• 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!

Winner Take All Electoral College

Into the Night said:
Sorry dude, that requires a constitutional amendment. It doesn't matter what you support unless you can martial enough States to give what little representation they still have away.
Click to expand...

i doubt that i will happen, but i support amending to eliminate the EC.
 
Into the Night said:
But it wouldn't be federated. Sorry dude, there is a point to a federated government. It means LOCAL influence of LOCAL leaders. You would effectively take that away.
Click to expand...

the president is the president of all voters. if the majority supports someone else, that person should win.
 
marke said:
Democrats have larger numbers of supporters in just a few big city democrat enclaves than republicans have throughout the rest of the nation. Therefore the democrats want the elections process reworked to allow the big city hubs of democrat corruption to be unfairly advantaged to seize control of every national election at the expense of sparsely populated states. That is also why democrats want DC given statehood, to give it unfair advantage in national elections and in Congressional numbers.
Click to expand...

if Republicans can't convince a majority of the voters that their message is better, perhaps they should consider embracing a new message.
 
Into the Night said:
So why don't you just cast Wyoming out of Congress and be done with it?
Click to expand...

because that has nothing to do with what we're talking about and i don't support it.
 
gfm7175 said:
No need... They just need to read the US Constitution and that answers all the questions which they may have about the issue...
Click to expand...

Ah yes - you have the knowledge and everybody else is wrong. Got it loud and clear.
 
ludin said:
yes it does nullify CO's votes.
it doesn't matter who the people of CO actually vote for.
CA and NY will dictate who their EC's go to.

It is pretty stupid to give up your state sovereignty but that is liberal philosophy for you.
if i was someone living in CO i would file a law suit against it.
Click to expand...

Like I said, there's a fairer way and that's to divide the EC votes. Any states floating that?
 
haymarket said:
Ah yes - you have the knowledge and everybody else is wrong. Got it loud and clear.
Click to expand...

Anybody who has the ability to read and comprehend the US Constitution can gain that knowledge...
 
gfm7175 said:
Anybody who has the ability to read and comprehend the US Constitution can gain that knowledge...
Click to expand...

And what about us readers who can read the official ballot in the states we vote in which tells us we are voting for a candidate for President?

Are our eyes lying to us?

Why can't you see that this vote for president is a two step process - the first involving the choice of each citizen and the second being the official state electors. Both cast their vote and both work together.
 
Helix said:
if Republicans can't convince a majority of the voters that their message is better, perhaps they should consider embracing a new message.
Click to expand...

Try to convince blacks that democrats have been responsible for oppressing blacks for decades? Try to convince mobs of democrats that they need to respect the EC for its protections of states with sparse populations? I might as well try to convince the pope he is a devil.
 
haymarket said:
And what about us readers who can read the official ballot in the states we vote in which tells us we are voting for a candidate for President?
Click to expand...
You are looking at the wrong source.

haymarket said:
Are our eyes lying to us?
Click to expand...
No, but you are looking at the wrong source.

haymarket said:
Why can't you see that this vote for president is a two step process -
Click to expand...
It's actually more than a two step process (you are forgetting the primaries). You seem to be mixed up about what the process actually is.

haymarket said:
the first involving the choice of each citizen
Click to expand...
The citizen is NOT choosing what President they want... They are choosing what electors they want.

haymarket said:
and the second being the official state electors.
Click to expand...
Yes, those electors then vote for President.

haymarket said:
Both cast their vote and both work together.
Click to expand...
They both vote for different things... The citizenry votes for particular electors and the electors then vote for President.

The citizenry is not in any way choosing who becomes President of the USA... The Electoral College (and solely they) are choosing who becomes President.

Again, anyone who has the ability/desire to read and comprehend Article II and Amendment 12 of the US Constitution would know this...
 
gfm7175 said:
You are looking at the wrong source.


No, but you are looking at the wrong source.


It's actually more than a two step process (you are forgetting the primaries). You seem to be mixed up about what the process actually is.


The citizen is NOT choosing what President they want... They are choosing what electors they want.


Yes, those electors then vote for President.


They both vote for different things... The citizenry votes for particular electors and the electors then vote for President.

The citizenry is not in any way choosing who becomes President of the USA... The Electoral College (and solely they) are choosing who becomes President.

Again, anyone who has the ability/desire to read and comprehend Article II and Amendment 12 of the US Constitution would know this...
Click to expand...

