• 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

haymarket said:
States do not vote. People vote. And Republicans who defend the EC because they believe they have a built in advantage will change their position when it bites them in the ass and they are on the losing end of the deal the way the Democrats have been five different times.
Click to expand...

Pedantic.

And I doubt politics will shift enough. As population density increases, people move to the left. The country shouldn’t be dictating city life any more than the city should be dictating country life.
 
prometeus said:
How is that done exactly?
Click to expand...

By a State Convention or by the State Legislature.

Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
 
Vadinho said:
If the people of California are in step with the majority of Americans and vote together, why shouldn't the people of California be considered equally with the rest of their voting compatriots? What is it about California that makes then any different then any other voter? For that matter, why should the conservatives in California have no say at all despite numbering in the millions? Shouldn't their votes count too?
Click to expand...

They are considered equally. Nothing makes them different. Yes, conservatives in California should count. Which is why I support splitting States.
 
Aberration said:
The country shouldn’t be dictating city life any more than the city should be dictating country life.
Click to expand...

Are you advocating succession? How else does one avoid either outcome?
 
Aberration said:
They are considered equally. Nothing makes them different. Yes, conservatives in California should count. Which is why I support splitting States.
Click to expand...

How does the last sentence relate to the others? I can't make any sense out of the whole statement.
 
Aberration said:
Pedantic.

And I doubt politics will shift enough. As population density increases, people move to the left. The country shouldn’t be dictating city life any more than the city should be dictating country life.
Click to expand...

Why are you against equality for all American voters regardless where they live?
 
OpportunityCost said:
They sure in the **** weren't talking about Russia. The British tried to buy support through titles and land. Madison offered it as foreign powers but the context was clearly England...at the time. But by adhering to it throughout our history, it is almost unthinkable for a US representative to accept an land or title from a foreign power.
Click to expand...

FOREIGN in Federalist 68 refers to any FOREIGN nation.

These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one querter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?
Click to expand...

notice FOREIGN POWERS is a whole lot more than just your false example of England.
 
Last edited:
Vadinho said:
I see. You want my tax money but not my vote. You want my contribution to our nation in every way but my vote. I got it. You are an elite voter, I am not. In fact, your vote is so important that we give it more power then my vote. Why? Because you are a real Murican, a man who represents the real Murica, the salt of the earth, the lily white underbelly of all that is good and proper and righteous. You are Mayberry RFD, we are Fast Times at Ridgemont High. I get it, you are truly a special person. Our nation needs you to make decisions, not me or my fellow Californians. Just let us create the worlds entertainment, the technology, the food, the next new paradigm shift but do not, under any circumstances, let us have the same voting power as you. Why? Because you are special.
Click to expand...

Your vote doesn’t count any less. You simply misunderstand the context of your vote. You vote in California, in your district, for who your district picks for President. Not all States are winner take all electorals. The context of your vote is not a national popular 50+1 election. [emoji2369]
 
NWRatCon said:
How does the last sentence relate to the others? I can't make any sense out of the whole statement.
Click to expand...

Splitting States not only frees the region from outside political influence, but 2 senators are gained from each new State. That affects the electoral college. Those conservative California’s who have a new State would be heard where there is no chance they are now.
 
Aberration said:
I am not.
Click to expand...

In supporting the EC you most certainly do as voters in the smallest states are treated to form of mathematical affirmative action over voters in the most populous states.
 
haymarket said:
FOREIGN in Federalist 68 refers to any FOREIGN nation.



notice FOREIGN POWERS is a whole lot more than just your false example of England.
Click to expand...

LOL whatever, Haymarket, you don't have a point other than to argue here.
 
OpportunityCost said:
LOL whatever, Haymarket, you don't have a point other than to argue here.
Click to expand...

The point is pointing out your error is saying it was just ENGLAND. Federalist 68 says FOREIGN POWERS.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Coming from the prognosticator that said Hillary would win, maybe you should just the people decide.
Click to expand...

Clinton did get over 2.8 million more votes then Trump. That is what polls predict.
 
haymarket said:
In supporting the EC you most certainly do as voters in the smallest states are treated to form of mathematical affirmative action over voters in the most populous states.
Click to expand...

They don’t get to vote as individuals for President. They get to vote for their district. Within their district their vote is equal. I do not care about the fabricated national popular vote context.
 
Aberration said:
They don’t get to vote as individuals for President. They get to vote for their district. Within their district their vote is equal. I do not care about the fabricated national popular vote context.
Click to expand...

The makes no sense on any level. It is pure nonsense.

What you "care about" is irrelevant regarding the peoples vote.
 
Aberration said:
Which is not the same as winning.
Click to expand...

Polls predict peoples support for a candidate or position. And they did their job in 2016. They were extremely accurate.

The vote for president is a vote for a NATIONAL office. A person is president over the NATION. And all votes for that office are NOT weighed equally.

Presidential election: A map showing the vote power of all 50 states.

We do not need mathematical affirmative action for some Americans at the expense of others and that is what the map clearly shows is happening with the EC.
 
OpportunityCost said:
You don't seem to understand, the Constitution wouldn't have been ratified without it. It was a compromise to get it passed, to ensure the voices of smaller states would still be heard.
Click to expand...
So it was just a gimmick then that needs to be corrected now.
 
Aberration said:
They are considered equally. Nothing makes them different. Yes, conservatives in California should count. Which is why I support splitting States.
Click to expand...

We are not treated equally under the concept of one man, one vote in regards to choosing the President. As for splitting states, how about we merge states? North and South Dakota becomes Dakota. Kansas, Iowa and Nebraska becomes the Great Plains. Or how about adding a couple states, Guam and the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico and DC. Take three out, add three in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom