• 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!

Should we change our electoral system?[W:319]

Should we change our system for electing presidents?

  • Total voters
    96
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

Masterhawk said:
Our current system has an electoral college which has different amounts for different states (based on population). The candidate which wins the most votes will win all of the votes of that state. Supporters of the EC argue that it protects small states from the big ones, however, it's not winner take all which does this, it's the fact that states start out with 3 electors.

Btw, an example of a third choice would be if it was really close, the two candidates would get half of the state votes.

So, should we change it?
Click to expand...

States can change how they award their electoral votes anytime they have a mind to. In fact Maine and Nebraska do not award their electoral votes in a winner take all fashion. They use congressional districts with the winner of the state receiving the last two. Maine split their electoral votes last year, 3 to Clinton, 1 to Trump.

If there were to be a change to the awarding of the electoral votes, I would if I had the power keep the winner take all for any candidate who wins the state with 50% plus one vote. A candidate must receive a majority. In states where a candidate won with a plurality, go by congressional districts with the last two electoral votes going to the candidate who had the most votes in that state. Last year those states won by a plurality that would go to Congressional districts plus giving the plurality winner an addition two electoral votes would have been Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. Would it have made a difference? In states where Trump and Clinton each won a majority of the vote, Trump would have lead 195-188. Instead of a 306-232 Trump victory, he still would have won 281-257. Two anomalies stand out, in Pennsylvania where Trump won the state by just 0.7 points, seven tenths of one percent, he would have taken 13 of the congressional districts to five for Clinton. In North Carolina where Trump won the state by 3.6 points, he would taken 10 congressional districts to three for Clinton.

I would either go with that or if the states wants to continue the winner take all, go to a runoff if no candidate receives a majority of the vote, the 50% plus one vote threshold. But I wouldn't award all of a states electoral votes to a candidate that doesn't receive a majority, no plurality winners receiving all of a single states electoral votes.

The constitution give each the authority to award their electoral votes as however they choose. An amendment is not needed nor is a federal law. Pennsylvania discussed the congressional district method now used by Maine and Nebraska a few years back. But decided against it as Pennsylvania came to the conclusion that to do so would dilute their electoral power. So I don't think any state with a significant amount of electoral votes would ever change their winner take all method.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

haymarket said:
There is no such thing as states without the people who comprise them. Take away the people from the states where they reside and that state loses its electoral votes.
Click to expand...
People do however comprise states and elect the representives that represent their interests. Can we agree on that

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

trouble13 said:
People do however comprise states and elect the representives that represent their interests. Can we agree on that

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Supposedly the represent some of the peoples interests.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

I continue my lonely call to require people to pass the citizenship exam as part of registering to vote.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

jimbo said:
I tend to agree on the primaries. There is no reason the states should be involved in the costly process of deciding who the party selects as their candidate of choice.

Does government get involved in the debates? I don't think so. If I am correct, then it should be up to the parties to establish the rules.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are correct. I had forgotten about that.

I would still prefer a 2% threshold, though, regardless who runs them. Whatever it would be, I would want to see the same for both parties in primaries, too.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

radcen said:
Yes, you are correct. I had forgotten about that.

I would still prefer a 2% threshold, though, regardless who runs them. Whatever it would be, I would want to see the same for both parties in primaries, too.
Click to expand...

In my view everyone who is on the ballot in a majority of states is a candidate and should have equal time. How do we know who has 2%? WaPo? CBS?
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

cuban smokes said:
I like OUR system of every vote counts for a vote, in every other election ................ that is REAL representation ........... and NOT a fraud ............
Click to expand...
Yes, it's the same system I was talking about. I'm glad we agree.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

trouble13 said:
It was the only way to get all the states to ratify the constitution. States were unwilling to concede that power to a federal gov.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Still does not change the fact the electoral college was set up so that densely populated states do not have all the say in who our president is.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

Get rid of the EC and institute ranked choice popular voting for all elections. Second choice would be just getting rid of the EC without ranked choice, but the EC has got to go. It's outdated and unfair.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

Red_Dave said:
Hence the problem.
Click to expand...

Only to those who reside in the 232.

It's hard to imagine people actually believing all citizens will tolerate a country being led by someone only those living in the population centers of the East and West Coast get to pick.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

jamesrage said:
Still does not change the fact the electoral college was set up so that densely populated states do not have all the say in who our president is.
Click to expand...

