• 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!

The alternative to abolishing the Electoral College

Is expanding the House the best way to fix the Electoral College?

  • Nah, abolish the Electoral College

    Votes: 17 23.0%

  • Let's be realistic: embrace the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

    Votes: 18 24.3%

  • Do it, expand the size of the House

    Votes: 7 9.5%

  • The status quo is fine, don't change anything

    Votes: 32 43.2%
  • Total voters
    74
concernedpuma said:
Just a thought, but would it be better to peg the electoral college to Senate representation?

Regards,
CP
Click to expand...

Making every state equal in representation would really hurt people who live in big states.
 
It is easier to cheat via popular vote than cheat by electoral college. Cheating appeals to the Democrats. Republicans prefer a fair game.

Cheating is very easy with the popular vote. For example, each state has a roll of registered voters. On the average, only about 60% of these eligible voters will vote in the presidential election. All you need to do to cheat is vote for the 40%, who are eligible, but who did not vote. This is what California did in 2016. This is easy yo do, using computers. You compare the eligible voter rolls; 100%, with actual voters; 60%, and then add votes from the 40%, who did not vote, blended into the late vote count. It will look legitimate on paper.

With the electoral college, popular vote cheating, using this and other techniques, has no affect, after any candidate gets a majority. Whether your candidate gets 51% or 99%, voter cheating gets the same electoral votes. This is what happened in 2016 to California. They voted at over 70%, which is unheard of. This did not get them any extra electoral votes. California would not allow their voter rolls to be inspected for cheating.
 
Masterhawk said:
Making every state equal in representation would really hurt people who live in big states.
Click to expand...

The only pain felt would be a tip of the hat to smaller in population, but just as significant and less populated states. Because there are millions accumulated around job opportunities does not imbue those folks with wisdom unavailable to those in Wyoming nor Montana, does it? In fact, it is quite the opposite. Folks in those sparsely populated states are more likely to vote nature and results. In fact, it would seem they are less influenced over cable news than most. Is that wrong? If so, how so?
Regards,
CP
 
wellwisher said:
It is easier to cheat via popular vote than cheat by electoral college. Cheating appeals to the Democrats. Republicans prefer a fair game.

Cheating is very easy with the popular vote. For example, each state has a roll of registered voters. On the average, only about 60% of these eligible voters will vote in the presidential election. All you need to do to cheat is vote for the 40%, who are eligible, but who did not vote. This is what California did in 2016. This is easy yo do, using computers. You compare the eligible voter rolls; 100%, with actual voters; 60%, and then add votes from the 40%, who did not vote, blended into the late vote count. It will look legitimate on paper.

With the electoral college, popular vote cheating, using this and other techniques, has no affect, after any candidate gets a majority. Whether your candidate gets 51% or 99%, voter cheating gets the same electoral votes. This is what happened in 2016 to California. They voted at over 70%, which is unheard of. This did not get them any extra electoral votes. California would not allow their voter rolls to be inspected for cheating.
Click to expand...

Wow. Just going to call me a cheater. Ok but I only do it in games of Monopoly.
Also how do you feel about DC statehood?
 
concernedpuma said:
Maybe some candidates, but not the one that was elected in the last election. He couldn't afford to give up one back then. Though it may be so this cycle.

Just a thought, but would it be better to peg the electoral college to Senate representation?

Regards,
CP
Click to expand...

Listen we have enough shortage of democracy already. We don't need even more.
 
Just chilling said:
Listen we have enough shortage of democracy already. We don't need even more.
Click to expand...

Shortage of Democracy? How do you mean that? Because my own or yours lost; that isn't democracy? Be a graceful loser, if it fits, I was for 8 years. It isn't too hard to love your country particularly when considering that both you and I vote for progress as we se it. I have the guts and faith in my fellow citizens to vote for the best for our country and accept the results. That isn't a failure of Democracy, but rather the best of it. Outcome will be Historical and how we are judged is a long ways off.
Regards,
CP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom