• 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!

Why we have an electoral college [W:196]

Lutherf

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
49,287
Reaction score
55,020
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
There was a lot of discussion regarding the fact that Hillary won the popular vote and should therefore have won the election. The fact of the matter is that we DO elect our president via popular vote but we do so indirectly. Your vote counts at the state level and then the states vote for president. You might not like it but that's the way it works.....and here's why the system was designed that way -

Politico has the popular vote count at 62.5M for Hillary and 61.2 M for Trump. That's a difference of 1.3M votes and I've heard suggestions that the final total will be Hillary by more than 2 million votes. That's a pretty compelling argument but if you look into it:

PRESIDENT
From the LA County Recorder's office, Hillary got over 2.1 million votes in the county while Trump got less than 700k.

That alone is 1.4 million of Hillary's overage.

Here's the NY Times figures for NY.
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/new-york

The 5 Boroughs that are generally considered to be New York City are Manhattan, Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens and Staten Island. If you look at the votes in those boroughs you'll find that Hillary beat Trump by 1.5 Million votes.

Just TWO CITIES accounted for roughly 150% of Hillary's popular vote win.

THAT, folks, is why we have an electoral college. It prevents the possibility that voters in just two cities can control the election of a president.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

Shamelessly cribbed from our member known as "American":

http://www.debatepolitics.com/gover...oral-college.html?highlight=electoral+college

I don't mean to step on your thread, merely amplify it. Without the electoral college, the country could easily split into several regions like Mexico where neither police or military go. Most of our US military members are from the red states.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

And when you take out all the illegal immigrants that Obama that were told by Obama to vote in this election, Hillary might not have even won the popular vote.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

More than that:

1) Increases political power of states who ordinarily would not have much influence as a bloc or by themselves.

2) Serves as an additional check against the demos, who at times favor demagoguery.

Obviously, this time around, it failed to uphold one of those checks. No system is perfect.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

This was the exact reason that the EC was put in place.
In fact many of the writers of the constitution didn't like pure democracy due to the corruption of the system.

The EC is in fact a balance of power.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

correct.... the offices of congress and the president are all meant to be balanced AGAINST EACH OTHER by having each office elected by a different process
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

THAT, folks, is why we have an electoral college. It prevents the possibility that voters in just two cities can control the election of a president.
That's kind of true but it's equally true that with the EC, one or two states can control the election and, as you demonstrate, one or two cities can control those states. I don't deny the problem but I do deny that the EC is some magical solution to it. It's really just a different way with it's own unique flaws and complications.

The other caveat I'd offer is that in your example, it isn't really those relatively small population of voters who determine the result of a popular vote but, by definition, every voter. You can split and categorise voters in all sorts of different ways but at the end of the day, they each get a single equal vote.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

There was a lot of discussion regarding the fact that Hillary won the popular vote and should therefore have won the election. The fact of the matter is that we DO elect our president via popular vote but we do so indirectly. Your vote counts at the state level and then the states vote for president. You might not like it but that's the way it works.....and here's why the system was designed that way -

Politico has the popular vote count at 62.5M for Hillary and 61.2 M for Trump. That's a difference of 1.3M votes and I've heard suggestions that the final total will be Hillary by more than 2 million votes. That's a pretty compelling argument but if you look into it:

PRESIDENT
From the LA County Recorder's office, Hillary got over 2.1 million votes in the county while Trump got less than 700k.

That alone is 1.4 million of Hillary's overage.

Here's the NY Times figures for NY.
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/new-york

The 5 Boroughs that are generally considered to be New York City are Manhattan, Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens and Staten Island. If you look at the votes in those boroughs you'll find that Hillary beat Trump by 1.5 Million votes.

Just TWO CITIES accounted for roughly 150% of Hillary's popular vote win.

THAT, folks, is why we have an electoral college. It prevents the possibility that voters in just two cities can control the election of a president.

And why let a little thing like historical truth to get in the way of that modern explanation?

