• 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!

Liberals and the call for abolishing the Electoral College

PeteEU said:
The EC made some what sense in the 1700s when it took weeks to get polling results around the country. It does not make sense now.

Saying that, you can easily redo the EC so that it will always reflect the popular vote. Right now you have a system that best can be categorized as a minority dictatorship. Yes Trump won 30 states, but most of those states have no people in them, which is why he lost the popular vote.

But the best way would be to go to a popular vote count like every other democracy and yes "Republic" on the planet.

Will it happen? no, because the GOP benefits hugely from the current system. They get to rig the election for the House of Representatives in their favor and with the control of more and more states, they also have the ability to change how those states give out their EC votes. I suspect that the GOP will push more and more for dividing them up according to massively gerrymandered congressional districts instead of winner takes all. It would ensure a GOP victory for a long time.
Click to expand...

Isn't North Korea a republic?
 
Crovax said:
I didnt say it could be abolished, I said it could be defacto abolished. Was I not clear enough?
Click to expand...

Clearly incorrect, you were.

Would you care to mention the mechanism whereby that part of the USC can be abolished? Or shall we just take your word for it?
 
Thoreau72 said:
Clearly incorrect, you were.

Would you care to mention the mechanism whereby that part of the USC can be abolished? Or shall we just take your word for it?
Click to expand...

he is correct.

state powers come into play. each state gets to decide how to award it's electoral college vote. If the state says, we will award our votes to the winner of the national election, that is their right to do so.

it is pretty silly to expect this as a path to victory. It is as reasonable as expecting smaller states to allow another state to vote for their two senators
 
Thoreau72 said:
Clearly incorrect, you were.

Would you care to mention the mechanism whereby that part of the USC can be abolished? Or shall we just take your word for it?
Click to expand...

One again not abolished, defacto abolished. Its already been mentioned if you have been reading the thread

Anagram said:
By the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
Click to expand...
Anagram said:
It de facto eliminates it. 270 EV states agree to award their votes to the popular vote winner. The Constitution gives the states the right to decide how to appoint their electors.
Click to expand...
 
PeteEU said:
The EC made some what sense in the 1700s when it took weeks to get polling results around the country. It does not make sense now.

Saying that, you can easily redo the EC so that it will always reflect the popular vote. Right now you have a system that best can be categorized as a minority dictatorship. Yes Trump won 30 states, but most of those states have no people in them, which is why he lost the popular vote.

But the best way would be to go to a popular vote count like every other democracy and yes "Republic" on the planet.

Will it happen? no, because the GOP benefits hugely from the current system. They get to rig the election for the House of Representatives in their favor and with the control of more and more states, they also have the ability to change how those states give out their EC votes. I suspect that the GOP will push more and more for dividing them up according to massively gerrymandered congressional districts instead of winner takes all. It would ensure a GOP victory for a long time.
Click to expand...

Man......you are unbelievable sometimes.

Since 1900......it's been almost a dead heat between the numbers of presidents on both sides.

Do some research once in awhile.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
And only one party is allowed on the ballot. Which is evidently the GOP's goal.
Click to expand...

And the Democrats do not want that? They have made it known that was their goal. Fail.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
And only one party is allowed on the ballot. Which is evidently the GOP's goal.
Click to expand...

do you really believe your hyper partisan nonsense?

the DNC is by far more guilty fighting ballot access. They succeeded in keeping Stein off 5 state ballots. in 2008, they successfully got Ralph Nader to pay their legal fees as they kept him off ballots - that has never happened to any other politicians in the history of presidential elections.
 
PeteEU said:
The EC made some what sense in the 1700s when it took weeks to get polling results around the country. It does not make sense now.

Saying that, you can easily redo the EC so that it will always reflect the popular vote. Right now you have a system that best can be categorized as a minority dictatorship. Yes Trump won 30 states, but most of those states have no people in them, which is why he lost the popular vote.

But the best way would be to go to a popular vote count like every other democracy and yes "Republic" on the planet.

Will it happen? no, because the GOP benefits hugely from the current system. They get to rig the election for the House of Representatives in their favor and with the control of more and more states, they also have the ability to change how those states give out their EC votes. I suspect that the GOP will push more and more for dividing them up according to massively gerrymandered congressional districts instead of winner takes all. It would ensure a GOP victory for a long time.
Click to expand...

Really? There's not even a PRETENSE of a popular vote for the UK or Canada's Prime Minister. Much less their monarch.
 
The Electoral College is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 1, as well as the 12th and 23rd Amendments.

Want to change the Electoral College? It will take a Constitutional Amendment.
 
ARealConservative said:
do you really believe your hyper partisan nonsense?

the DNC is by far more guilty fighting ballot access. They succeeded in keeping Stein off 5 state ballots. in 2008, they successfully got Ralph Nader to pay their legal fees as they kept him off ballots - that has never happened to any other politicians in the history of presidential elections.
Click to expand...

You deny voter suppression, voter intimidation, and gerrymandering and then have the gall to claim that the other side is guilty of hyperpartisan nonsense? Dismissed.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
You deny voter suppression, voter intimidation, and gerrymandering and then have the gall to claim that the other side is guilty of hyperpartisan nonsense? Dismissed.
Click to expand...

we are talking about ballot access. that was what you introduced to this.

the DNC is so much worse then the GOP when it comes to ballot access fights.

And only one party is allowed on the ballot. Which is evidently the GOP's goal.
Click to expand...

the goal post is staying with that. no moving it on me!
 
Fishking said:
So...I've been seeing this push by the left to get rid of the electoral college. There is one huge reality that seems to be completely missed, or just not understood. Yes, Hillary won the popular vote but that's because of an extremely populous and bias state in California, giving Hillary 2.7 million more votes than Trump.

So the left sees this popular vote and thinks that means something. It doesn't. It really, really doesn't. To get rid of the EC it would take a constitutional amendment. Guess what that will take? 2/3 of the states ratifying it. Trump won 30 states with is 60% of the states. The cold hard reality is that there is only one party that is anywhere close to amending the Constitution and it's Republicans.

Further, as was pointed out in another thread, Republicans crushed Democrats in state level legislators and executives.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...emocrats-have-been-decimated-state-level.html

If even in Democrat favorable years, they are no where close to making any amendments to the Constitution. So settle in, people, nothing is changing in your favor anytime soon but it may change against you, if anything.
Click to expand...

What needs to change is how they total it. A candidate should not win the entire state. The votes should be divided based on district. As it stands my Republican vote was worthless since I lived in California. My vote literally did not count.
 
Bodhisattva said:
What needs to change is how they total it. A candidate should not win the entire state. The votes should be divided based on district. As it stands my Republican vote was worthless since I lived in California. My vote literally did not count.
Click to expand...

I've long been in favor of preferential voting for candidates in multiple parties. At that point the EC would be almost completely irrelevant.
 
Valid reasons have been put forth for both positions, abolish or keep the EC, but no valid arguments have been made how to compensate for the shortcoming resulting from either position. How about , if abolishing the EC there be a requirement that the winner of the popular vote be so by a minimum margin and if that margin is not reached a run off vote be had among the top two candidates. What would have happened if such a vote would have taken place without the other candidates and the votes they received would have gone to either Trump or Clinton?
 
Praxas said:
Yep, the Republicans have been given their rope and let's see if they hang themselves with it. If the economy fails to keep improving, the middle class fails to be protected (as Trump claims) and the jobs situation either doesn't change or gets worse then 2018 and 2020 may be really good years for the Dems. Republicans have no more room for bitching.
Click to expand...

Oh really? Did Democrats stop blaming Bush just because they won in 2008?
 
LowDown said:
Oh really? Did Democrats stop blaming Bush just because they won in 2008?
Click to expand...

Obama left the economy better than he got it. If trump does the same than kudos to him but if he doesn't it's on you righties.
 
Crovax said:
Not really, it can be defacto abolished without a constitutional amendment
Click to expand...
Except that you would be changing our form of government, do not think that is going to be happening. Reforming it, maybe, going to one man one vote, very doubtful.
 
LowDown said:
Oh really? Did Democrats stop blaming Bush just because they won in 2008?
Click to expand...

Do move forward, you did not like the Dems looking in the rearview mirror so now is the time to take your own advice. Fulfill the promises made, Fix It.
 
Bodhisattva said:
What needs to change is how they total it. A candidate should not win the entire state. The votes should be divided based on district. As it stands my Republican vote was worthless since I lived in California. My vote literally did not count.
Click to expand...
That's what are level decision, so you can work to get it changed.
 
Fishking said:
So...I've been seeing this push by the left to get rid of the electoral college. There is one huge reality that seems to be completely missed, or just not understood. Yes, Hillary won the popular vote but that's because of an extremely populous and bias state in California, giving Hillary 2.7 million more votes than Trump.

So the left sees this popular vote and thinks that means something. It doesn't. It really, really doesn't. To get rid of the EC it would take a constitutional amendment. Guess what that will take? 2/3 of the states ratifying it. Trump won 30 states with is 60% of the states. The cold hard reality is that there is only one party that is anywhere close to amending the Constitution and it's Republicans.

Further, as was pointed out in another thread, Republicans crushed Democrats in state level legislators and executives.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...emocrats-have-been-decimated-state-level.html

If even in Democrat favorable years, they are no where close to making any amendments to the Constitution. So settle in, people, nothing is changing in your favor anytime soon but it may change against you, if anything.
Click to expand...

Without the electoral college we become a direct democracy and cease to be a republic. That will be the end of the union. States will no longer have autonomy and DC will run everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom