View Poll Results: Keep Electoral College or have direct elections?

Voters
107. You may not vote on this poll
  • The Electoral College works, keep it.

    46 42.99%
  • The presidency should be determined by direct national vote.

    49 45.79%
  • IDK/Other

    12 11.21%
Page 3 of 32 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 319

Thread: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

  1. #21
    Guru
    Smeagol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    02-19-17 @ 11:35 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,147

    re: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

    Its worth considering IMHO. I think we'd also need a runoff system so the President has at least 50% plus 1 vote. And since US citizenship will become the new prerequisite to vote for President and not state citizenship; Puerto Ricans, Virgin Islanders, Guam citizens and American Samoans would get the right to vote for POTUS, something they've wanted for a while.

    On the downside, we'd still have "irrelevant" parts of the country as nearly all the focus could be on reaching major metropolitan areas who's values and concerns are often sharply different than rural America.

    Direct elections does seem for fair however; one man, one vote.
    Having opinions all over the map is a good sign of a person capable of autonomous thinking. Felix -2011

  2. #22
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,872

    re: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    The electoral college is founded on the idea that the people who live in a state are all homogeneous with each other. The college is intended to prevent more populous states from imposing their will on the smaller ones. But states don't actually operate that way. Most states are split close to 50/50, and even the most divisive states split closer to 60/40, maybe reaching as far as 70/30. In 1998, GWB won re-election as governor of Texas in a landslide with 69% of the vote. 69% is a landslide. Clearly, Texas is not as uniformly red as some people might think. No state is uniformly one way or another. That's just not how voters work in this country. The problem that the electoral college exists to prevent doesn't actually happen. New York wouldn't have any influence in a presidential election, because New York wouldn't be a prize to be won. Each individual voter in the state would be a unique and separate data point, and some would go one way and some the other. A direct popular vote would make every single vote count the same, since states do not move as homogeneous blocks.

    Every single vote counts now.

  3. #23
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,872

    re: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

    Quote Originally Posted by roughdraft274 View Post
    They are already able to do this. California gets 50-something votes while Nebraska gets 2. If you were arguing for a system where each state got equal votes you'd be on the right track.
    Only California and 19 others would count and the candidates wouldn't be visiting New Hampshire, or Iowa.

  4. #24
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,782

    re: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    Only California and 19 others would count and the candidates wouldn't be visiting New Hampshire, or Iowa.
    I disagree, if im a canidate this would only happen if the super majority of people in those states like me and did NOT like my opponent.

    otherwise i would have to go to little places also

    for example if the 20 states of your picking had 100million voters and say 60 of them liked me by polling thats great

    but

    that leaves 40 million votes and that other guy is DEFINITELY going other places like Iowa (if he wants to win) to try and get another 21million votes so i will HAVE to go also to stop him

    im not saying its impossible im saying the strs have to really be aligned to make it happen and theres a slim chance it could happen today too (places being ignored)

    I think a direct vote would be AWESOME BUT also make it for a minimum of 3 maybe more candidates and second place should be the vice
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  5. #25
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    re: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

    I left off another discussed alternative of the President being selected by the members of the House of Representatives of Congress. This would be indirect democracy but on a nationwide basis. Many countries have such a system.

  6. #26
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    re: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

    Quote Originally Posted by Smeagol View Post
    Its worth considering IMHO. I think we'd also need a runoff system so the President has at least 50% plus 1 vote. And since US citizenship will become the new prerequisite to vote for President and not state citizenship; Puerto Ricans, Virgin Islanders, Guam citizens and American Samoans would get the right to vote for POTUS, something they've wanted for a while.

    On the downside, we'd still have "irrelevant" parts of the country as nearly all the focus could be on reaching major metropolitan areas who's values and concerns are often sharply different than rural America.

    Direct elections does seem for fair however; one man, one vote.
    I agree with the run-off premise. Very much. Otherwise the "spoiler" 3rd parties tend to make the overall less popular candidate the winner.

  7. #27
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,399

    re: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    We know that it is possible for the candidate receiving the most votes to lose (Gore) and the voters in all but 7 states are now irrelevant to the candidates. The strategy of both is to forget about recieving a majority of votes and instead only care about the delegate count of 7 states.

    Do you think that regardless of the election outcome, there should be a constitutional amendment to have national elections (president) decided by direct democracy in which the winner is determined by which candidate received more votes nationwide?
    I really don't know. I have been in favor of abolishing the electoral college most of my life, but in just the last few years have seen good arguments for keeping it. Hence, my opinion now is "I don't know".
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  8. #28
    Sage
    blackjack50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:57 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,291

    re: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

    I have to say that I agree that a 51% majority factor is slightly unerving. Any time 51% can impose a decision on 49%...it doesn't quite sit right with me.

    Not to mention direct democracy is not such a grand thing. Things like amendments that can get voted on because of direct democracy is idiotic and they do that in my state. It is a dumb idea. I can understand voting for people, but I still don't quite like the idea.
    The Crowd is not the sum of its parts.

  9. #29
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,782

    re: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

    well since this is fantasy my dream would be to not have any "parties" but oh well

    Direct Vote
    4+ candidates minimum (3 separate parties)
    2nd place is VP
    3rd lace leader of the house

    reform House and Senate terms to match

    if we still have parties then no majority would be allowed in either house or senate



    hopefully by default this FORCES bi-partisanship
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  10. #30
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,782

    re: Time for direct democracy - end electorial college?[W:193]

    Quote Originally Posted by stonewall50 View Post
    .)I have to say that I agree that a 51% majority factor is slightly unerving. Any time 51% can impose a decision on 49%...it doesn't quite sit right with me.

    Not to mention direct democracy is not such a grand thing. Things like amendments that can get voted on because of direct democracy is idiotic and they do that in my state. It is a dumb idea. I can understand voting for people, but I still don't quite like the idea.
    well i agree with what you are saying but for presidency id be ok with it

    the rest of the government would still be im place and working because yes 51% making all decesions for the 49% would be bad
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

Page 3 of 32 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •