Go back
Electoral College

Electoral College

Debates

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
46d

@Mott-The-Hoople said
but you want to increase democracy and do away with the EC 😂
And your point is ............................................. what exactly?

Earl of Trumps
Pawn Whisperer

My Kingdom fora Pawn

Joined
09 Jan 19
Moves
20480
Clock
46d
Vote Up
Vote Down

@A-Unique-Nickname said
Which highlights how it's a completely flawed system.
agreed

Suzianne
Misfit Queen

Isle of Misfit Toys

Joined
08 Aug 03
Moves
37419
Clock
46d
Vote Up
Vote Down

@Mott-The-Hoople said
but you want to increase democracy and do away with the EC 😂
Aha! So you do understand some things you read. Well done!

AverageJoe1
Catch the Train 47!

Lake Como

Joined
27 Jul 10
Moves
54763
Clock
46d

@no1marauder said
And your point is ............................................. what exactly?
How can mott talk about Democracy when no one here can define it? Sonhouse mentions it the most, and knows it the least.

AverageJoe1
Catch the Train 47!

Lake Como

Joined
27 Jul 10
Moves
54763
Clock
46d

@A-Unique-Nickname said
Which highlights how it's a completely flawed system.
You could only mean that the person with the most votes is the winner. But that is not the way the Founders want it. Look it up. So, it is NOT flawed, it is intact.
How silly you are.

A Unique Nickname

Joined
10 Jan 08
Moves
19081
Clock
46d

@AverageJoe1 said
You could only mean that the person with the most votes is the winner. But that is not the way the Founders want it. Look it up. So, it is NOT flawed, it is intact.
How silly you are.
Yeah you're right, it make complete sense to have a system where the winner can have and has in the past had 3 million less votes than the winner. Great system, very fair... Me so silly.

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
46d

@AverageJoe1 said
You could only mean that the person with the most votes is the winner. But that is not the way the Founders want it. Look it up. So, it is NOT flawed, it is intact.
How silly you are.
The Founders and Framers didn't want women or black folks to vote either.

They were progressive for their time but many of their ideas are long outmoded. They recognized times change and provided for a process to amend the Constitution - one would should use to eliminate the EC.

spruce112358
It's All A Joke

Joined
23 Oct 04
Moves
4402
Clock
46d

@AverageJoe1 said
But that is not the way the Founders want it. Look it up. So, it is NOT flawed, it is intact.
The EC wasn't broken in the Founder's day.

The EC was broken in 1929 by the Reapportionment Act that capped the number of members in the House at 435. That means that large states do not have enough Representatives when compared to the smallest state by population (e.g. Wyoming).

The EC cannot be fixed. It has to be eliminated.

A Unique Nickname

Joined
10 Jan 08
Moves
19081
Clock
46d

@no1marauder said
The Founders and Framers didn't want women or black folks to vote either.

They were progressive for their time but many of their ideas are long outmoded. They recognized times change and provided for a process to amend the Constitution - one would should use to eliminate the EC.
What's your alternative? Just most votes wins between two parties?

Would be interesting in states where you know has a majority, would more of the minority come out to vote because their vote is actually going to count?

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
46d

@A-Unique-Nickname said
What's your alternative? Just most votes wins between two parties?

Would be interesting in states where you know has a majority, would more of the minority come out to vote because their vote is actually going to count?
It would make every vote count if it was simply the candidate with the most votes nationally.

In practical terms now, the only votes that are of any importance are those in the "swing" States.

A Unique Nickname

Joined
10 Jan 08
Moves
19081
Clock
46d
Vote Up
Vote Down

@no1marauder said
It would make every vote count if it was simply the candidate with the most votes nationally.

In practical terms now, the only votes that are of any importance are those in the "swing" States.
Do you think the turnout would be higher?

sh76
Civis Americanus Sum

New York

Joined
26 Dec 07
Moves
17585
Clock
46d

@no1marauder said
It would make every vote count if it was simply the candidate with the most votes nationally.

In practical terms now, the only votes that are of any importance are those in the "swing" States.
I suppose that would be the logical thing to do.

But think of how much less exciting election analysis and election nights would be.

vivify
rain

Joined
08 Mar 11
Moves
12456
Clock
46d
Vote Up
Vote Down

Elections should be decided with a Showcase Showdown on the Price Is Right.

AverageJoe1
Catch the Train 47!

Lake Como

Joined
27 Jul 10
Moves
54763
Clock
46d
1 edit

What if there were 5 states...California, Texas, Florida, Wyoming and Vermont.
The first listed 3 have 100M people. The other 2, about ONE million.


Now create a situitation where WY and/or ME have a say in a populous vote.

AverageJoe1
Catch the Train 47!

Lake Como

Joined
27 Jul 10
Moves
54763
Clock
46d
Vote Up
Vote Down

@no1marauder said
The Founders and Framers didn't want women or black folks to vote either.

They were progressive for their time but many of their ideas are long outmoded. They recognized times change and provided for a process to amend the Constitution - one would should use to eliminate the EC.
Odd that you suggest that those who were not allowed to vote have anything to do wtih the counting of votes by those are allowed to vote, the qualified citizens. Uh oh, a racist comment I guess. But, children were not qualified, Marauder. And we are indeed speaking only of the numbers who live in the area or the state.
Further I sayeth not

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.