Jump to content
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

NanuqoftheNorth

Why The Electoral College Ruins Democracy

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, darrybear said:

 Honestly if it were that way all you would have to do is win New York and California and you almost won the whole election   Innoway this allow small states to be heard one vote does equal one vote it's just that that is with in your state I don't understand how people don't get this how could you honestly takes US government in high school and not learn this 

New York and California wouldn't win the whole election, the PEOPLE would.

take states entirely out of the equation. the states shouldn't be voting for anything. the people should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


16 hours ago, rodeo said:

you could just rephrase this and say "the last thing we need is the will of the American people to determine the fate of America."

you're basically in no uncertain terms admitting that your chosen ideology is a small minority that couldn't win without unethical manipulation of vote weights.

I voted Hillary and still support the electoral college. It allows for elections in individual states which is the intent of the constitution.

each state has a right to be heard, not just the overpopulated ones.

its more unethical to drown out everyone else or bend rational thinking to one side or another when it has nothing to do with logic.

furthermore,  just like I believe the constitution should change and make people have to earn their citizenship, the electoral college isn't going anywhere.

someday a candidate on another side will be heard and the electoral college will be championed by the left and demonized on the right.

such is the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, firefox1234 said:

The electoral college is a pretty fair system at the moment....

In what way is it fair for the President to be the person who lost the vote?

That's absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, rodeo said:

In what way is it fair for the President to be the person who lost the vote?

That's absurd.

As mentioned previously it gives low populated states a voice in elections, and in the end of the day a States electoral count is determined by population so it’s not like they get a significant advantage. The ones with the most electorals are still in costal high populated states. The electoral issue is just a cover for the real issue which is Gerrymandering in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rodeo said:

New York and California wouldn't win the whole election, the PEOPLE would.

take states entirely out of the equation. the states shouldn't be voting for anything. the people should.

This is true for the Presidential election sure. 

It's filtered down even farther in California though. The Dems have passed legislation that for instance the State Senator race only the top 2 vote getters in the Primary are on the final ballot. So your choice for State Senator in Cali on election day was Democrat 1 or Democrat 2. You didn't even have a Repub or Indi choice.

senate.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

 

 

Tens of millions of voters (like republicans in California or Dems in Texas) are for all intents and purposes irrelevant.  Most states (like California and Texas) are predictably red or blue, elections are determined by a handful of states rather than the nation at large.  The USA has one of the lowest rates of voter participation of any nation when it comes to selecting its leader.  That is in large part to an electoral system that promotes voter apathy.

 

This would also lead to a more tangible result for Independents. People scream for another party, this would actually make them more relevant on election day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, firefox1234 said:

As mentioned previously it gives low populated states a voice in elections, and in the end of the day a States electoral count is determined by population so it’s not like they get a significant advantage. The ones with the most electorals are still in costal high populated states. The electoral issue is just a cover for the real issue which is Gerrymandering in my opinion.

why should they have a disproportionately loud voice compared to everyone else? why should someone have a louder voice because of where they live? the electoral votes are determined by population but they are heavily skewed.

Charlotte has a higher population than Tampa Bay, should the Bucs touchdowns count 14 points instead of 6?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, rodeo said:

why should they have a disproportionately loud voice compared to everyone else? why should someone have a louder voice because of where they live? the electoral votes are determined by population but they are heavily skewed.

Charlotte has a higher population than Tampa Bay, should the Bucs touchdowns count 14 points instead of 6?

Yeah but they would still lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rodeo said:

take states entirely out of the equation. the states shouldn't be voting for anything. the people should.

This.  Time to end an antiquated electoral system devised to perpetuate slavery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

Every other elected office in this nation is determined by popular vote and the POTUS should be no different.  To argue that it is better that those in the minority should hold sway over the majority turns the whole purpose of having elections on its head. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, rodeo said:

why should they have a disproportionately loud voice compared to everyone else? why should someone have a louder voice because of where they live? the electoral votes are determined by population but they are heavily skewed.

Charlotte has a higher population than Tampa Bay, should the Bucs touchdowns count 14 points instead of 6?

Because it's the United States of America, not the United Counties of America where independent states bound together to have a common government so long as the INDIVIDUAL states still had their own right to govern a be heard.

This whole butt hurt is over winning and losing. If Hillary had won, and in the same fashion this argument would be reversed.

republicans and democrats both as a party and as a people are too mixed up in butt hurt.

respect the institution and the constitution that created it.

otherwise we are just Spain, France or any other country on the planet. Not the States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JARROD said:

Because it's the United States of America, not the United Counties of America where independent states bound together to have a common government so long as the INDIVIDUAL states still had their own right to govern a be heard.

This whole butt hurt is over winning and losing. If Hillary had won, and in the same fashion this argument would be reversed.

republicans and democrats both as a party and as a people are too mixed up in butt hurt.

respect the institution and the constitution that created it.

otherwise we are just Spain, France or any other country on the planet. Not the States.

respect the broken, oppressive systems just because they're the system and we need to respect it?

you sound like a confederate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, rodeo said:

respect the broken, oppressive systems just because they're the system and we need to respect it?

you sound like a confederate.

Born in Charlotte not a transplant. 

Oppressive?

 Did anybody put you in a breadline? Did you get to vote? Do you own firearms? What the hell are you talking about? 

I voted for Hillary and I still don't say that

 Broken? We have the richest and most powerful country on the planet. Our country uses 42% of the worlds resources. By 2050 we will need three Earths just to supply the United States with power and food.

 So how is being here oppressive? You have it better than anybody. Trust me I've been there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      19,413
    • Most Online
      2,867

    Newest Member
    dercrutch
    Joined
  • Topics

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      141,495
    • Total Posts
      4,513,592
×