@Curtmungus your honor of being more famous than me is quite deserved. I salute you.
Stanley
-
Yeah I don’t understand the whole electoral college thing. Seems kinda dumb. I think direct democracy would be best. just like the swiss
-
Yeah I don’t understand the whole electoral college thing. Seems kinda dumb. I think direct democracy would be best. just like the swiss
its impossible to have everyone vote all the time. you are right about the electral college.
-
I’m not sure if it’s mandatory to vote about everything but it better represents what the people and if they realy feel strongly about something I’m sure they would vote.
-
I’m not sure if it’s mandatory to vote about everything but it better represents what the people and if they realy feel strongly about something I’m sure they would vote.
Canadians are looking into this kind of thing, and afair this occurs in Australia.
With the electoral college - what would be the point in mandatory voting anyway? -
@ncscswitch:
Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more
  votes?"why does the un and other nations consider him the president and not some rougue leader. what would be say if iraq’s prime minister was elected like that or any other country(except china and us). this nation was founded on democracy and is as if not more important today than it was in 1776.
You’ve got to be kidding… If you don’t like the way our government operates write your ccongressmen You may not understand the electoral college, but that doesn’tean it doesn’t have a purpose. Democracy doesn’t mean that everyone gets what they want.
BTW, I thought the concept of the joke was funny, but the questions where a bit ignorant. ;)
-
Majority should win, not the college. That was created when people (wealthy white men) from every state could not see the candidates for themselves, therefore could not vote accordingly.
-
Um I’m pretty sure Al Gore conceded.
Yes he did, just before he unconceeded. Only person in history to surrender then unsurrender all within 24 hours!
-
Majority should win, not the college. That was created when people (wealthy white men) from every state could not see the candidates for themselves, therefore could not vote accordingly.
That’s not realy the point. The US is a confederation of states and each state in proportion to it’s population votes for president. If we went with popular vote, people in Wyoming could just stay home on election day, because There is absolutely no way they could make a difference in the election. You may think it’s a good idea, but I don’t want California and New York making the poitical decisions for Arizona. If you look a little deaper and a little more objectively you can see that our political system has purpose.
-
Majority should win, not the college. That was created when people (wealthy white men) from every state could not see the candidates for themselves, therefore could not vote accordingly.
That’s not realy the point. The US is a confederation of states and each state in proportion to it’s population votes for president. If we went with popular vote, people in Wyoming could just stay home on election day, because There is absolutely no way they could make a difference in the election. You may think it’s a good idea, but I don’t want California and New York making the poitical decisions for Arizona. If you look a little deaper and a little more objectively you can see that our political system has purpose.
I disagree. Popular vote can and should be done. As it is now, it doesn’t matter if I vote or not, and if do, whom I vote for. If we had elections by popular vote, people voting in Wyoming WOULD matter more. You’d also not have a winner takes all scenario for each state, which is why someone can achieve the popular vote but not ultimately win the presidency. More importantly, there are ranking voting systems that would work much better than a single vote for a single candidate. Honestly, you have more impact on local elections - presidential elections are somewhat a scam.
-
Jermo, that is part of the shift that has occured in the US AWAY from semi-soverign states and more to a single National government.
That was NOT the intent of the founders, but has been creeping in.
The Civil War was a big hit on teh Federation. Direct taxation of hte populace was HUGE. Loss of state selection of Senators sealed our fate.
-
@ncscswitch:
Jermo, that is part of the shift that has occured in the US AWAY from semi-soverign states and more to a single National government.
That was NOT the intent of the founders, but has been creeping in.
The Civil War was a big hit on teh Federation. Direct taxation of hte populace was HUGE. Loss of state selection of Senators sealed our fate.
I’m just commenting on the presidential election. Honestly, it’s a joke. We have the ability to make it democratic, and I think we should do so. I’m not saying to strip states’ rights.
-
im ffine with the electoral college i don’t think it should be winnner take all. How would they round that then?
-
I don’t think you completely understand the concept. It’s a fact that the college disproportionally favors smaller states. because of the rules for how the electorates are assigned. The President isn’t elected by the “people” he is elected by the States to represent the states. This is another example of how the states were designed to have more power than the federal government. The people in Alabama don’t want the same government as the people in Connecticut.
And, your vote does count. Did your candidate your state? If not, you are in the minority the Minority never get thier way in a democracy, thats kind of the point. If your state did chose your candidate and he still lost, then your state is in the minority of states, again democracy.
A wise man said to me recently paraphrased: other than possibly of Switzerland The US is the most Democratic nation in the world.
-
I don’t think you completely understand the concept. It’s a fact that the college disproportionally favors smaller states. because of the rules for how the electorates are assigned. The President isn’t elected by the “people” he is elected by the States to represent the states. This is another example of how the states were designed to have more power than the federal government. The people in Alabama don’t want the same government as the people in Connecticut.
But if i understand right, the whole point to electing senators is to help give even the smallest, most marginallized and stupidest states an equal voice to the bigger, more important and smarter states . . . so this would kind of make them much overrepresented - i.e. the only real democracy is in electing members to the house of representatives. Or am i wrong about this?
-
The point is that individual states are treated like individuals. Be careful with the small is stupid, they don’t do thinngs my way does not = stupid :wink:
-
By the way the house of representatives favors the smallest states in the same way the college does.
-
Here’s an example:
Combined populations of WY, AK, VT, and ND = aprox. 2,317,000 each of these states has 1 Representative
Population of AZ = aprox. 5,580,811 - 4 Representatives
-
I don’t think you completely understand the concept. It’s a fact that the college disproportionally favors smaller states. because of the rules for how the electorates are assigned. The President isn’t elected by the “people” he is elected by the States to represent the states. This is another example of how the states were designed to have more power than the federal government. The people in Alabama don’t want the same government as the people in Connecticut.
Actually, it doesn’t. It favors larger states. All of them get 2 votes for their senators. With that being equal, the rest of the votes equate to population. That’s why candidates shoot for the big states - California, New York, Texas, etc. - and hope to sweep up some of the smaller states. If it mattered to a single vote, then it would be MORE representative of the population. And you last point is moot, no matter the way the presidential election is held.
And, your vote does count. Did your candidate your state? If not, you are in the minority the Minority never get thier way in a democracy, thats kind of the point. If your state did chose your candidate and he still lost, then your state is in the minority of states, again democracy.
A wise man said to me recently paraphrased: other than possibly of Switzerland The US is the most Democratic nation in the world.
I disagree here as well. In a presidential election, your vote doesn’t count. That’s why the popular vote recipient can lose, and has. In my eyes, the presidential election is more for show than actual result. You have no impact whatsoever.
And your note about minorities is completely off. It’s not the point of democracy. A true democracy would say the minority base needs just as much representation as the majority. There has to be some protection - otherwise, it’s not a democracy but mob rule. Furthermore, depending on what you look at, the minority and majority could be comprised of anyone. Is it by gender? Age? Race? Hardly a way to go. Other things to consider - why should men decide what happens with women, a la abortion? Or the heterosexuals on gay issues? Etc, etc.By the way the house of representatives favors the smallest states in the same way the college does.
No, like CC said, it’s the Senate. The House is based on population. Remember the Connecticut Compromise…
-
Well if you don’t understand the point I am trying to make it’s my fault for being unable to explain clearly enough. I do suggest you do a bit of research on pro=college view points so that perhaps someone else can explain better than I.
-
dont fret dezrtfish, i understood perfectly. of course these damn liberals, spew venom about the electoral college, b/c they blame it for bush winning. and so they cry about it. constantly. they would rather have the states rights and the intention of the founders by the states LETTING themselves be governed by a central government if it keeps to the original contract, thrown away so they can dominate with the populations of shitheads in new york and the douchbag eastcoast and those retarded hippies on the west coast. the oceans must screw with the mind. to much salinity in the air.
the electoral college is there as a function of states rights. this isnt some huge centralized government piece of crap socialist democracy. its a damn good democracy without the socialism. the electoral votes give more sway to states with more population, and that sounds democratic to me. more people, more votes = a little extra voting power for a state. just like the house of reps is their to let more populous states have a little extra clout also. the senate makes all states equal in votes.
the whole setup is a great, fantastic compromise that works well. and will continue to work well. the states if they see themselves getting screwed hardcore by a “new and improved” populous vote system, under the contract as it is, could just walk away. what state would want to get royally screwed over by shitheads. or they could group together and attack blockade and starve into submission those shitheads. liberals just dont like it because they lost to bush,……twice. nuff said.
Suggested Topics
