One Person, One Vote

[Deleted User 12047]

The electoral college is there for much the same reason that each state has two Senator's regardless of size or population.

And please explain that reason. Why should someone living in Wyoming have 7 times the voting power of someone in Texas?

[bmw]

The electoral college is there for much the same reason that each state has two Senator's regardless of size or population.

And please explain that reason. Why should someone living in Wyoming have 7 times the voting power of someone in Texas?

Go educate yourself.

[Turkeytop]

In Canada, we're living with a spineless Liberal government, elected with 33% popular vote. The second place Conservatives got 34.4%. The remaining 33% was distributed among four other parties.

[Rate This]

So you would be open to the Maine and Nebraska models which have produced split results?

Kind of. The main difference is that I wouldn't allocate the proportional electoral votes on a per-District basis. Rather, I would allocate them as a percentage of the state-wide vote totals. This avoids the issue of gerrymandering.

The Electoral College directly mirrors the House + Senate combined in terms of number of electors per state. As such, I think that in the interest of mirroring that as much as possible, only 100 of the Electors should be at-large. The remaining electors should be proportionally allocated.

I've proposed this several times in here before and even a few liberal regulars were ok with the idea. I think it is the perfect compromise.

I could get on board with this.. it would still take an amendment but it does answer the issue of gerrymandering quite well... I was afraid you were gonna gloss over that...

[Matt]

The electoral college is there for much the same reason that each state has two Senator's regardless of size or population.

And please explain that reason. Why should someone living in Wyoming have 7 times the voting power of someone in Texas?

Go educate yourself.

Not a likely outcome. Perhaps he could change his user name to "Logic Sucks" in the interest of accuracy.

Also, the fallacy of suggesting the outcome of the last election would have been different if there was no electoral college COMPLETELY disregards the fact that Trump would have campaigned differently if the electoral college did not exist. He campaigned to win by the rules that have been in place since day 1. Who knows how many people in California or New York stay home because they know their presidential vote is not going to count?

Anyone notice the H U G E turnout at the New Jersey Trump rally the other day?

[Rate This]

The electoral college is there for much the same reason that each state has two Senator's regardless of size or population.

And please explain that reason. Why should someone living in Wyoming have 7 times the voting power of someone in Texas?

Go educate yourself.

Not a likely outcome. Perhaps he could change his user name to "Logic Sucks" in the interest of accuracy.

Also, the fallacy of suggesting the outcome of the last election would have been different if there was no electoral college COMPLETELY disregards the fact that Trump would have campaigned differently if the electoral college did not exist. He campaigned to win by the rules that have been in place since day 1. Who knows how many people in California or New York stay home because they know their presidential vote is not going to count?

Anyone notice the H U G E turnout at the New Jersey Trump rally the other day?

That turnout is meaningless... in a state with millions of people even a state as blue as New Jersey you can still get 35 or 40% to support the Republicans at any given time.. with said millions of people you can create a crowd like he had. If he pulls that off in Hawaii we can talk. Similarly if Sanders pulls off a H*** crowd in Oklahoma we can talk. But not New Jersey.

[Deleted User 12047]

The electoral college is there for much the same reason that each state has two Senator's regardless of size or population.

And please explain that reason. Why should someone living in Wyoming have 7 times the voting power of someone in Texas?

Go educate yourself.

Not a likely outcome. Perhaps he could change his user name to "Logic Sucks" in the interest of accuracy.

Also, the fallacy of suggesting the outcome of the last election would have been different if there was no electoral college COMPLETELY disregards the fact that Trump would have campaigned differently if the electoral college did not exist. He campaigned to win by the rules that have been in place since day 1. Who knows how many people in California or New York stay home because they know their presidential vote is not going to count?

Anyone notice the H U G E turnout at the New Jersey Trump rally the other day?

It's so much easier to just throw around insults then it is to actually present an argument, isn't it?

Let's attack a lot of these questions:

"Go educate yourself." In reading the Federalist Papers, support for the Electoral College also expresses support for the "Three Fifths Clause" of the Constitution - the one that held slaves were not actually people. One of the goals of the Electoral College was to keep free states from forcing changes in slave states. In fact, many of the state designations and borders at the beginning of the US were based on slave ownership.

The Founding Fathers were also concerned about allowing the "huddled masses" to decide who should lead the country. In early Presidential elections, an individual voter didn't vote for a President - he (only men could vote) voter for an elector, who then went to an Electoral College meeting with no restrictions on who they might vote for.

So today, the Electoral College is not just another relic of the slave era, it reminds us that we weren't trusted as voters to make the right decisions. Please offer me the reasons to maintain such a system.

"fallacy of suggesting the outcome of the last election would have been different if there was no electoral college" - I have made no such suggestion. You might be totally surprised by the following statement coming from me - Donald Trump won the election in 2016 fair and square and is the duly elected President of the United States, and deserves the support of the American people. Even those that didn't vote for him. I support changing future elections to make them more fair and more constitutional - one person, one vote.

"Who knows how many people in California or New York stay home because they know their presidential vote is not going to count?" Thanks for making my point for me.

Please offer any rebuttals. Thanks and have a great day.