Your value as an American citizen should not differ no matter if you like in NY city or Post Falls , Idaho. But people who disagree with that are the same ones who get upset that towns with population of 400 don't have international airports.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

Crosscheck said:
Your value as an American citizen should not differ no matter if you like in NY city or Post Falls , Idaho. But people who disagree with that are the same ones who get upset that towns with population of 400 don't have international airports.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

The voters informed of the issues important to them in Post Falls, Idaho, should have as much influence in selecting the President of the United States, as those voters informed of the issues important to them in Los Angeles, CA.

Hence the EC provides the mechanism to insure such a balance is possible.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

ocean515 said:
Exactly.

The voters informed of the issues important to them in Post Falls, Idaho, should have as much influence in selecting the President of the United States, as those voters informed of the issues important to them in Los Angeles, CA.

Hence the EC provides the mechanism to insure such a balance is possible.
Click to expand...

That is wrong. The voter in Post Falls, Idaho would have more influence that the voter in Los Angeles,CA with the EC.

Just because you live in a city of a million or a city of 45 your vote should count the same. Just because I live in that city of a million or city of 45 I may not necessarily have the same political view as my next door neighbor.

That is where everyone gets it wrong with the use a wide brush to paint everyone. Americans move around the country so much that you cannot assume this voter is like all the rest because he lives in a certain region. I know I sure don't live in the same state I was born in and would be interesting to see here who doesn't live in the same state they were born in.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

Crosscheck said:
That is wrong. The voter in Post Falls, Idaho would have more influence that the voter in Los Angeles,CA with the EC.

Just because you live in a city of a million or a city of 45 your vote should count the same. Just because I live in that city of a million or city of 45 I may not necessarily have the same political view as my next door neighbor.

That is where everyone gets it wrong with the use a wide brush to paint everyone. Americans move around the country so much that you cannot assume this voter is like all the rest because he lives in a certain region. I know I sure don't live in the same state I was born in and would be interesting to see here who doesn't live in the same state they were born in.
Click to expand...

Just curious how all that extra influence has worked out for this person in Idaho. Do people fete him when he travels out of state?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

Crosscheck said:
That is wrong. The voter in Post Falls, Idaho would have more influence that the voter in Los Angeles,CA with the EC.

Just because you live in a city of a million or a city of 45 your vote should count the same. Just because I live in that city of a million or city of 45 I may not necessarily have the same political view as my next door neighbor.

That is where everyone gets it wrong with the use a wide brush to paint everyone. Americans move around the country so much that you cannot assume this voter is like all the rest because he lives in a certain region. I know I sure don't live in the same state I was born in and would be interesting to see here who doesn't live in the same state they were born in.
Click to expand...

The voter whose concerns about life and issues important to him in Idaho Falls would have less influence than the voters in Los Angeles given the sheer difference in numbers.

Do you think voters in Idaho Falls care much about Metro Rail projects? What if the candidate for President ran on a platform that promised big money for mass transit projects and less money for rural projects.

Do you think the concerns of the Idaho Falls voter would carry much weight if the President was selected on a pure popular vote result?
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

ocean515 said:
The voter whose concerns about life and issues important to him in Idaho Falls would have less influence than the voters in Los Angeles given the sheer difference in numbers.

Do you think voters in Idaho Falls care much about Metro Rail projects? What if the candidate for President ran on a platform that promised big money for mass transit projects and less money for rural projects.

Do you think the concerns of the Idaho Falls voter would carry much weight if the President was selected on a pure popular vote result?
Click to expand...

Do you agree then that race minorities should be given 1 1/2 votes too? Otherwise the white majority will push their agenda right over them.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

Crosscheck said:
Do you agree then that race minorities should be given 1 1/2 votes too? Otherwise the white majority will push their agenda right over them.
Click to expand...

:doh

It's generally considered classy to, at minimum, just move on when you can't defend a position, rather than vaporize any hint of it by posting the nonsense you just did.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

ocean515 said:
:doh

It's generally considered classy to, at minimum, just move on when you can't defend a position, rather than vaporize any hint of it by posting the nonsense you just did.
Click to expand...

Don't quite an answer do you. See what happens when you want to even the field for one minority all these others pop up.
 
Re: Should we change our electoral system?

haymarket said:
One person - one vote with no vote carrying any more power than any other vote. The only way to achieve that is strict popular vote. Get rid of the EC.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that virtually impossible task. You would never get enough states to ratify a constitutional amendment that would implement that insane system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom