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.
Left wing nuts forget the "United States" part of United States of America.
That the cornerstone of the federation was that states still retained a partial essence of sovereignty but brought together by founding principles that of which consist of un/inalienable rights, freedom protections, and an understanding of just representation...for each individual state and people thereof.
Really it's a protection of diversity, a hedge against mob rule, and an insurance of loyalty to the federation by people with different ideologies, interests, values, and backgrounds. It apportions power, protects local interests, more fairly distributes resources, and identifies the needs of those that would otherwise not be represented.
What about right wind nuts who also wanted to get rid of the EC?
Left wing nuts forget the "United States" part of United States of America.
That the cornerstone of the federation was that states still retained a partial essence of sovereignty but brought together by founding principles that of which consist of un/inalienable rights, freedom protections, and an understanding of just representation...for each individual state and people thereof.
Really it's a protection of diversity, a hedge against mob rule, and an insurance of loyalty to the federation by people with different ideologies, interests, values, and backgrounds. It apportions power, protects local interests, more fairly distributes resources, and identifies the needs of those that would otherwise not be represented.
No, the EC was pure elitism by the founders who were a bunch of aristocrats. They believed in giving the vote to the common people (as long as they were white males) but still didn't trust them to vote "right" so they put in place the EC which was supposed to be a bunch of rich white guys who would be more likely to vote the "right" way. It was always an elitist sham and it is time for it to go.
Wrong. I've always liked it, as it balances population and equal representation of states, too. The 435 are proportionally represented by population (House), the 100 equal distribution (Senate), plus 3 for DC. so 435 of 538 are broken per population. 3 are gifted to DC (which favors Dems). 100 are split by land.
Ingenious.
The fact it drives lefties insane is simply a bonus to me.
It was designed when the various regions were in development and sparsely populated. That is no longer the case and it should have been abolished long ago... WE DON'T NEED SOMEONE SECOND GUESSING OUR VOTES...... The electors can be manipulated, and they should have no position of existence in the United States that permits and allows them to violate and negate the votes of the people.
We also should stick to the base principle "NO PERSON IS ABOVE THE LAW".... and certainly no person gets to pardon themselves, because doing so means they are above the law. Nor should they be allowed to have any voice or say in any family members when legal and judicial decisions are made.
We are not running some "system with an alias as if its a dictatorship".
And... "YES"; President's CAN be Indicted..... no one is exempt from the Law.
Says the party with superdelegates for its nomination process.
The Electoral College ain't going anywhere. We like things the way they are. You can stock the Congress with nothing mentally-challenged leftists and pass the amendment if you want, but when it comes time for ratification by a minimum of 38 states, we'll be putting a stop to it. Because we like the Electoral College, and we don't need vapor-brains in California or airheads in New York choosing our President for us.
Democrats Introduce Bill To Eliminate Electoral College.
Dems will go to any length to better their chances of winning elections, even if they have to destroy the Constitution.
Republicans in the past have tried to get rid of the Electoral College. Historical fact. So now you can say republicans will go to any length to win elections including destroying the constitution.
One person one vote when sometimes up to 40% of the voters in a given state have no say in the outcome of an election? And I'm talking about blue states as much as I am red states. In 2016 Trump got 4,483,810 votes in California and all of those voters were disenfranchised, their vote meant nothing. That is just plain wrong. At the very least we should do away with winner takes all when it comes to the electoral college.
How your state apportion it's Number of Electors is entirely at the discretion of your state, it will be in its law books.
If you feel that voters are disenfranchised by how the Electors are apportioned then lobby your State Congress to change how they are apportioned. You can lobby to remove winner takes all, if your state has such a apportionment.
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.