The electoral College
09-08-2008, 02:44 PM
#2
Super Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 2,532
Originally Posted by phinsup' post='907595' date='Sep 8 2008, 02:49 PM
So what's your feeling outdated? As useful as ever? DISCUSS
I'm familiar with the basic concept, but I do not feel qualified to debate at this time. I will have to do some research first.
09-08-2008, 02:53 PM
#3
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
ha ha, ok well I'm not buyin that, but here's the breakdown http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_Col...(United_States)
it has only failed to represent the popular vote a handful of times, the 2000 Bush/Gore election was one such instance, Gore had the popular vote, Bush had the electoral votes.
it has only failed to represent the popular vote a handful of times, the 2000 Bush/Gore election was one such instance, Gore had the popular vote, Bush had the electoral votes.
09-08-2008, 03:28 PM
#5
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
I see some of the arguments for it, but I think it's time it goes away. The only real valid argument i have seen for it, is that it could trigger massive recounts, i only see this really happing in tight areas, not nationwide and I think it would be easy to move in a direction away from the electoral college.
Americans vote, Diebold decides!
Americans vote, Diebold decides!
09-08-2008, 03:51 PM
#7
Super Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 2,532
As we are a "federation of independent states", the Electoral College makes good sense, even today. It keeps smaller states from being completely superfluous to a national election, and I think that's a good thing. I feel it also limits the damage that can be done via fraudulent voting.
Also, I tend not to favor tampering with the constitution, on the assumption that even though its over 200 years old, the only thing we're likely to accomplish by changing it is to **** it up.
Also, I tend not to favor tampering with the constitution, on the assumption that even though its over 200 years old, the only thing we're likely to accomplish by changing it is to **** it up.
09-08-2008, 04:13 PM
#9
Super Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 2,532
Well, to plagiarize the wiki:
Maintains the federal character of the nation
The United States of America is a federal coalition which consists of component states. Proponents of the current system argue that the collective opinion of even a small state merits attention at the federal level greater than that given to a small, though numerically-equivalent, portion of a very populous state.
For many years early in the nation's history, up until the Jacksonian Era, many states appointed their electors by a vote of the state legislature, and proponents argue that, in the end, the election of the President must still come down to the decisions of each state, or the federal nature of the United States will give way to a single massive, centralized government.[43]
Maintains the federal character of the nation
The United States of America is a federal coalition which consists of component states. Proponents of the current system argue that the collective opinion of even a small state merits attention at the federal level greater than that given to a small, though numerically-equivalent, portion of a very populous state.
For many years early in the nation's history, up until the Jacksonian Era, many states appointed their electors by a vote of the state legislature, and proponents argue that, in the end, the election of the President must still come down to the decisions of each state, or the federal nature of the United States will give way to a single massive, centralized government.[43]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)