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.
I know we have had many electoral college debates pro and con. Personally,I do support it,as I do not believe in mob rule or direct democracy. That's why if I was ever transported back to the 19th century I would be a moderate John Adams style fenderalist. Not a radical like Jefferson,not an elitist like Hamilton.
Anyway.back to the electoral college. I really like what Maine and Nebraska do. A candidate can win the overall electorals of those states. Yet,the loser could still if they win a congressional district come out with that 1 electoral vote. Example. In 2008 McCain won Nebraska yet Obama did win 1 of the 3 congressional districts,and gained 1 electoral vote. John McCain and Palin likewise campaigned in the far northern Maine congressional district,trying to win it.
This system,I believe would be a very fair way of doing things. We have numerous districts in California that vote Republican. Their votes mean nothing as Obama is guranteed to win the state. Mississippi and Tennessee will vote Romney,yet they have districts that will vote Obama. I firmly beleive under this system you would see many more states or at least areas put in play. You would see Romney in certain areas of California,Illinois,or New York. obama would campaign for votes in red states. Yet,you would still ahve the basic framework of an electoral college. Someday soon i hope more states look into this.
I know we have had many electoral college debates pro and con. Personally,I do support it,as I do not believe in mob rule or direct democracy. That's why if I was ever transported back to the 19th century I would be a moderate John Adams style fenderalist. Not a radical like Jefferson,not an elitist like Hamilton.
Anyway.back to the electoral college. I really like what Maine and Nebraska do. A candidate can win the overall electorals of those states. Yet,the loser could still if they win a congressional district come out with that 1 electoral vote. Example. In 2008 McCain won Nebraska yet Obama did win 1 of the 3 congressional districts,and gained 1 electoral vote. John McCain and Palin likewise campaigned in the far northern Maine congressional district,trying to win it.
This system,I believe would be a very fair way of doing things. We have numerous districts in California that vote Republican. Their votes mean nothing as Obama is guranteed to win the state. Mississippi and Tennessee will vote Romney,yet they have districts that will vote Obama. I firmly beleive under this system you would see many more states or at least areas put in play. You would see Romney in certain areas of California,Illinois,or New York. obama would campaign for votes in red states. Yet,you would still ahve the basic framework of an electoral college. Someday soon i hope more states look into this.
There's one problem with this. Ever hear of gerrymandering?
Interestingly, PA was thinking about doing this last year to give the Republican candidate the majority of electoral votes in the state even if Obama won the state this year. (States determine how to award their EV's).
As a Republican, I would love this system this year - and in 2016 and 2020, as redistricting following the 2010 Census was controlled by Republicans in most states. However, if Democrats were in power in most state legislatures immediately following later Censuses, that would be very bad for the GOP. Plus - gerrymandering, no matter which side it favors (my "side" or "the other side"), is bad enough as it is. This would only allow gerrymandering to play an even greater role in our political system and provide greater motivation for extreme partisan gerrymandering. So, at the end of the day, I don't think I would support such a system.
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 07-04-2012 at 10:11 PM..
John Adams' political ideas were exactly what the constitution attempted to avoid. He was a strong advocate of a very powerful centralized federal government. If the country had evolved along Adams' ideas there most likely would never been a civil war because none of the several states would ever been strong enough to challenge the very dominent central federal power.
In a strange twist of fate the founding fathers of Canada saw this decentralization of power as main cause of the civil war and when they formed Canada right after that war in 1867 they decided to avoid future problems of this sort by centralizing most of the power at the federal level.
The irony of it is, that as time has gone by Canadian federalism has devolved power unto the provinces to the point where the country is extremely decentralized while the federal power in the USA has steadly increased to the point where it seems the constitution is not even relevant anymore.
So, it seems that each of our countries run almost completely contrary to the intent of the founders.
At least in Canada our politicians realized this was not acceptable and they wrote a new constitution in 1982.
The electoral college prevents the campaigning in the largest cities only. Atl least this is what happened before the days of television.
It also prevents campaigning anywhere but "battleground states" only.
I don't necessarily favor getting rid of the electoral college, but it has actually created a similar problem to the one you describe.
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.