How the electors are chosen is up to the states. And the states have seen fit to allow the citizens of the state select the electors by the citizenry voting for which candidate they want for president. That process satisfies the Constitution and allows the citizenry to vote for president .

If you still think I am wrong - just tell me this: which state selects it elector without a determining vote of the citizenry where they vote for who they want for president?
 
Last edited:
uptower said:
Like I said, there's a fairer way and that's to divide the EC votes. Any states floating that?
Click to expand...

Some states do winner by %.
not many only like 2 or 3.

most are winner take all still.
as for the popular vote thing i don't think that take effect till there are enough votes for it matter.
they are still a few short.

if they still do that i feel sorry for the people of CO as their vote for president won't count for much of anything.
 
Helix said:
the president is the president of all voters. if the majority supports someone else, that person should win.
Click to expand...

that is what we do. the majority of people living in the majority of states get to pick the president.
not just the people that live in 2 states as you want.

sorry but NY and CA does not represent the rest of the US like you seem to think.
 
haymarket said:
How the electors are chosen is up to the states.
Click to expand...
Correct. The State legislatures each decide how their electors are chosen.

haymarket said:
And the states have seen fit to allow the citizens of the state select the electors by the citizenry voting for which candidate they want for president.
Click to expand...
Not what's happening... My words are going right over your head, and I'm sick of repeating myself...

haymarket said:
That process satisfies the Constitution and allows the citizenry to vote for president .
Click to expand...
See my prior response to you.

haymarket said:
If you still think I am wrong - just tell me this: which state selects it elector without a determining vote of the citizenry where they vote for who they want for president?
Click to expand...
See my prior response to you.


This whole discussion has now become a complete circle and I'm done repeating myself...
 
ludin said:
that is what we do. the majority of people living in the majority of states get to pick the president.
not just the people that live in 2 states as you want.

sorry but NY and CA does not represent the rest of the US like you seem to think.
Click to expand...

that isn't what we do. first, we let the same minority of states pick the candidates, and then the later states can suck wind. then we have electors to act as a stopgap. the stopgap doesn't work. it's time to eliminate both of these systems, IMO.
 
gfm7175 said:
Okay, and I support not amending, as I described.
Click to expand...

great. we have a fundamental disagreement. this is the part where we both move on. i'll go first.
 
gfm7175 said:
Correct. The State legislatures each decide how their electors are chosen.


Not what's happening... My words are going right over your head, and I'm sick of repeating myself...


See my prior response to you.


See my prior response to you.


This whole discussion has now become a complete circle and I'm done repeating myself...
Click to expand...

You did not answer my question: which state selects its electors without a determining vote of the citizenry where they vote for who they want for president?

And honest answer would tell you I am right.
 
haymarket said:
You did not answer my question: which state selects its electors without a determining vote of the citizenry where they vote for who they want for president?

And honest answer would tell you I am right.
Click to expand...

No citizen votes for who they want for President. They vote for particular electors. Those electors typically pledge (and follow through with it) to vote for a particular candidate, but they aren't forced to vote for that candidate.

You remain ignorant of how the process works...
 
Helix said:
that isn't what we do. first, we let the same minority of states pick the candidates, and then the later states can suck wind. then we have electors to act as a stopgap. the stopgap doesn't work. it's time to eliminate both of these systems, IMO.
Click to expand...

Not at all. the minority states don't pick the candidates either.
Sorry i like my vote counting and not being over written by the nutjobs that live in CA and NY.

All the states get a say in who the candidate is. if you have a problem with how the DNC picks their candidate then
you need to complain to the DNC.
 
uptower said:
The more i think of it the more i believe the only smart thing would be to apportion EC votes according to who won each state. So if a state has 10 and a candidate gets 60%, that equals 6 seats, the other 4 going to whoever got them in whatever ratio.

Colorado just introduced a bill to give all its EC votes to the national winner of the popular vote, but doesn't that nullify Colorado's votes altogether?
Click to expand...

Yes it does. However, the President is elected by the electoral college. Each State legislature decides on how the members of the electoral college from there State are appointed. They don't have to put it to a vote by anyone, or they can use another States voting result if they want to. There are no guidelines specified on the criteria a legislature must use to determine it's electors.
 
gfm7175 said:
I personally live in a state which only lists the Presidential candidates on the ballot... I see no names of electors... Yet, I realize that I am ultimately voting for those mystery electors and NOT directly voting for any particular candidate...
Click to expand...

Yeah. That's the way we do it here, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom