After this election........

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by GeddonM3, Nov 5, 2012.

  1. GeddonM3

    GeddonM3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    20,180
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83
    can we please get rid of the electoral college (*)(*)(*)(*)??? i mean really, why cant it just be as simple as the popular vote? doesnt that seem a lot more logical considering the popular vote would show who the people of this country really want as president?

    and really why should some states be more important than others? talk about disenfranchising a lot of states.
     
  2. slashbeast

    slashbeast Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,583
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah I'm gonna have to agree with ditching the electoral college process...

    Gets old knowing my vote counts for nothing since I live in a red state that ALWAYS votes republican overwhelmingly. Atleast without the EC my vote will actually matter lol

    I didn't even vote this election because it's pointless. My EC district votes like 90% republican every election, so what's the point? Might as well spend my free time playing dota or getting drunk...
     
  3. ZippyThePinhead

    ZippyThePinhead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No.
    .................
     
  4. Skeptical Heretic

    Skeptical Heretic New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    849
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I prefer the electoral college as it gives states more recognition to the candidates campaigning. Though one of the reasons the founding fathers wanted the electoral college is because they believed that direct democracy wasn't a good idea asmany voters were misinformed and were too emotionally based on voting.

    I don't like the idea of direct democracy as it generally fails, also for the reason of states getting more of a voice during the elections of which they would probably be ignored.
     
  5. GeddonM3

    GeddonM3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    20,180
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83

    exactly my point, the way this (*)(*)(*)(*) is done you might as well just let Ohio,Florida and the other swing states decide. those who vote in states that are already known to be dominated by dems or repubs hardly matter at all. which means millions of votes honestly dont mean a (*)(*)(*)(*)ed thing and i feel its highly unfair no matter who you vote for. every vote should count, as as long as the electoral college exists a many americans vote are about as good as toilet paper.
     
  6. upside-down cake

    upside-down cake Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2012
    Messages:
    5,457
    Likes Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It's another way that democracy isn't truly representative. If your state voted 54% Republican- just if- than the whole state would be tallied as a Republican win, or vice-versa, regardless of the reality that nearly half the state disagrees. When the same pattern repeats itself in other states, the true sense of who the people are actually voting for is lost in generalizations. I'm not banking for Obama or Romney. I see only two different approaches to how I'll be f'd over the next 4 - 8 years. But it's one of a growing number of observations about democracy that starts- literally- at the elementary school level.
     
  7. GeddonM3

    GeddonM3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    20,180
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83
    i could see the issue then about misinformation, but we arent exactly traveling around by horse and buggy anymore. all the info we need is right there in front of us. then what happens if a single party dominates those "key states"???? it wont be much of a democracy anymore.

    all votes should truly and honestly count, with the electoral college they dont unless you live in a swing state.
     
  8. Nikolaos

    Nikolaos New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm wondering if Presidents ever actively focus on keeping unemployment down in the swing states by giving them more attention and funds than others. Does anyone know off the top of their head if this has happened or how much stimulus money went to these states in percentages compared to others? Preferential treatment of swing states because of their higher value than other states is another issue with the EC.
     
  9. Serfin' USA

    Serfin' USA Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    24,183
    Likes Received:
    550
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, honestly, the Electoral College is kind of half-@$$ed if you think about it.

    On the one hand, we don't have direct democracy for the presidency, so the popular vote doesn't matter that much.

    On the other hand, if having the public directly elect the president is a problem, then why not instead have an indirectly elected prime minister like in a parliamentary system?

    The Electoral College may have had good intentions in the beginning, but today, all it does is discourage people of minority parties from voting in heavily liberal or conservative states, while swing states get all the attention.

    In the meantime, large states are underrepresented, while small states are overrepresented.

    Overall, it's a pretty crappy design that made more sense in the 1800s. Today, it's a painfully outdated system compared to most of our peers.
     
  10. philipkdick

    philipkdick New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2012
    Messages:
    506
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This would require an amendment to the constitution, which is no easy task. The fellows who wrote it deliberately made it a difficult and it can literally take decades.

    US Constitution
    Article 5 - Amendment
    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.
     
  11. Serfin' USA

    Serfin' USA Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    24,183
    Likes Received:
    550
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There's definitely some of that, although it's also present in how the Appropriations committee in Congress distributes funds to states in exchange for favors to Congress members for votes.

    The whole system is essentially bribery with public money.
     
  12. GeddonM3

    GeddonM3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    20,180
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83
    a few decades is nothing when compared to eternity. like another said this system is highly outdated the the time we live in. we need a new system, whether it takes a few decades or not.
     
  13. GeddonM3

    GeddonM3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    20,180
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83
    exactly, this system is too easy to exploit. candidates and the incumbent know what states they already have so they are basically a non issue to them. all they have to do is kiss more ass in more states and show swing states more attention, which is exactly what they do now anyways. im sorry but im not cool with a couple states holding the power to our future.
     
  14. GeddonM3

    GeddonM3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    20,180
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83
    side note to the mods!!!!

    i apologize as i meant to post this in the Political Beliefs section.
     
  15. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've been saying that for a couple decades now, but the Republicans don't want any part of it. They want to 'matter'.

    While we're at it, we should jettison the Senate and get down to some REAL democracy.
     
  16. GeddonM3

    GeddonM3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    20,180
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83
    this is not a partisan thread,dont start.
     
  17. Lowden Clear

    Lowden Clear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    Messages:
    8,711
    Likes Received:
    197
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Why should New York, LA and Chicago decide how I will live my life?
     
  18. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    97,282
    Likes Received:
    27,224
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Getting rid of the electoral college will disenfranchise the rest of American that is not concentrated in the major cities.
     
  19. GeddonM3

    GeddonM3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    20,180
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83
    how would they??? in this scenario Ohio alone basically decides our fate. ine one scenario every vote would truly count, in what we have now only a few million votes actually count.
     
  20. GeddonM3

    GeddonM3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    20,180
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83
    how so????
     
  21. Piscivorous

    Piscivorous New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    11,854
    Likes Received:
    232
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We need state apportionment like Nebraska and Maine. Split each state with more than 3 electoral votes up into parcels of 4. That way the candidates really have to spend time trying to get electoral votes out of each state. Dems could run ads in Austin, Houston and Dallas in an effort to get votes, while the GOP could campaign in NorCal and the Central valley of California in an effort to get votes. Meanwhile those huge election warchests aren't so huge anymore when you're flying to Minnesota trying to get the corn vote or to Georgia to campaign in Atlanta.
     
  22. GeddonM3

    GeddonM3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    20,180
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83

    i guess that would work alot better and make the playing field a bit more fair and truly making more votes count.would definitely make the elections a hell of alot more interesting and the candidates would really have to work their ass off for those votes all over the USA instead of just keying on swing states.
     

Share This Page