalPopularVote POTUS?
Do the math: The electoral vote system protects voting rights by giving every individual state a number of electoral votes representing the level of population. In this way, all states in the Union have a proportionate and representative say in who becomes President. It doesn’t matter if the state has more land mass than populace, or if more of the people live in rural areas, etc.
Who is behind the NationalPopularVote Compact?
George Soros ...and Vikram Amar & Akhil Reed Amar
Akhil Amar has also “recently proposed that every American should be required to undergo a DNA test so that a national DNA database can be created.”
The National Public Vote Compact bill, promoted nationwide, came from this source in 2001. Since then, the same bill based on their strategy has been filed in states nationwide!
Digging into the background of the National Public Vote Compact – as a means to radically and permanently shift the basis of the Presidency, here’s what we found: highly credentialed attorneys (and brothers) who devised this “state bill” compact, as a strategy to get around the normal requirements for constitutional amendment – and, instead, undermine the Electoral College by bypassing both Congress and the voters!
plan for Permanent White House control by progressives happening now
Called the “NationalPopularVote Compact” this movement has been in the works nationwide – without public attention – on a state-by-state level since at least 2008.
Like other surreptitious actions against the U.S. Constitution, the NPVC “movement” has several promotional websites claiming to represent “true democracy.”
The NPVC is a bill now moving state-by-state to make the popularvote winner President by bypassing normal requirements to amend the Constitution. Tts outcome would ensure the Presidency would be declared by giving all the required 270 Electoral Votes needed for a “winner” to the candidate who wins the largest number of popular votes nationally – no matter how small the win margin and no difference how many states voted to oppose him. Here’s
how it works:
Once enough states have passed the NPVC bill into law to reach the requisite 270 Electoral Votes (by totaling the EV’s of those states which pass this bill) the NPVC goes into immediate effect in the next – and all subsequent – Presidential elections. It doesn’t matter how strongly other states oppose this. We’d all have to go along, if even a minority of states pass it! • Currently, this bill has passed enough state houses to reach more than 160 EV’s – so they are well over half way to their goal right now.
According to most up-to-date information this NationalPopularVotePact has already passed 1 of the 2 required chambers in more than 30 other states- without public attention.
If their magic number of 270 EV totaling states is reached, it won’t matter how the rest of the states vote on this; nor whether other states never take up the bill; not even if other states vehemently object and oppose this action. It would be the Law of the Land!
This sneaky scheme to upend Constitutional rights and protections of all states and their residents in selecting the nation’s leader is underway as an explicit attempt to defeat the careful Constitutional amendment process with no public knowledge, no voter input, no public referendums and no input from states which object to this measure. All NPVC takes is a portion of current state houses to make it law for all of us – always!
Why would progressives want to switch to a National Popular Vote POTUS?
Do the math: The electoral vote system protects voting rights by giving every individual state a number of electoral votes representing the level of population. In this way, all states in the Union have a proportionate and representative say in who becomes President. It doesn’t matter if the state has more land mass than populace, or if more of the people live in rural areas, etc.[/quote]
There is a lot here, but the crux of your argument is simply an ad hominem attack on George Soros. Personally, I don't take the time to find out where Soros stands on issues before I formulate an opinion. If an idea seems just and a good idea it gets my support and I pay no never-mind to Soros or any other billionaire with a cause.
The presidential election should be determined like any other election. The candidate with the most popular votes should win period. The vote of every citizen in every state should have exactly the same weight period. People in Wyoming and Delaware are not better people deserving of more of a voice in selecting the president than people in New York or California period. Most importantly, a popular vote would encourage all sorts of people to cast a vote who don't bother because they know their state will always choose the republican or democrat candidate.
What you have done is explained why the level of political discourse in America today is so bad. Rather, than try to explain why everyone having an equal vote is a bad idea, you instead choose to rant about George Soros and Progressives. No thanks....I'll leave conspiracies to other people.
Once enough states have passed the NPVC bill into law to reach the requisite 270 Electoral Votes (by totaling the EV’s of those states which pass this bill) the NPVC goes into immediate effect in the next – and all subsequent – Presidential elections. It doesn’t matter how strongly other states oppose this. We’d all have to go along, if even a minority of states pass it! • Currently, this bill has passed enough state houses to reach more than 160 EV’s – so they are well over half way to their goal right now.
According to most up-to-date information this NationalPopularVotePact has already passed 1 of the 2 required chambers in more than 30 other states- without public attention.
If their magic number of 270 EV totaling states is reached, it won’t matter how the rest of the states vote on this; nor whether other states never take up the bill; not even if other states vehemently object and oppose this action. It would be the Law of the Land!
This sneaky scheme to upend Constitutional rights and protections of all states and their residents in selecting the nation’s leader is underway as an explicit attempt to defeat the careful Constitutional amendment process with no public knowledge, no voter input, no public referendums and no input from states which object to this measure. All NPVC takes is a portion of current state houses to make it law for all of us – always!
Why would progressives want to switch to a National Popular Vote POTUS?
Do the math: The electoral vote system protects voting rights by giving every individual state a number of electoral votes representing the level of population. In this way, all states in the Union have a proportionate and representative say in who becomes President. It doesn’t matter if the state has more land mass than populace, or if more of the people live in rural areas, etc.
There is a lot here, but the crux of your argument is simply an ad hominem attack on George Soros. Personally, I don't take the time to find out where Soros stands on issues before I formulate an opinion. If an idea seems just and a good idea it gets my support and I pay no never-mind to Soros or any other billionaire with a cause.
The presidential election should be determined like any other election. The candidate with the most popular votes should win period. The vote of every citizen in every state should have exactly the same weight period. People in Wyoming and Delaware are not better people deserving of more of a voice in selecting the president than people in New York or California period. Most importantly, a popular vote would encourage all sorts of people to cast a vote who don't bother because they know their state will always choose the republican or democrat candidate.
What you have done is explained why the level of political discourse in America today is so bad. Rather, than try to explain why everyone having an equal vote is a bad idea, you instead choose to rant about George Soros and Progressives. No thanks....I'll leave conspiracies to other people.[/quote]
Any state that wants to cede their citizens votes to California can do so if they choose.
Here in Texas, our votes will be decided by those who live here.
The United States of America is a democratic republic. Do you want to get rid of the states? Because that would have to go along with getting rid of the electoral college.
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.
