• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Poll: most people who voted in 2016 want to abolish the Electoral College

Lafayette

Lafayette

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
9,594
Reaction score
2,072
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From here: (Vox) Poll: most people who voted in 2016 want to abolish the Electoral College


voting_ELECTORAL_VOTE.jpg



'Nuff said ... ?
 
I'd be cool with it being "abolished."

Not exactly something that you do with a hand wave though.
 
No, not "nuff said".


We are not simply a mob-rule democracy.


The structure of the gov, its limits, and the manner of electing the President are set out in the Constitution. You'll need an Amendment to change that and that's a long hard road. There are good reasons why we don't make major changes just because, for a short period of time, a majority want to.


Very good reasons.
 
this is just one of the many things that i hate about the two party system. if it had been Clinton with an electoral win and a popular vote loss, this kind of stuff would be a mirror image just like the monthly economic report threads will be from now on. the electoral college isn't a horrible idea, because it prevents a situation in which candidates only pay attention to highly populated cities. you want a couple really bad ideas that you should be pissed off about? ok.

1. gerrymandering. these assholes are drawing their own districts. that's ****ed up.

2. the presidential primary system. the same states are picking the candidates almost every time, and the other states are left to vote for candidates who have already dropped out. if you're defending that, then you probably live in one of the early states, and you should take a step back and have a long think about the unfairness that you're supporting.

start with those.
 
It would be interesting to see that broken down by state. Something tells me that even in the more rural states where the people benefit the most from the electoral college, most people probably would want to abolish it. While I understand all purposes behind the EC, I think it defies most people's sense of fairness.
 
No surprise. The Democrat received more votes in 2016 and 2000. And everyone has read the headlines that Republicans are controlling more states which might indicate that with the Electoral College Republicans may be well positioned.

Hopefully common sense prevails. There are reasons for the EC. Every country in the world basically is on a EC type election. No democracies out there. I realize that Americans are notoriously short sighted but 1)this is a bad idea, and 2) won't happen anytime soon.
 
MaggieD said:
All it takes is an amendment to the Constitution. 'Course there'll probably be thirty or more states that have absolutely no desire to do so...
Click to expand...

Why is that if already more than two-thirds of Americans are against the inanity of the present "Electoral College"?

The will of the people is manifested by the Popular Vote in every other democracy on earth. Only ours is an aberration.

It is NOT Mission Impossible ...
 
Cool, another thread on a doa topic. Who knew there was so much money in polling that there are so many polling companies so many silly questions.

Or are they really spending any money and just making up numbers? Hmmmm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Lafayette said:
Why is that if already more than two-thirds of Americans are against the inanity of the present "Electoral College"?

The will of the people is manifested by the Popular Vote in every other democracy on earth. Only ours is an aberration.

It is NOT Mission Impossible ...
Click to expand...

OK. But you don't seriously think that a Constitutional amendment gets voted on in a vacuum, do you? The public will have PLENTY of time to learn how three or four states' population is going to control the entire country from then on. And each state will vote individually...

It may not be mission impossible, but I'd say it would be close to it.
 
Lafayette said:
'Nuff said ... ?
Click to expand...

Nope, not nuff said. The EC is in the Constitution so it will take an amendment to abolish it and that has a 0% chance of ever happening.
 
Lafayette said:
Why is that if already more than two-thirds of Americans are against the inanity of the present "Electoral College"?

The will of the people is manifested by the Popular Vote in every other democracy on earth. Only ours is an aberration.

It is NOT Mission Impossible ...
Click to expand...
Look at a map and see how many Republican controlled States are out there and think about how scared Republicans, and everyone living in the outback, more than 50 miles from the coast, would feel about a few large urban areas dictating to the country. Hard to see how an amendment would pass.
 
There's absolutely no rational reason to give a minority the opportunity to choose the president. It's indefensible.
The tyranny of the minority has given us George W. Bush and now Donald Trump.
Way to go GOP!
 
BrewerBob said:
It would be interesting to see that broken down by state. Something tells me that even in the more rural states where the people benefit the most from the electoral college, most people probably would want to abolish it. While I understand all purposes behind the EC, I think it defies most people's sense of fairness.
Click to expand...

Your analysis is correct, and I would be among those that upholds the EC in small part because of that point. Nevertheless, I would be interested in tweaking the formula if we receive one or two more elections like 2000 or 2016. So far they are, by far, an exception to the normal course of U.S. elections, but if they truly increase in frequency in a short period of time, that is enough cause for concern in my book.
 
RetiredUSN said:
That is because most voters are about as ignorant as you are with the function of the federation of states. Coming from the very same guy who claims that the the majority are the victims of the few.
Click to expand...

