• 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 Electoral College: Purpose, Problems, Alternatives

Tbird19482 said:
This also goes for the " winner take all " states
ex say there are 39 representatives elected to the EC and in NY they vote 29 to the Dems and 10 to the Republicans in that state that is how they have to vote but in the " winner take all " states they Dems would have got all 39 votes
so the people in the 10 Districts that voted for the Republican effectually are not getting their say.
It has to be changed so that if a district in a state votes Dem they have to vote Dem and the same for districts that vote Republican Not have " winner take all " states
again the same thing can and does happen in other states say AL. they could be electing 19 representatives to the EC and say 15 go to the Republicans and 4 to the Dems being a winner take all state all 19 have to vote for the Republican and the people who voted for the other 4 are having their say taken away from them
the EC would work better and be more fair if there were not any " winner take all " states
have a nice day
Click to expand...

Republicans tried to introduce that, and Democrats absolutely pitched a fit.
 
sjmay said:
Republicans tried to introduce that, and Democrats absolutely pitched a fit.
Click to expand...
Can you show us when this happened?
as it is now most of the states are winner take all and I believe this practice takes away some voters preferance.
as I said with the system as it is now people in say NY that voted for a Republican could be having their say taken away from them because more people in the state voted for the Dem.
If your district in your state voted for the republican no matter what the rest of the state does the Representative you elect to the EC should be recognized and be bound to vote for the Republican and not have to vote for the Dem your district didn't want
again from what I have read I find nothing saying the Republicans have already proposed this.
Have a nice day
 
Tbird19482 said:
Can you show us when this happened?
as it is now most of the states are winner take all and I believe this practice takes away some voters preferance.
as I said with the system as it is now people in say NY that voted for a Republican could be having their say taken away from them because more people in the state voted for the Dem.
If your district in your state voted for the republican no matter what the rest of the state does the Representative you elect to the EC should be recognized and be bound to vote for the Republican and not have to vote for the Dem your district didn't want
again from what I have read I find nothing saying the Republicans have already proposed this.
Have a nice day
Click to expand...

Republicans want to change laws on Electoral College votes, after presidential losses | Fox News
 
sjmay said:
Republicans want to change laws on Electoral College votes, after presidential losses | Fox News
Click to expand...

I saw a video compilation of Trump speaking to the electoral college.

It was honestly hysterical and so representative of who he is as a person.

Like with everything else, he is totally unprincipled and he has held every position possible on the issue.

He was for it, against it. He felt it was good for the country bad for the country. He thought it benefited republicans he thought it hurt republicans. He thought it hurt Democrats and though it benefited Democrats. He thought it made it harder to win an election for a republican he thought it made it harder for a Democrat to win an election.

At some point he has said absolutely everything on the issue.

He is a complete and total nothing. An empty man. A waste of a life force. Satan on earth. Pure evil.
 
noonereal said:
He was for it, against it. He felt it was good for the country bad for the country. He thought it benefited republicans he thought it hurt republicans. He thought it hurt Democrats and though it benefited Democrats. He thought it made it harder to win an election for a republican he thought it made it harder for a Democrat to win an election.

At some point he has said absolutely everything on the issue.
Click to expand...

You just described every politician out there, on almost every issue out there, Democrats for the wall, now against it, Republicans, against government spending, now for it,

some of that can be attributed to evolving on a subject, but most of it is pandering to what will get them reelected.
 
AlbqOwl said:
As I said, the discussion between you and me is over until you address what I have already posted instead of asking question as if I had not already answered them or inferring that I am arguing something that I am not.
Click to expand...

What is it you want me to speak about?
 
sjmay said:
NONSENSE, utter garbage,

You know why they are perceived as illegitimate? Because the left won't quit whining about it, won't shut up about it,

BUT EVEN if you think he's illegitimate,

One year on, Donald Trump is still an illegitimate president | Rebecca Solnit | Opinion | The Guardian Doesn't mention the EC

Opinion: Is Donald Trump an illegitimate president? Doesn't mention the EC

Was the 2016 election legitimate? It's now definitely worth asking the question - Los Angeles Times References the electoral college as a technicality,

Is Trump’s Legitimacy At Risk? | FiveThirtyEight Doesn't mention the EC

You would think that if SO MANY PEOPLE thought the EC was the cause of being illegitmate, someone would say so?
Click to expand...

