dump the electoral college [here]

dump the electoral college [here] (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

pahunkboy -> dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 4:46:50 AM)
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iJ3fP7e8bLTL-sxO9LhucAhprvXgD8VTBMNO0 http://www.kcchronicle.com/articles/2008/04/09/news/state/doc47fb40dc94f57943653690.txt http://congress.org Using congress.org plug in your zip code - email your state- insert the content. send. if you want- do this will more then one state. Spare us the battleground state fiascos. I got a quick reply from the email I sent yesderday.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 4:51:33 AM)
There's a guy over at Bondage.com who posts about 20 threads a day. Nobody reads them. [8D]

pahunkboy -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 4:56:07 AM)
I dont hang there. What do you mean?

celticlord2112 -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 4:59:00 AM)
The current slugfest for the Democratic nomination is exactly why the Electoral College is meaningful and valuable even today. The Electoral College system compels a candidate to run a truly national campaign, to speak to and speak with voters across the length and breadth of this country. If only the popular vote were considered, candidates could focus on cities and states with large populations, and literally ignore everyone else. Keep the Electoral College, strengthen the Electoral College, to ensure the President is truly a President of all these United States.

Level -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 4:59:03 AM)
I think he's saying you're wasting your time, pahunk, but don't pay no mind. And don't feel bad, no one hangs out over there. [;)]

pahunkboy -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 5:37:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 The current slugfest for the Democratic nomination is exactly why the Electoral College is meaningful and valuable even today. The Electoral College system compels a candidate to run a truly national campaign, to speak to and speak with voters across the length and breadth of this country. If only the popular vote were considered, candidates could focus on cities and states with large populations, and literally ignore everyone else. Keep the Electoral College, strengthen the Electoral College, to ensure the President is truly a President of all these United States. It is coming in some form. Look at the state that proportions its electoral votes. We need election reform. Tho- it is probaly too late this cycle.

DomKen -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 5:42:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 The current slugfest for the Democratic nomination is exactly why the Electoral College is meaningful and valuable even today. The Electoral College system compels a candidate to run a truly national campaign, to speak to and speak with voters across the length and breadth of this country. If only the popular vote were considered, candidates could focus on cities and states with large populations, and literally ignore everyone else. Keep the Electoral College, strengthen the Electoral College, to ensure the President is truly a President of all these United States. ? The electoral college means that candidates will not run truly national campaigns. Campaigns instead devot etheir time and effort in states which polling indicates are winnable and have enough electoral college votes to be worth campaigning in. Having direct election of POTUS would, first of all, make every persons vote count equally. As it stands low population state voters are worth more than voters in higher population states. Finally direct election would force candidates to truly campaign nationally. No longer would it be sufficient to game the electoral college and concentrate only on some states. Huge blowouts in any region would doom a candidate in a way that the electoral college prevents.

Real0ne -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 7:50:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 The current slugfest for the Democratic nomination is exactly why the Electoral College is meaningful and valuable even today. The Electoral College system compels a candidate to run a truly national campaign, to speak to and speak with voters across the length and breadth of this country. If only the popular vote were considered, candidates could focus on cities and states with large populations, and literally ignore everyone else. Keep the Electoral College, strengthen the Electoral College, to ensure the President is truly a President of all these United States. ? The electoral college means that candidates will not run truly national campaigns. Campaigns instead devot etheir time and effort in states which polling indicates are winnable and have enough electoral college votes to be worth campaigning in. Having direct election of POTUS would, first of all, make every persons vote count equally. As it stands low population state voters are worth more than voters in higher population states. Finally direct election would force candidates to truly campaign nationally. No longer would it be sufficient to game the electoral college and concentrate only on some states. Huge blowouts in any region would doom a candidate in a way that the electoral college prevents. You are both wrong and it works to the benefit of the larger cities either way. The only way to fix it is with staunch election reform and miles of new legislation that we will never see unless there is a revolution. Finally I gave you all a solution a long time ago and that was to add a 4th branch to the government comprised of the average joes getting directly involved in the process down to the county level as regulators. Now thats the way a republic should be run. Unfortunately its far to advanced for most to grasp.

Moloch -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 9:24:01 AM)
Get rid of electoral college? I dont lime MOBacracy. Paris Hilton would pe president.

pahunkboy -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 10:36:59 AM)
it reduces us down to a marketing region. why is only Ohio relevent? only Florida? majority wins. anything else is proportional voting. the very thing that Lani Guineer was smeared over when Bill was in.

luckydog1 -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 11:02:25 AM)
The E C is one of the bedrocks of our Federal Republic. We are a Federation of States. A structual flaw has occured in it though that needs reform. Originally the number of Electors is based on the number of congressonpeople each state has (House + Senate). And that number was based on the census and a direct formula. For most of the nation, every Congress had more members/ seats as the population grew. IN the mid 20th Century it was decided that Congress was getting too big (physically) and the number of Representatives was capped. Affecting the make up and operation of the E C. Now States gain and lose seats to each other, which is not the way it is supposed to work. And it is not as representative as it was intended. It does need an adjustment, but eliminating it is a huge step away from our Constitutional Federal Republic. States are free to divide thier Electoral Votes in the same porpotion as their popular vote (or any manner they decide on the state level), I believe 2 currently do it. Remeber there is no National Election. There are 50 statewide elections on the same day.

Archer -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 12:11:16 PM)
also remember that there is no federal law saying you have the right to vote for president at all, unless you are one of the folks the states name as electors. The States can choose electors in whatever manner they have seen fit. The State of Georgia could tomorrow pass a law saying the State electors will be selected by dropping bowling balls out of an airplane and whoever came in with one of the bowling balls would be an elector. and there would be nothing the federal government could do about it.

celticlord2112 -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 1:18:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy it reduces us down to a marketing region. why is only Ohio relevent? only Florida? majority wins. anything else is proportional voting. the very thing that Lani Guineer was smeared over when Bill was in. The claim that "only" certain states are relevant is simply hogwash. States such as Ohio are termed "battleground" states because the electorate in those states has a higher percentage of "swing" voters. Naturally, these are the states where Presidential candidates will campaign most intensely. However, no candidate can ignore his or her own political base, and in an unusual burst of insight, Howard Dean's "50 State" strategy in the 2006 mid-term elections demonstrated that even "safe" districts can be taken over by the opposing political party. A pure national vote would give inordinate voting weight to high-population states such as California, Texas, New York, and Florida. Those four states contain 1/3 of the American population. The 10 most populous states contain just over 50% of the population. The top 20 states by population hold 75% of the American people. One could campaign in just those 20 states and win the election, without ever setting foot in the remaining 30 states. The Electoral College system, by increasing the relative voting significance of smaller states, compels candidates to campaign broadly. Direct popular vote would eliminate that.

cyberdude611 -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 1:30:53 PM)
No way....I favor the electoral college. I respect the wisdom of our founding fathers. They put it in there for a reason. And abolishing the electoral college would require a constitutional amendment. Which means you need 2/3rds of the states to agree as well as 2/3rds of the House and Senate. You will never get that kind of majority on this issue. What some states might do is divide up the state's electoral votes according to what the popular vote is....perhaps that would be more fair. But that is something you would have to take up with your state government.

Real0ne -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 1:39:01 PM)
so how many candidates champaign in alaska? LOL So where is the balnce of power between the people and the government? There isnt. The idea of electors was that property owners the ones who paid the greatest taxes had the most say as electors. It should still be that way as property owners as a rule at least take interestet in government and the rest tend to vote off of the media folly.

pahunkboy -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 1:52:34 PM)
the founding fathers are all dead now. they did not visualize tv, computers, technology. somehow the process has to evolve. the bank ATM knows every penny I have/took/etc, they can tabulate that. yet we cant do a census or an election it might ALL be irrelevant, that being that computerized voting machines are in place. we all know the computer is never wrong. the current system what is to stop California from becoming 2 states? or 3, heck every state could disect into multiple states if the election was prime importance. i dont see an end to hyper-partisanship. with resources strained- it will get moreso. win at any costs. even if it is a fake win. ahhh-egads. i guess that is how it goes.

Moloch -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 2:09:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy the founding fathers are all dead now. they did not visualize tv, computers, technology. somehow the process has to evolve. the bank ATM knows every penny I have/took/etc, they can tabulate that. yet we cant do a census or an election it might ALL be irrelevant, that being that computerized voting machines are in place. we all know the computer is never wrong. the current system what is to stop California from becoming 2 states? or 3, heck every state could disect into multiple states if the election was prime importance. i dont see an end to hyper-partisanship. with resources strained- it will get moreso. win at any costs. even if it is a fake win. ahhh-egads. i guess that is how it goes. Hey Ever heard of the American Civil War? There is a damn good reason for electoral college, otherwise states like Monta will cease to exist as some jack asses from Los Angeles will dictate how to run their lives because they breed faster.

Mercnbeth -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 2:36:19 PM)
Eliminating the EC would open the floodgates for third party candidates. Now that may not be a bad thing on its surface however with further consideration is would make the possibility of a President having a 50% plurality almost an impossibility. The current situation reduces any third party candidate to 'spoiler' status; creating a loser from the side he/she pulls vote. Reference the impact of third party candidates from Ross Perot to George Wallace. The most valuable vote a person has is for their Congressional Representative. You can change them, in theory at least, every two years. That vote impacts the power of the Executive Branch. The EC has value, again in theory, by not requiring the a President determined by a coalition consensus of regional special interest groups. Bonus trivia question: Prior to the 2004 election; who was the last President to receive more than 50% of the popular vote?

dcnovice -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 3:12:27 PM)
<fast reply> There have been four times--1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000--when the Electoral College selected a candidate who had not won the popular vote. Each time the EC selected the more conservative candidate. The last three Presidents to lose the popular vote but win the EC were all Republicans. This may help explain some of the support the EC receives.

Mercnbeth -> RE: dump the electoral college [here] (4/9/2008 3:27:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice <fast reply> There have been four times--1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000--when the Electoral College selected a candidate who had not won the popular vote. Each time the EC selected the more conservative candidate. The last three Presidents to lose the popular vote but win the EC were all Republicans. This may help explain some of the support the EC receives. 2000 proves the point about the impact of a 3rd party candidate. Think Ralph Nader took more votes from Bush or Gore? Take those 97,000 he got in Florida and allocate them proportionally to the rest of the country and there'd be no 'Global Warming' problem today.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125