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 popular vote case could be easily folded into the electoral college system. Simply award the proportionate percentage of votes received by each party, in equivalent electoral college votes.
OH NO! ... you mean, Calif., Wash., Ore, NY would actually have to acknowledge that a large segment of their votes are NOT for the Dem candidate ... and even award some of Calif's. already top-heavy, 55 EC votes to the Republicans??? That would really trigger the liberals! -- What they actually want is to award all of their votes (popular or EC) to the Dems, effectively negating the value of all votes in about two dozen less populated states. Since Calif. already get 53 congressional candidates, no sense changing that. Maybe the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals can change the EC system?
The popular vote case could be easily folded into the electoral college system. Simply award the proportionate percentage of votes received by each party, in equivalent electoral college votes.
OH NO! ... you mean, Calif., Wash., Ore, NY would actually have to acknowledge that a large segment of their votes are NOT for the Dem candidate ... and even award some of Calif's. already top-heavy, 55 EC votes to the Republicans??? That would really trigger the liberals! -- What they actually want is to award all of their votes (popular or EC) to the Dems, effectively negating the value of all votes in about two dozen less populated states. Since Calif. already get 53 congressional candidates, no sense changing that. Maybe the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals can change the EC system?
Its already been explained why a "proportional plan" of awarding electoral votes doesn't work.
Because electoral votes are calculated based on the number of representatives and senators that each state has its weighted too heavily in favor of states with small populations. Whether the vote is awarded in a winner-take-all fashion or proportionately, the fundamental problem is people in small population states like Wyoming end up with a vote that gives them about 5-6X as much political power as a citizen of New York or California.
We need a direct popular vote. The easiest way to get there is by approval of the national popular vote (npv) compact. One more election where the winner has fewer popular votes than his opponent will probably create the political will to get this done. I hope that it is not this election. If it is, it will be the third time in 20 years that the winner of the popular vote lost in the electoral college.
I'm certainly no constitutional scholar, but my sense is that the EC is no longer serving its original purpose.
I predict we will soon see the Republican party crying to change the method of presidential voting. If the demographic trends in place today continue, all of the southwest United States except Utah will turn blue in the relatively near future. If NV, AZ, CO, NM, and TX are all reliably blue there is little chance we'll see another Republican president under the current system, IMO. All of the arguments with respect to states' rights and such will disappear; all that matters is political power.
I read something recently that explained the EC like this: if the WORLD was United and voted on laws and policies it would be China, then India, making the decisions. The USA wouldn't have the clout.
Eh, that's just a bit more than ridiculous. First, it would and could never happen. Moreover, the US is a contiguous country divided into states which have no commerce barriers between them - i.e., one state cannot impose tariff or policy on another. If the world was truly united, there would be no trade restrictions, risk of global warfare, immigration or separation of economies. It wouldn't be "Chinese" or "Indian," it would be people of Asian descent. The need or desire to act in the best interest of "China" simply because you are of Asian descent would cease to exist.
The bottom line is that the electoral college was put into place to allow slave owners to essentially cast a ballot for President on the behalf of the enslaved. That is, to ensure the election of a president who would veto anti-slavery legislation and thereby acting against the self interest of the enslaved. It is obsolete and should have been abolished over a century ago. States have representation based on population in the House of Representatives and each state has 2 representatives in the Senate. It more than balances the legislative interests by region. All the EC does is allow for party rule of the executive branch based on the flawed notion that it somehow is integral for the balance of powers. It's also exactly why we only have 2 parties that matter in this country. Essentially by design, third party candidate doesn't stand a chance of being elected on a national level.
I'm certainly no constitutional scholar, but my sense is that the EC is no longer serving its original purpose.
The original intent of the electoral college was to protect The South political power
It was first accomplished with the 3/5 compromise to make sure that The South representation in congress counted the slave population as 3/5.
10 years later when the founding fathers were trying to find a way to elect the president, they came up with another wonderful compromise: "Each state gets a number of electors based on their congressional representation"
The South loved it .... why?
4 out of the first 5 presidents were from slave states, also known as "The Virginia Dynasty", thanks to the electoral college and the 3/5 compromise
So the original intent was to protect the South political power
Another way to hack ourselves out of the current electoral college problem would be to increase the size of the House of Representatives. Add 100 reps, make it 535 instead of 435. That adds 100 electoral votes. Most of the new districts would go to suburban swing areas.
I'm certainly no constitutional scholar, but my sense is that the EC is no longer serving its original purpose.
I predict we will soon see the Republican party crying to change the method of presidential voting. If the demographic trends in place today continue, all of the southwest United States except Utah will turn blue in the relatively near future. If NV, AZ, CO, NM, and TX are all reliably blue there is little chance we'll see another Republican president under the current system, IMO. All of the arguments with respect to states' rights and such will disappear; all that matters is political power.
There is no reason to change. What you are describing is a lagging reaction, not leading. Politics doesn't work that way. The policy of the two parties simply should change and adapts to fit changing demographics. Trump new this: we saw that in 2016 where Trump simply changed policy to focus on that demographic segment that was traditionally democratic - the blue collar worker. We've also seen this before in history - southern states used to be traditionally democrat and shifted to republican.
Politics shouldn't work to obtain victory by changing the rules. It's a level playing field and every candidate knows how the election process works going in, and focuses policy and campaigning to fit the process. Victory should be obtained by changing a politicians message and platform and working within the rules, not changing the rules.
The original intent of the electoral college was to protect The South political power
It was first accomplished with the 3/5 compromise to make sure that The South representation in congress counted the slave population as 3/5.
10 years later when the founding fathers were trying to find a way to elect the president, they came up with another wonderful compromise: "Each state gets a number of electors based on their congressional representation"
The South loved it .... why?
4 out of the first 5 presidents were from slave states, also known as "The Virginia Dynasty", thanks to the electoral college and the 3/5 compromise
So the original intent was to protect the South political power
That's not accurate at all although it's an often repeated myth. The concept of electoral college was devised by the founding fathers (including Hamilton, who opposed slavery) before the discussions on how the appropriation would be decided, most of the presidents came from Virginia because they were the most populated state even excluding slaves. Isn't that what some of you arguing about - popular vote? See attached:
If the red states are run so better just have them split and see how they survive on their own.
They can have the electoral college and we can have votes by person.
Red states aren’t better but the people are equal to those in blue states. [moderator edit] Blue states should not tell red states how to operate and neither should red states tell blue states who to operate. Heck, I even go down to the county level. Urban counties should not tell suburban counties what to do. They all have different needs and values, and each are as relevant as the other.
Last edited by Rachel NewYork; 11-04-2020 at 10:39 AM..
Reason: Deleted personal remark.
That's not accurate at all although it's an often repeated myth. The concept of electoral college was devised by the founding fathers (including Hamilton, who opposed slavery) before the discussions on how the appropriation would be decided, most of the presidents came from Virginia because they were the most populated state even excluding slaves. Isn't that what some of you arguing about - popular vote? See attached:
Virginia had almost the same population of free whites than Pennsylvania
but thanks to the 3/5 compromise, they got more political representation in congress = more votes in the electoral college
If you don't see how they are connected, you are blind
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.