Here is Alexander Hamilton from his Federalist 68 explaining why have the Electoral College

It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be confided. This end will be answered by committing the right of making it, not to any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjuncture.
It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.

Hamilton says it was to give the actual choice - not to people regardless of where they lived - but to men most capable ... men who had the information and discernment necessary to pick somebody they liked if the masses picked somebody who failed to meet with the approval of this elite body so empowered.

In simple English - the Constitution created the EC to thwart the will of the people if this elite body did not like the will of the people.

No nonsense about who lives where or the city mouse and the country mouse and all that goes with it.

Se lets all get on the same page of reality here as to why we really have the EC.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

THAT, folks, is why we have an electoral college. It prevents the possibility that voters in just two cities can control the election of a president.

It actually isn't why we have it, though.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

Politico has the popular vote count at 62.5M for Hillary and 61.2 M for Trump. That's a difference of 1.3M votes and I've heard suggestions that the final total will be Hillary by more than 2 million votes. That's a pretty compelling argument but if you look into it:

PRESIDENT
From the LA County Recorder's office, Hillary got over 2.1 million votes in the county while Trump got less than 700k.

That alone is 1.4 million of Hillary's overage.

NO - neither you nor I nor any person on the planet can tell us where the two million extra for Clinton came from and point to a place giving it that credit. It simply does NOT work that way.

In 2010, I was the campaign manager for a candidate for the Michigan House. The district had about 80,000 residents of which about 3,500 were actual active primary voters. Picture a district that is five inches high and three inches across. Now divide that up into about 50 different precincts of varying sizes but none abnormal large nor small. Now each district had potential voters in it. Some had very low numbers - twenty to thirty people. Some had large numbers - over 150 to just over 200 in a few. We had to decide where to campaign.

So we made two decisions:
1- We would first hit every single house with am identified primary voter. That would be somebody who had voted in the primary in the last election or in the previous two before that.
2- We drew a large block capitol C on the map that extended about one inch wide to one and a half inches wide going from the upper right north corner to the left, on down and then across the bottom. That is where
3- most of the voters lived
4- our identified most receptive areas were

And we knocked on just over 10,000 doors in five months time and hit every single house we indentified. In the Block C we hit those several times.... some twice, some three times, and in really important precincts - even four times.

And on primary election day, in a field of nine candidates, we won over the expected second place finisher by 70 votes.

Now I can tell you which precincts voted heavy for us and where we won. And i can tell which we lost and did not do well in. But I cannot tell you exactly where those 70 winning votes came from. Nobody can.

A national campaign is no different than that. Every state gave Clinton votes and every county in every state gave Clinton votes. Any of those from any place could have been some of those 2 million she got more than Trump.

So please, lets all stop this falsehood from being repeated yet again.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

Hamilton says it was to give the actual choice - not to people regardless of where they lived - but to men most capable ... men who had the information and discernment necessary to pick somebody they liked if the masses picked somebody who failed to meet with the approval of this elite body so empowered.

In simple English - the Constitution created the EC to thwart the will of the people if this elite body did not like the will of the people.

No nonsense about who lives where or the city mouse and the country mouse and all that goes with it.

Se lets all get on the same page of reality here as to why we really have the EC.

this is not correct.

Hamilton and Madison on the issue of elections is:

that our government is meant to be a mixed government, mixed in the sense of how members of congress and the president are elected each by a different process which is why the term mixed is used.

the founders in no way wanted the people to direct elected the president or the members of the senate because those two officials would represent the union for the president and the states for the senate.

But the house which would be elected by the people via a direct election would represent the people's interest.

the founders created our mixed government to prevent democracy which they saw as an evil form of government, unstable and would eventually fail.

in the government of the founders there are no elites, because the senate is appointed by the state legislatures, BUT the state legislatures are elected by the people, therefore there are no elites when the people are involved in the election process.

in the case of the president the founders also sought to keep elites out, this was done by the states choosing the electors, meaning the states choose how the process was done.

in early America electors were chosen in some states by the state legislatures, some were are a direct vote of the people state wide, and some by districts.

In 1824 the electors were chosen by popular vote, by districts, and by general ticket, in all the States excepting Delaware, Georgia, Louisiana, New York, South Carolina, and Vermont, where they were still chosen by the legislature. After 1832 electors were chosen by general ticket in all the States excepting South Carolina, where the legislature chose them up to and including 1860

so the founders did not create a system of elites, they wanted to avoid democracy [will of the people] , but also have the people have a voice in the election process by giving them an indirect vote for the president, and an indirect vote for the senators.

by creating our system of government by this process, democracy could not take hold in the American system of government and destroy it.
John Adams wrote in 1806: "I once thought our Constitution was quasi or mixed government, but they (Republicans) have now made it, to all intents and purposes, in virtue, in spirit, and in effect, a democracy. We are left without resources but in our prayers and tears, and have nothing that we can do or say, but the Lord have mercy on us."

James Madison from the federalist paper #40 --THE second point to be examined is, whether the [ constitutional ]convention were authorized to frame and propose this mixed Constitution.

Patrick Henry, Virginia Ratifying Convention--4--12 June 1788 --But, Sir, we have the consolation that it is a mixed Government: That is, it may work sorely on your neck; but you will have some comfort by saying, that it was a Federal Government in its origin.

the problem we face today with the electoral college is that political parties elect the electors and parties are what divides our nation and does not unify it.
 
Last edited:
Re: Why we have an electoral college

the founders in no way wanted the people to direct elected the president or the members of the senate because those two officials would represent the union for the president and the states for the senate.

Madison favored a popular vote for the presidency. He gave in to keep the slave states happy, as the Electoral College disproportionately benefited them thanks to the 3/5 compromise. He captured that in his notes on the Constitutional Convention.

Mr. MADISON. If it be a fundamental principle of free Govt. that the Legislative, Executive & Judiciary powers should be separately exercised, it is equally so that they be independently exercised. There is the same & perhaps greater reason why the Executive shd. be independent of the Legislature, than why the Judiciary should: A coalition of the two former powers would be more immediately & certainly dangerous to public liberty. It is essential then that the appointment of the Executive should either be drawn from some source, or held by some tenure, that will give him a free agency with regard to the Legislature. This could not be if he was to be appointable from time to time by the Legislature. It was not clear that an appointment in the 1st. instance even with an eligibility afterwards would not establish an improper connection between the two departments. Certain it was that the appointment would be attended with intrigues and contentions that ought not to be unnecessarily admitted.

He was disposed for these reasons to refer the appointment to some other source. The people at large was in his opinion the fittest in itself. It would be as likely as any that could be devised to produce an Executive Magistrate of distinguished Character. The people generally could only know & vote for some Citizen whose merits had rendered him an object of general attention & esteem. There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

Madison favored a popular vote for the presidency. He gave in to keep the slave states happy, as the Electoral College disproportionately benefited them thanks to the 3/5 compromise. He captured that in his notes on the Constitutional Convention.

no, thats wrong.

Madison flavored mixed government which is the electors chose by an indirect vote of the people, later in life Madison favors the electors being elected by the people via districts, as the best choice as compared to legislature or state wide voting.

the 3/5ths clause deals with taxes and apportion of the house, the slaves states wanted slaves counted as 1 person, it was a compromise of the north for them to be 3/5ths, not the south.

while Madison was at the convention, serving on the committee of style, a provision in the constitution stated that slavery was a legal institution, Madison along with the other members of that committee struck that statement from the constitution and proclaimed, "there is nothing legal about slavery"
 
Last edited:
Re: Why we have an electoral college

this is not correct.

I gave you Hamilton himself - his own words - explaining to the nation why we need and EC and its purpose.

You gave me your usual spin on it using your words and how you see it.

I will trust the primary source on this one - as should everyone who cares about such thing.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

I gave you Hamilton himself - his own words - explaining to the nation why we need and EC and its purpose.

You gave me your usual spin on it using your words and how you see it.

I will trust the primary source on this one - as should everyone who cares about such thing.

its true the EC does have purpose, and that is to prevent a democratic vote of the people for president because the founders were creating a republic, and not a democracy.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

no, thats wrong.

These are literally his own words on his position at the Convention. "The people at large was...the fittest [source of appointment for the President] in itself." But slaves couldn't vote, whereas under a system of indirect electors their numbers count toward the number of electors awarded to a state. So he relented to appease the slave-heavy states.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

These are literally his own words on his position at the Convention. "The people at large was...the fittest [source of appointment for the President] in itself." But slaves couldn't vote, whereas under a system of indirect electors their numbers count toward the number of electors awarded to a state. So he relented to appease the slave-heavy states.

the founders talked over the election of the president, and having the people direct the president would be the best choice in a practical sense, however Madison knew it would not work, this is why he advocates for mixed government concerning the president and the senate, because people are easily lead seduced and beguiled into doing things which are not in their interest, which is why democracy fails.

the top part is Madison , where it see Mr. Madison...... the bottom part is someone's commentary on Madison.

voting in early America is not a right, its privilege of government, to vote you have to own land and pay taxes, slaves, women did not vote, white people who did not meet the Qualifications requisites by the state could not vote either.

3/5th clause was a compromise of the north and south, with the south at first wanting slaves to count as 1 because they knew they would get more representation in the house, but the north stated if slaves are 1 person, then they cannot be slaves they have to be free men, which the south rejected.

also if they had been counted as 1, while the south would receive more representation, they would have had to paid more in taxes to the federal government.

our mixed government which is 1 of our separation of powers is modeled off of the roman empire to prevent tyranny of the majority
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

Why does everyone continue to believe this nonsensical myth? In 1787, the US population was significantly more rural than urban. Trust me, they didn't design the electoral college to prevent California from deciding the election.

The Electoral College exists because the founders were afraid of true democracy. They felt that most people were ignorant and uninformed, and thus decided that the office of president should be chosen by the "men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations."

The Avalon Project : Federalist No 68

People need to read the federalist papers before talking about why the Constitution is the way it is.

The way the Electoral College votes are allocated today ('winner-take-all' as opposed to the people of the states actually voting for competent people who will do the voting based on conscience, reason, and information) is antithetical to the actual reasoning for the Electoral college described by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 68.

The Electoral College is a failure of the highest order. It was designed to prevent someone with "Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity" from taking the office of President. In this instance, it actually CAUSED someone of that nature to be granted that office.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

Why does everyone continue to believe this nonsensical myth? In 1787, the US population was significantly more rural than urban. Trust me, they didn't design the electoral college to prevent California from deciding the election.

The Electoral College exists because the founders were afraid of true democracy. They felt that most people were ignorant and uninformed, and thus decided that the office of president should be chosen by the "men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations."

The Avalon Project : Federalist No 68

People need to read the federalist papers before talking about why the Constitution is the way it is.

The way the Electoral College votes are allocated today ('winner-take-all' as opposed to the people of the states actually voting for competent people who will do the voting based on conscience, reason, and information) is antithetical to the actual reasoning for the Electoral college described by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 68.

The Electoral College is a failure of the highest order. It was designed to prevent someone with "Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity" from taking the office of President. In this instance, it actually CAUSED someone of that nature to be granted that office.

the electoral college is not a failure per the founders, the problem today is the electors are elected by the parties, in early america the people elected the electors.

dont blame the system, put the blame where it belongs, on the parities.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

NO - neither you nor I nor any person on the planet can tell us where the two million extra for Clinton came from and point to a place giving it that credit. It simply does NOT work that way.

In 2010, I was the campaign manager for a candidate for the Michigan House. The district had about 80,000 residents of which about 3,500 were actual active primary voters. Picture a district that is five inches high and three inches across. Now divide that up into about 50 different precincts of varying sizes but none abnormal large nor small. Now each district had potential voters in it. Some had very low numbers - twenty to thirty people. Some had large numbers - over 150 to just over 200 in a few. We had to decide where to campaign.

