OldGreyEagle Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 So, is it? Has the Electoral College seen its time come and gone? Do we still need to send educated trusted representatives to DC to elect our President or are we ready for a Constitutional Amendment to elect the President by Popular Vote or at the very least apportion electoral votes by popular vote results. Shouldn't we be working on this or will it take a disputged election? Maybe we could work on this from our ownb states, what do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WasE61 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 No. In this case, Obama would have one either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nike Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Every system has idiosyncrasies. The Electoral College is ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eisely Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 One of the purposes of the electoral college, as I understand it, was to give more weight to the lightly populated states in juxtaposition to the more populous states. I still think that is a valid purpose. One reform that would make sense would be for a state to apportion its electoral college votes based on the popular vote within that state. I don't think this would require a constitutional amendment to accomplish. Of course that would mean that those of us who live in California would be subjected to a great deal of political advertising we currently escape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGreyEagle Posted November 13, 2012 Author Share Posted November 13, 2012 WasE61 thats the point, the time to change the Electoral College is not when the Popular Vote winner is not the president (see Al Gore) but when there is no issue. Then it is not seen as sour grapes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn_LeRoy Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 The one main reason I'd like to hang onto the electoral college is that, if there's a very close popular vote, it would be like Florida in 2000, except every state in the union. Dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria. eisely, two states (Maine and Nebraska) divide their electoral votes; neither one is proportional, but instead the winner of each congressional district gets 1 EV and the overall winner of the state gets the last 2 EVs (the senator EVs). There is an interesting way people are trying to change to a popular vote -- get state legislatures to pass a bill, saying they will assign all of their electors to the winner of the popular vote, with this bill becoming effective when the EVs of all the states that have passed this bill make up a majority of EVs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pchadbo Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 As a resident of a state that has fewer residents than most major metropolitan areas, I am not a fan od doing away with the electoral college. If we went strictly on popular vote totals, California, New York and Florida would pretty much decide the president and the other 47 states would have little or no say. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packsaddle Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Yes, it is a good thing that some mere pimple on the landscape can wield undeserved influence on the democratic process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callooh! Callay!1428010939 Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 The "democratic process" in which some would apparently like to see these "pimples" popped, is a process to elect the government of a Republic. It's "United States" not "United State." The electoral college is an expression of state sovereignty. States should assert their sovereignty more, not less. States should stand against collectivist driven federal overreach. The population of a state written off as ""a mere pimple on the landscape?" Why? Are they "kulaks?" "Capitalist roaders?" Roadblocks to some collectivist "great leap forward?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brewmeister Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 We are a republic....still.... On the plus side, my state is therefore not ignored in a presidential campaign in favor of focusing on the population dense coasts. On the downside, my state is therefore not ignored in a presidential campaign in favor of focusing on the population on the coasts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packsaddle Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 So....are you saying the current status is NOT a 'good' thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brewmeister Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 The EC has pluses and minuses...eliminating it would also. However it is a reflection of our republic structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packsaddle Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Actually that question was mostly for Callooh! Callay! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSA24 Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 > States should stand against collectivist driven federal overreach. They did. They lost. There was a civil war which they lost. Then there were innumerable court cases which they lost. The US is an entity now not a collection of them. Has been that way for over 100 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghjim Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 This is an issue I have always wondered about? Does the EC have some special purpose to balance the vote? I always though that it existed only as an artifact of earlier times when the United States had no mass communication. The EC was invented as a simple way of organizing the voting across the country when our "electors" counted up the local votes and then hopped on a horse to ride to Washington to represent their state and what the state majority voted for. If that is the case I am in favor of eliminating it (even though my candidate won this election by a large margin in the EC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now