View Poll Results: How should presidents be elected

Voters
70. You may not vote on this poll
  • Popular vote

    34 48.57%
  • Electoral college

    36 51.43%
Page 25 of 25 FirstFirst ... 15232425
Results 241 to 245 of 245

Thread: The electoral college

  1. #241
    Sage

    vesper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,885

    Re: The electoral college

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius46 View Post
    Thank you for this history lesson, however it's not needed. I'm familiar with everything you've said. I'd also appreciate you not making assumptions about my motivations - your whole insulting comment about electing a minority. You don't know me.

    You and others have repeatedly gone on at length about how the EC and winner-take-all, which is really my problem not EC per se, protect the rights of small states. I've repeatedly asked for a reasonable explanation of how this can be - and have gotten silence.

    So here's what I think. The EC was instituted primarily to thwart popular vote. Electors have no Constitutional responsibility to vote in accordance with the way their states tell them to. In reality that doesn't happen all that often but it is legally permissible. What the EC with winner-take-all effectively does is give all the real voting power to a small number of undecideds in a small number of traditionally undecided states. The rest of us - including most of those small states you profess to care about - can stay home on election day. Our vote matters not one bit.

    We are a republic, not a democracy - at least not in the traditional sense. How we elect people has NO bearing on that. How we elect people has no real bearing on our Constitutional protections. If we went to direct popular vote tomorrow we would still be a republic. We would still be protected by the Constitution.


    My use of the word minority wasn't in regard to race but to numbers. The minority meaning the candidate that did not receive the popular vote but won the electoral vote.
    I've done a bit of reading on the subject and many of the law professors and jurists are of the opinion that the NPV is riddled with constitutional perils and will result in a nightmare of litigation. Some of the issues they bring up are...

    "Guarantee Clause" of Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution, which states that the "United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government."

    "Compact Clause" in Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution, which provides that "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress ... enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State."

    The NPV compact's reduction of the Electoral College to an empty shell would therefore thwart the intention of the Framers of the original Constitution and the framers of the Twelfth Amendment, which reformed the Electoral College in 1804, since the Constitution clearly contemplates that electoral votes will be cast by the states as states rather than by the states as collective or compacting entities.

    And then there is the issue of those states who have banned together under the NVP versus those states (I believe 10 in all) who have rejected it, how is that going to result in a fair outcome of an election with States using two different methods?

    Some have warned that the NPV compact might violate sections 2 and 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
    Last edited by vesper; 08-12-13 at 09:06 AM.

  2. #242
    Sage
    Gaius46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,494

    The electoral college

    Quote Originally Posted by vesper View Post
    My use of the word minority wasn't in regard to race but to numbers. The minority meaning the candidate that did not receive the popular vote but won the electoral vote.
    I've done a bit of reading on the subject and many of the law professors and jurists are of the opinion that the NPV is riddled with constitutional perils and will result in a nightmare of litigation. Some of the issues they bring up are...

    "Guarantee Clause" of Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution, which states that the "United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government."

    "Compact Clause" in Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution, which provides that "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress ... enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State."

    The NPV compact's reduction of the Electoral College to an empty shell would therefore thwart the intention of the Framers of the original Constitution and the framers of the Twelfth Amendment, which reformed the Electoral College in 1804, since the Constitution clearly contemplates that electoral votes will be cast by the states as states rather than by the states as collective or compacting entities.

    And then there is the issue of those states who have banned together under the NVP versus those states (I believe 10 in all) who have rejected it, how is that going to result in a fair outcome of an election with States using two different methods?

    Some have warned that the NPV compact might violate sections 2 and 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
    My apologies then for misunderstanding you.

    I'd never heard of the NPV before today wasn't speaking in defense of it. I'm merely pointing that the winner-take-all rules that almost all states follow do nothing but place electoral decision making into the hands of a small number of voters n a small number of swing states and that does a disservice to the rest of the country.
    Don't be a grammar nazi - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 1 #7

  3. #243
    Sage

    vesper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,885

    Re: The electoral college

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius46 View Post
    My apologies then for misunderstanding you.

    I'd never heard of the NPV before today wasn't speaking in defense of it. I'm merely pointing that the winner-take-all rules that almost all states follow do nothing but place electoral decision making into the hands of a small number of voters n a small number of swing states and that does a disservice to the rest of the country.
    Not a problem. NPV is a movement that started out of California a few years back. I notice you are listed as being a Libertarian. Here is a link to a pdf at the Libertarian think tank, Cato Institute on the proposed National Public Vote you might find interesting. Make it a great day!

    A Critique of the National Popular Vote | Cato Institute

  4. #244
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3

    Re: The electoral college

    ...... i'm still looking for the 'trial by combat' option.......

    coming to you live from the Thunderdome, it's PRESIDENTIAL DEATHMATCH!!!!!!!!!! LET"S GET READY TO BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNNGLLLLE!

  5. #245
    User
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    08-29-13 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6

    Re: The electoral college

    In my opinion, the electoral college is antiquitated and inefficient. It fails miserably at its one and only goal (to easily elect a president by correctly representing the views of the American public and of small states). I'm not saying that popular vote would be my next choice, but almost anything is better than the EC.
    "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

    Voltaire

Page 25 of 25 FirstFirst ... 15232425

Posting Permissions

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