Toggle sidebar

Question: The Electoral College

Tide1986 said:
I guess I'm not a partisan. I like the EC regardless of the outcome. But maybe I'm just informed.
Click to expand...

I do, too, but note that I'm not arguing for it's inclusion because 'my guy' won or against it because 'my guy' lost, either.

It will never be overturned by amendment given you need 38 states to do it - and that's what gives most of the states their clout.
 
selmaborntidefan said:
I do, too, but note that I'm not arguing for it's inclusion because 'my guy' won or against it because 'my guy' lost, either.

It will never be overturned by amendment given you need 38 states to do it - and that's what gives most of the states their clout.
Click to expand...

I seriously hope that abolishing the EC is the totality of the Democrats opposition over the next four years.
Please Democrats, bang your head against that wall. Please.
 
Bamaro said:
No but at least I didn't question your truthfulness like you did mine. You seem to have a comprehension problem. I made that statement to show that my opinion wasn't something new or based on recent results. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The reason he called you an "expert" is because you have for the past week and a half been really harping on that we need to change it. When we ask how should we change it, you give a very simplistic answer that you should expect from a high school government class paper.
 
81usaf92 said:
The reason he called you an "expert" is because you have for the past week and a half been really harping on that we need to change it. When we ask how should we change it, you give a very simplistic answer that you should expect from a high school government class paper.
Click to expand...

If we are just going to dump every person's vote into a big national hopper, I still have not heard Bamaro explain how we will avoid having to recount every single precinct, in the single state, in every single election. He studiously avoids that issue, and it makes his proposal look impractical.
 
Tidewater said:
If we are just going to dump every person's vote into a big national hopper, I still have not heard Bamaro explain how we will avoid having to recount every single precinct, in the single state, in every single election. He studiously avoids that issue, and it makes his proposal look impractical.
Click to expand...

That's one of the many issues that I would like him , and the others who believe that it is so easy to abandon a 200 year old system of voting by simply clicking your heels together and everything will run smoothly, to answer. But it's like day 12 now... So....
 
Last edited:
Crimson1967 said:
I would favor a Maine/Nebraska system nationwide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I wouldn't and the reason states don't is because it dilutes any real power at all. It would make the whole thing a fiction by which we may as well dispose of it.
 
We don't really even know the outcome of the popular vote yet. It's worked as is so far so let's leave it alone. One question, when you look at the fact that all major areas of subsidized housing is located in areas that Democrats traditionally hold, is that gerrymandering?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
 
NationalTitles16 said:
Of course you should all know that I am not looking at this from a left/right or blue/red or demo/rep standpoint. I refuse to vote for either. The electoral college only partially balances the scales between big and small states. It forces candidates to consider a broader part of America than they otherwise would. It ensures diversity. When did "liberals" stop liking diversity?
Click to expand...
I have two issues with the EC. (1) It disenfranchises red voters and blue states and blue voters in red states. (2) It gives far more representation to rural, predominantly white voters through the math of the EC system. Right now, one person's vote in Wyoming or the Dakotas is weighted ~4 times more than a vote from someone in a more heavily populated state. I would support a compromise whereby the number of EC votes per state is rebalanced to reflect the current population distribution. It wouldn't help with my first issue. But since I don't seriously believe the EC will be abolished in my lifetime until it disadvantages the GOP (which is unlikely due to issue #2), I would accept a reform that better balances state representation while keeping the system intact and not forcing nationwide recounts in years where there is no clear victor by popular vote to the tune of 1.5+ million.

But again, since the EC grants Republicans an institutional advantage, realistically nothing will be done.
 
bama_wayne1 said:
We don't really even know the outcome of the popular vote yet. It's worked as is so far so let's leave it alone. One question, when you look at the fact that all major areas of subsidized housing is located in areas that Democrats traditionally hold, is that gerrymandering?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

last i saw clinton is ahead in the popular vote by about 1.4 mil votes. i read that the final tally is expected to go more in her favor.
 
Last edited:
I'm not and R or a D, so keep that in mind...

... but if Trump had won the popular vote but Clinton had won the EC, I wonder how many Dems would be clamoring to change it due to it's 'unfairness'.
 
92tide said:
the flip side of that argument also exists.
Click to expand...

Yep, and that's exactly my point.

The only reason the EC has become a topic for discussion is because the Dems don't like the results. We'd likely see the same response from the Repubs were the shoe on the other foot.

It's a knee-jerk reaction, not a fight against some institutional unfairness.
 
RhodeIslandRed said:
There are also severe discrepancies in voter registration laws state by state.
Click to expand...

This. Purge the voter registration list of the deceased and ALL states should require a photo id to vote. Non-citizens and felons should not be able to vote. Then let's see how the popular vote shakes out.
 
81usaf92 said:
The reason he called you an "expert" is because you have for the past week and a half been really harping on that we need to change it. When we ask how should we change it, you give a very simplistic answer that you should expect from a high school government class paper.
Click to expand...

Sometimes simplistic answers are the proper answers. Every other election, senate, house, governor, mayor etc is decided by popular vote. The presidential doesn't need to be nor should it be different. Let the people decide directly. Sorry if this seems simplistic or high schoolish but that is how i feel.
 
Tidewater said:
If we are just going to dump every person's vote into a big national hopper, I still have not heard Bamaro explain how we will avoid having to recount every single precinct, in the single state, in every single election. He studiously avoids that issue, and it makes his proposal look impractical.
Click to expand...

Not sure why that would be a problem. It certainly is not a good reason to keep the EC, convenience. I seriously doubt that it was on the framers minds so it seems odd that strict constructionists like I believe you are would even consider it. Recounts are the exception, not the rule.
 
sabanball said:
This. Purge the voter registration list of the deceased and ALL states should require a photo id to vote. Non-citizens and felons should not be able to vote. Then let's see how the popular vote shakes out.
Click to expand...
That and you should dip your thumb in ink after you vote to prevent repeat voting with a stolen identity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back