Piffle & Drivel, Drivel & Piffle. This democracy is not a federation of Independent States but a republic with elected representation to Executive & Legislative branches in LaLaLand on the Potomac.

And I tire of repeating the same fundamental elements of our democracy to somebody who wont Read & Learn.

Moving right along ...
 
Goshin said:
No, not "nuff said".


We are not simply a mob-rule democracy.


The structure of the gov, its limits, and the manner of electing the President are set out in the Constitution. You'll need an Amendment to change that and that's a long hard road. There are good reasons why we don't make major changes just because, for a short period of time, a majority want to.


Very good reasons.
Click to expand...
Maybe.
Maybe Not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
 
DYSFUNCTIONAL DEMOCRACY

Eric7216 said:
Look at a map and see how many Republican controlled States are out there and think about how scared Republicans, and everyone living in the outback, more than 50 miles from the coast, would feel about a few large urban areas dictating to the country. Hard to see how an amendment would pass.
Click to expand...

You need a rudimentary lesson in democracies and how they function.

Ever take a course in Civics? Ever graduate by taking a course in Civics? From what you write, apparently not.

it is the will-of-the-people as expressed in a Popular Vote that reigns in a Functional Democracy. It is a Dysfunctional Democracy that inserts itself between the will-of-the-people to determine who "wins" a presidential election.

And that holds true for both sides of our two-party system in America where last November Hillary Clinton won the Popular Vote by a significant margin of 2.1%! As well, Donald Dork lost the Popular Vote by the largest recorded margin in the nation's recent history! (See that historical record here.)

MY POINT

A country that does not know how to count-votes in a presidential election (and report them directly to Congress) that confirms the election of a candidate has no fundamental anchoring in the meaning of the word "democracy" ...
 
Last edited:
Fishking said:
Nope, not nuff said. The EC is in the Constitution so it will take an amendment to abolish it and that has a 0% chance of ever happening.
Click to expand...

Sez you.

There is always a "first time" in a real-democracy. We shall see how "real" America's democracy is today ...
 
MaggieD said:
The public will have PLENTY of time to learn how three or four states' population is going to control the entire country from then on.
Click to expand...

False logic. You make such an election sound like a "cabal".

It's not that easy that just four-states obtain the majority vote, and so what if it just so happens that four states have also a majority of the electoral population. You are thinking in terms of "states" because of a "tribal notion" (on this forum) that holds that "state rights" transcend those of the nation.

That question of "state rights" predominance was settled in the Civil War, I thought; but some people in this forum seem attached by an umbilical chord to the antiquated notion. What belongs to the states (in terms of jurisdiction) remains with the states - but the election of a PotUS transcends "state rights" and is the jurisdiction of the nation as a whole.

And, if that bothers you, just convince your fellow-travellers (in that archaic thought) to declare "statehood independence".

We'll see how far you get with that idea. About as far as I get convincing people that the archaic Electoral College must be dumped from its constitutional base, even though a sounding-of-sentiment seems to indicate clearly a preference for exactly that outcome ...
 
Last edited:
RetiredUSN said:
That is because most voters are about as ignorant as you are with the function of the federation of states.

Coming from the very same guy who claims that the the majority are the victims of the few.

Yeah.............let NYC & LA determine where we go.

Bravo!
Click to expand...

Ad hominen and sarcasm.

Moving right along ...
 
GIVE DEMOCRACY A CHANCE

Eric7216 said:
Look at a map and see how many Republican controlled States are out there and think about how scared Republicans, and everyone living in the outback, more than 50 miles from the coast, would feel about a few large urban areas dictating to the country. Hard to see how an amendment would pass.
Click to expand...

Piffle, the subject at present is the national election of a PotUS that was besmirched by the inanity of an antiquated and unnecessary Electoral College.

Only the Popular-Vote nationally should assure the election of a PotUS - as in all other real democracies.

Which will require perhaps a national referendum to undue the 12th Amendment employed to create the Electoral College at a time when far too many electors did not even know how to read-and-write nor count!!!

That electoral condition is no longer with us, though we do have a country with one of the worst turn-out records of any. See Pew Research in the matter here: U.S. voter turnout trails most developed countries.

All I am saying is "Give Democracy A Chance*" ...

*But for that to happen American voters must get off their collective-arses and out voting for fundamental change in an archaic electoral system. Rather than bitching-in-a-blog.
 
Fishking said:
Nope, not nuff said. The EC is in the Constitution so it will take an amendment to abolish it and that has a 0% chance of ever happening.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right.

And for as long as the Replicants own both chambers of Congress and the Supreme Court, nothing will change.

(Last time the national emotion rose to a pitch level, however, we did summon the courage to throw out a monarch ... !)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom