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.
No one would be disenfranchised. Every person would have exactly one vote that would have just as much weight as every other person's, wherever they have chosen to live.
Plus it would give Republicans in CA and Democrats in TX a reason to vote. As it stand now they are disenfranchised.
rubbish. try reading up on why the electoral college was set up, and then recognize that it is just as viable today as it was 240 years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobdreamz
Which is dumb because in every other election held in the US it is a winner majority except for the US Presidency.
that is because ALL elections are local elections, there is no such thing as a national election. win a a state election while running for president, and yu get those electoral votes. win enough states and you win the presidency. its as simple as that.
Which is dumb because in every other election held in the US it is a winner majority except for the US Presidency.
No, it's not dumb. Your STATE government was supposed to be your primary government and the Feds just a weak entity that did a few things to keep the states working together, and for national defense. The Feds usurped a lot of the State's powers after the Civil War.
If you want to change it lobby your politicians to amend the Constitution. However, it is a system that works well and as intended.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,557 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
yep, people in geographical areas. the map was just pointing out where each candidate got their votes from. if we went by what the democrats want us to, a national popular vote, then the blue areas would have been the ones that determined who was president. that would have then disenfranchised the red areas. think about it.
So by your logic, losing is disenfranchisement no matter which side wins.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,557 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1
No, it's not dumb. Your STATE government was supposed to be your primary government and the Feds just a weak entity that did a few things to keep the states working together, and for national defense. The Feds usurped a lot of the State's powers after the Civil War.
If you want to change it lobby your politicians to amend the Constitution. However, it is a system that works well and as intended.
The Constitution's job was to get rid of that weak loose network of states. It wasnt the civil war.
The Constitution's job was to get rid of that weak loose network of states. It wasnt the civil war.
Ahhh, no. The States were supposed to be strong, and Feds weak under the Constitution. The Electoral College is in the Constitution, not the Articles of Confederation. The Constitution enumerates the Feds few powers and leaves all else to the States.
I agree, the electoral college is dumb. Get rid of it.
If we aren't going to do that, your percentage system would be the next best thing.
"I agree, the electoral college is dumb. Get rid of it."
I DON'T thank it is dumb at all. Some states just need to change to proportional allocations of votes.
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.