So we made two decisions:
1- We would first hit every single house with am identified primary voter. That would be somebody who had voted in the primary in the last election or in the previous two before that.
2- We drew a large block capitol C on the map that extended about one inch wide to one and a half inches wide going from the upper right north corner to the left, on down and then across the bottom. That is where
3- most of the voters lived
4- our identified most receptive areas were

And we knocked on just over 10,000 doors in five months time and hit every single house we indentified. In the Block C we hit those several times.... some twice, some three times, and in really important precincts - even four times.

And on primary election day, in a field of nine candidates, we won over the expected second place finisher by 70 votes.

Now I can tell you which precincts voted heavy for us and where we won. And i can tell which we lost and did not do well in. But I cannot tell you exactly where those 70 winning votes came from. Nobody can.

A national campaign is no different than that. Every state gave Clinton votes and every county in every state gave Clinton votes. Any of those from any place could have been some of those 2 million she got more than Trump.

So please, lets all stop this falsehood from being repeated yet again.

Don't be silly. If a given precinct, legislative district, county, state or whatever swings heavily toward one candidate while all others are relatively close then that's where the overage came from. In this case there were two metropolitan areas that accounted for nearly 3 million more Clinton votes than Trump votes. Those cities alone account for Clinton beating Trump in the popular vote.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

its true the EC does have purpose, and that is to prevent a democratic vote of the people for president because the founders were creating a republic, and not a democracy.

Actually Hamilton says it is to allow those few elite who know and can be trusted to make that decision over the people.

It has nothing to do with a democracy because a popular vote electing the President would not be democracy anyways so your comment is both factually wrong as well as irrelevant.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

Don't be silly. If a given precinct, legislative district, county, state or whatever swings heavily toward one candidate while all others are relatively close then that's where the overage came from. In this case there were two metropolitan areas that accounted for nearly 3 million more Clinton votes than Trump votes. Those cities alone account for Clinton beating Trump in the popular vote.

How do you know where each of those votes fits in to the Clinton 64 million?
YOU DON'T.

So tell me, in my election case that I gave details about, which precinct supplied the 72 winning votes?
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

How do you know where each of those votes fits in to the Clinton 64 million?
YOU DON'T.

So tell me, in my election case that I gave details about, which precinct supplied the 72 winning votes?

We're only talking about the absolute number of votes to the extent that there is a large distribution to one side or the other in a given district. If you've dealt with campaigns at the local level you know exactly how this works. You review the precincts where your party was even or overperformed and you target those precincts to make up for the precincts you know you're going to lose. Clinton overperformed by HUGE margins in NYC and LA but seriously underperformed damned near everywhere else. That's why she lost.
 
Re: Why we have an electoral college

We're only talking about the absolute number of votes to the extent that there is a large distribution to one side or the other in a given district. If you've dealt with campaigns at the local level you know exactly how this works. You review the precincts where your party was even or overperformed and you target those precincts to make up for the precincts you know you're going to lose. Clinton overperformed by HUGE margins in NYC and LA but seriously underperformed damned near everywhere else. That's why she lost.

Oh - I agree you can tell where one does well and where one does not. No problem. But when you win by 72 votes out of over 50 precincts and thousands of votes - you have no idea where exactly those votes came from. They came from everywhere the same as Clintons 64 million. If somebody wants to say its because she did so well in California and that is the two million vote margin - I can say NO its not - its her vote from a collection o states where she lost and nobody can prove either one of us is right or wrong.

You see - at its core is people on the Trump side wanting to claim that we have to defend the EC because otherwise California or New York would pick the President. And that is nonsense also.

Do you realize that right now today under the mechanism of the EC, it takes only 12 states to pick the President and all one need do is get one single vote from a voter in each of those 12 states? And if that winning candidate is not even on the ballot and loses the whole horse race by 50 million total - they still become President?

That is the screwy system we have today. 38 states are irrelevant.
 
Back
Top Bottom