Each citizen is free to decide the question of a presidents legitimacy on whatever issue they want to decide it upon, That is the way our system works.
 
sjmay said:
You just described every politician out there, on almost every issue out there, Democrats for the wall, now against it, Republicans, against government spending, now for it,

some of that can be attributed to evolving on a subject, but most of it is pandering to what will get them reelected.
Click to expand...

No. Not at all. Not even close. Not even similar.

I hear this kind of nonsense all the time.

Yes all politicians are slime. But none take it anywhere near to the degree TRump does. Not a one. No normal human does. Not a one.
 
sjmay said:
Republicans want to change laws on Electoral College votes, after presidential losses | Fox News
Click to expand...
Thank you
where I see it staying this way are in states like NY and Cal because they have the most Dem.and I would have thought in states like some of the Red states in the south they would want to keep it too
IF it was district by district and the people in that district voted for a Representative to vote Republican no matter what ever the rest of the state does they would have to vote Republican and the peoples say would be heard and not have their votes be taken away from them
have a nice day
 
calamity said:
When a single vote in a small, over 90% White state like Wyoming counts for 4 times more than that of a vote in a large multicultural state like California, people have a right to complain, call it racist and wonder just what it is that the White Privileged Power Structure is REALLY up to.
Click to expand...

While they are wondering about that, they can also wonder about what the White Privileged Power Structure is up to when they allowed a black man keys to the Oval Office.
 
haymarket said:
Each citizen is free to decide the question of a presidents legitimacy on whatever issue they want to decide it upon, That is the way our system works.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and just a handful are saying the EC is a problem....what does that tell you?
 
noonereal said:
No. Not at all. Not even close. Not even similar.

I hear this kind of nonsense all the time.

Yes all politicians are slime. But none take it anywhere near to the degree TRump does. Not a one. No normal human does. Not a one.
Click to expand...

LOL Sure.
 
haymarket said:
The system you advocate for and defend allows just a single voter in each of the 12 largest states to elect the president. Five times in our history and two of our last three Presidents have been elected by a process that ignored the first choice of the American people.
Click to expand...

The present system allows for one man to declare a national emergency on the border over the expressed objection of the majority in Congress. Majority doesn'talways rule. However The situation fretting about is far from a reasonable concern. However the veto occurs fairly regularly.
It's the same concept.
 
sjmay said:
Agreed, and just a handful are saying the EC is a problem....what does that tell you?
Click to expand...

It tells me that each citizen is free to make up his own mind using what ever criteria they want to use.

It also tells me that you are very insecure about the source of your opinion. But that is your right.
 
Last edited:
Athanasius68 said:
The present system allows for one man to declare a national emergency on the border over the expressed objection of the majority in Congress. Majority doesn'talways rule. However The situation fretting about is far from a reasonable concern. However the veto occurs fairly regularly.
It's the same concept.
Click to expand...

This is this, this isn't something else... this is this.

Robert DeNiro ... THE DEER HUNTER
 
haymarket said:
It tells me that each citizen is free to make up his own mind using what ever criteria they want to use.

It also tells me that you are very insecure about the source of your opinion. But that is your right.
Click to expand...


Sure......

Tell me again how this isn't about Democrats losing their mind about losing to Trump?
 
sjmay said:
Sure......

Tell me again how this isn't about Democrats losing their mind about losing to Trump?
Click to expand...

Each citizen is free to feel as they want to. If it is Trump that displeases a citizen, so be it.

My objection to the EC is based on inequality of the vote and the voter and I have submitted evidence of mathematics accordingly.
 
haymarket said:
Each citizen is free to feel as they want to. If it is Trump that displeases a citizen, so be it.

My objection to the EC is based on inequality of the vote and the voter and I have submitted evidence of mathematics accordingly.
Click to expand...


LOL like I said, this is coming about because you lost, nothing more, nothing less.
 
sjmay said:
LOL like I said, this is coming about because you lost, nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...

My objection is based on the mathematical inequality that I already submitted as evidence to abolish the EC.

It would not matter to me who benefits as anyone who unfairly benefits is wrong and that must be changed.
 
haymarket said:
Everyone has a right to live where they want. Rewarding people in smaller states with more political power behind their vote is wrong. But you favor the system because it benefits your own political party.
Click to expand...

The issues that were addresses when the EC was approved was to prevent citizens from being estranged from their government. It would be easy to see hostility from the red middle leading to demands for secession from the four or five blue states that run the country.

Its much like Mexico not able to control its outer provences.
 
chuckiechan said:
The issues that were addresses when the EC was approved was to prevent citizens from being estranged from their government. It would be easy to see hostility from the red middle leading to demands for secession from the four or five blue states that run the country.

Its much like Mexico not able to control its outer provences.
Click to expand...

Have you read Federalist 68?
 
haymarket said:
Five times in US history and two out of the last three Presidents, have been rendered illegitimate in the eyes of many citizens precisely because of the mechanism that install them in office. That is not acceptable in any lifetime.
Click to expand...

Illegitimate to the side that lost perhaps. But accepted by a vast majority of Americans. 2016 was a good news, bad news election for me. The good news, Hillary Clinton lost. The bad news Trump won. I've never seen two more idiotic choices ever made by our two major parties in my lifetime. It's like each side tried as hard as they could to give the presidency to the other side.

We have whom we have directly because of the choices, actions and decisions made by the two major parties in 2016. Don't like Trump, blame the two major parties who came up with these nominees. Never before in our history have we had two such disliked and unwanted candidates that the two chosen in 2016. Only four times sinc Gallup and Pew Research started keeping track of major party candidates favorable ratings has a candidate been below 50%. The four, G.H.W. Bush 46% favorable 1992, Barry Goldwater 43% favorable 1964, Hillary Clinton 38% favorable 2016, Donald Trump 36% favorable 2016. Here's the entire list.

Highest to lowest favorable ratings of each major party presidential candidate.

1956 Eisenhower 79%
1960 JFK 75%
1960 Nixon 74%
1964 LBJ 71%
1972 Nixon 66%
1976 Carter 63%
1956 Stevenson 61%
1984 Reagan 61%
1980 Reagan 59%
1968 Nixon 59%
1968 Humphrey 58%
2008 Obama 58%
2000 G.W. Bush 58%
1976 Ford 58%
2012 Obama 57%
1996 Bill Clinton 56%
2008 McCain 55%
2000 Gore 55%
1980 Carter 54%
1984 Mondale 54%
1988 G.H.W. Bush 53%
2004 G.W. Bush 52%
1992 Bill Clinton 51%
1996 Dole 51%
2004 Kerry 51%
2008 Romney 51%
1972 McGovern 50%
1988 Dukakis 50%
1992 G.H.W. Bush 46%
1964 Goldwater 43%
2016 Hillary Clinton 38%
2016 Donald Trump 36%

Regardless of who won, a huge majority of Americans didn't want them in 2016.
 
Perotista said:
Illegitimate to the side that lost perhaps.
Click to expand...

That is not true. History shows us that very few times in American history the loser claimed the winner was illegitimate. America is noted for its peace after elections and the acceptance of the loser to accept the will of the people.

Even in the highly contested and suspicious result in 1960, the loser accepted the result.
 
haymarket said:
That is not true. History shows us that very few times in American history the loser claimed the winner was illegitimate. America is noted for its peace after elections and the acceptance of the loser to accept the will of the people.

Even in the highly contested and suspicious result in 1960, the loser accepted the result.
Click to expand...

I will agree that Hillary would have been president, should have been. But she was too lazy to campaign seriously, ran a very inept campaign, was ho hum, her campaign strategy was dumb, she came across as aloof, elitist and not really caring whether she won or lost. Yet she did win the popular vote. I think that says more about Trump obnoxious persona that any effort Hillary put in.

Blaming the electoral college, the Russians, whom or whatever for a candidates loss because she was too darn lazy, could inspire any enthusiasm in her supporters gets my goat. Trump shouldn't have came within 10 points of Hillary, but she let him. Trump didn't win it, Hillary lost it due to her actions or should I say in-actions. It wasn't the electoral college that cost Hillary the election, it was Hillary herself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom