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.
One of the main rationales for the electoral college was to have a sober body of wisemen to keep from electing a populist demagogue. Obviously that didn’t work. Time to abolish it and let whoever gets the most votes win. That’s not exactly a radical idea for a supposed democracy.
We are not a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic.
If you vote against the majority in your state your vote means absolutely nothing, it goes in the wastebasket as an irrelevance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by atltechdude
Abolishing the electoral college would not disenfranchise anyone.
It would ENFRANCHISE EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN, no matter where they lived.
One person, one vote. All would count equally.
Rs could get votes from CA, same as Ds could get votes from TX.
As it is, everyone who votes against the majority in their state is disenfranchised, their vote is essentially not counted.
Also, it would bring a lot more diversity to the campaigns. As it is all of the campaigns only focus on the small number of swing states where the outcome is not already determined. One person one vote would be campaigning everywhere could benefit you and all of the states' issues would get greater consideration.
do you enjoy being wrong? because you couldnt be more wrong than you are with these posts.
let me try and set you straight here.
first we do not have a national popular vote, we have STATE popular votes. there is no such thing in this country as a national election, only state and local elections.
second everyone that wants to vote in each state can vote in their state of residence, they just need to register to vote and be a citizen of this country.
third if you vote for a candidate, and ten people vote for a different candidate, that does not mean your vote doesnt count, i just means that of eleven people that voted, ten of them wanted the other guy. no one is disenfranchised in the least since every vote counts. or did you think tht only your vote should count above all others?
fourth, the electoral college was set up to give smaller states a say in who is to be president. if we went to a national popular vote, then you WOULD be disenfranchising voters across the country, since at that point a few population centers would tell the rest of the nation who would be president. personally i dont want new york california, and a few large cities telling me who is to be president.
and even though i took the time to post this, you wont read it, you wont try to understand it, because you think you are right and everyone else is wrong. but that is your choice, so be however you wish to be, just be careful what you ask for as you may just get it.
Sure, abolish the electoral college so that about 5% of the land mass has control over the other 95% of the nation. Let's make sure that a flaming lib in NYC or San Fran can dictate the life of a North Dakotan or Wyoming cowboy. That's the way it is supposed to work. One segment of society is supposed to tyrannize the other segments of society.
Why would they? Their wins were consistent with the popular vote. People complain and rightfully so when the result differs and when we would prefer one person, one vote, instead.
Trump won the popular vote in MOST of the states. That is why he is president. This is the same way the World Series is determined. Not by the total of all runs scored over 7 games. It is determined by who wins the most games in the series.
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.