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.
Oh OK. I guess we've introduced a new twist into elections that were around 200 years ago. In modern times getting an election into the House would be almost inconceivable. The last one that was a remote possibility was 1968 and even in that one there weren't enough logical Wallace (American Independent Party) states to do the trick. Even Wallace campaigned in the 1972 Democratic primaries until he was shot.
Actually the 2000 election should have gone to the House for a decision, where George W Bush would have been elected. I could not find fault with the SCOTUS decision in Bush v Gore, which ruled that the Florida Supreme Court could not lawfully change the rules after the votes had been cast. But it should not be up to the federal courts to decide the outcome of a presidential election, when the Constitution already has a mechanism in place for deciding disputed elections.
Actually the 2000 election should have gone to the House for a decision, where George W Bush would have been elected. I could not find fault with the SCOTUS decision in Bush v Gore, which ruled that the Florida Supreme Court could not lawfully change the rules after the votes had been cast. But it should not be up to the federal courts to decide the outcome of a presidential election, when the Constitution already has a mechanism in place for deciding disputed elections.
I think you are partially right here. The actual locus for that decision, state by state, is with each state legislature. They ultimately pick and certify the electors.
My pet theory is that the Florida legislature, under tight Republican control was going to pick Bush, regardless of any combination of hanging, dimpled and other chads. They wouldn't need to give reasoning but essentially a 700 vote difference in a large state is a coin toss. Ultimately that would have led to a constitutional crisis. So the SCOTUS simply stopped the count.
The House is only for a situation where the EC has no majority at all. Not possible in a race where only two candidates get any electoral college votes.
I think you are partially right here. The actual locus for that decision, state by state, is with each state legislature. They ultimately pick and certify the electors.
My pet theory is that the Florida legislature, under tight Republican control was going to pick Bush, regardless of any combination of hanging, dimpled and other chads. They wouldn't need to give reasoning but essentially a 700 vote difference in a large state is a coin toss. Ultimately that would have led to a constitutional crisis. So the SCOTUS simply stopped the count.
The House is only for a situation where the EC has no majority at all. Not possible in a race where only two candidates get any electoral college votes.
No, it was not up to the Florida legislature to certify the presidential electors. I think it is the US Senate that does that.
The Florida supreme court was supposed to ensure that the Florida election laws were fairly enforced -- not to alter those laws by authorizing partial recounts in some counties but not in others. If the Florida court had been doing its job properly, the SCOTUS probably would have let a statewide recount go forward, and the US Senate probably would have waited for that recount before certifying the election.
In the past nine months since the election we have hard that the electoral college is flawed. Two out of the last five elections saw a different popular vote than the electoral vote, that is simple to understand. But is it a symptom of the system and we should just leave it or should we fix the system? And if we chose to fix it, what do we do?
I say yes. It let's only 10% of the voting populous truly decide the president since they live in swing states. If you live outside of a swing state, what is the use in voting? My suggestion, tie electoral votes to the state's popular vote. So you win 60% of state's popular vote, you get 60% of the votes. For states with 5 votes, that would be 3 votes going to a given candidate.
The Republic itself is flawed abolish it. We need a true leader a monarch. One King One God One Nation
I’ve been an opponent of The Electoral College for decades, but I’m always amused to see the Democratic and Republican political parties only complain about it when it works against their interests.
One of the effects of the Electoral College System is that it serves to uphold the duopoly held by the two dominant parties in the country. Electors are typically wealthy donors, activists within the inner-circles of the parties, and former office holders. It is by its very nature an oligarchy designed to override the democratic process.
The other problem with The EC is that it gives disproportionate voting power to rural populations that are mostly white, Christian, and conservative—even as it dilutes the voting power of urban areas that are far more representative of the population as a whole.
The only way to “fix” The Electoral College is to eliminate it, something that should be part of a massive overhaul of our electoral system. In addition to killing-off The Electoral College, we need to devise a model that provides for publicly-financed elections, eliminate any public involvement in specific political parties, standardize ballots and voting laws across the country, and make Election Day a national holiday.
I’ve been an opponent of The Electoral College for decades, but I’m always amused to see the Democratic and Republican political parties only complain about it when it works against their interests.
One of the effects of the Electoral College System is that it serves to uphold the duopoly held by the two dominant parties in the country. Electors are typically wealthy donors, activists within the inner-circles of the parties, and former office holders. It is by its very nature an oligarchy designed to override the democratic process.
The other problem with The EC is that it gives disproportionate voting power to rural populations that are mostly white, Christian, and conservative—even as it dilutes the voting power of urban areas that are far more representative of the population as a whole.
The only way to “fix” The Electoral College is to eliminate it, something that should be part of a massive overhaul of our electoral system. In addition to killing-off The Electoral College, we need to devise a model that provides for publicly-financed elections, eliminate any public involvement in specific political parties, standardize ballots and voting laws across the country, and make Election Day a national holiday.
Election Day as a national holiday would NEVER work. People work on Thanksgiving and Christmas in the service industry (stores, restaurants, gas stations, theme parks, hotels), emergency services, roads, television networks, etc.
I think the electoral college needs a huge overhaul but not a dismantling.
I like the electoral college but the only issue is that if you live in a democrat state like California, there's no point in voting if you're a republican. Just like if you live in a republican state like Texas, and there's no point voting if you vote democrat.
I have thought of states splitting electoral votes and having a bunch of individual districts. For example, split california between the coastal areas, high desert, sierras, and the central valley. But then, all of those districts could turn blue and it would defeat the purpose.
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.
