America's Presidential electoral college system: a severe Achilles heel.

Dont tell me what to do.

 

When did china surpass the USA as a Super power and what does china have to do with the EC?

 

The notion of checks&balances is older than that even. The first notions of a democracy with checks&balances dates from the late 18th century in France with the first overthrowing of a sitting monarch in 1789. The checks&balances did not work in France with the advent of Napoleon. It took more than another half-century for France to get around to truly democratic system of representation.

But it did work in the US with the first on earth of a democratic constitutional government in the form of a republic. The checks&balances is a constant "work-in-progress" in any country seeking economic fairness for all its constituents.

That is, if the country insists upon it - which insistence is presently lacking in the US ...

 

The winner-take-all system of the EC IS A SUPPRESSION OF VOTES. That fact is painfully obvious at present.

Why should there be an incentive if most Americans do not understand that the popular-vote is being presently manipulated in both state and national elections?

And we shall see soon enough if there is not a focused attention on the manipulation of gerrymandering in state elections. Of course, with a Supreme Court "stacked" as it has become by the Reckless-Right, I do not think much can be done.

The US needs to take the nomination of SC-justices away from the sole-whimsy of any sitting presidency. Why not let both Congress and the President negotiate the filling of seats in the Highest Court in the Land ... ?

 

No, it's a feature of the American Republic system of government which prevents national elections from being contested.
Each state is responsible for conducting their own election.

The Presidency doesn't exist by popular vote. Originally it was the states who decided, but eventually all 50 states in the union passed legislation to let the people in their state decide through popular vote. If a state legislature wanted to, they could convert back to the old system and decide the electors directly.
You don't have a Constitutional right to vote for President. It's not even in state Constitutions (as far as I know).

 

Gerrymandering can only tip the elections. It can't enable a small minority to stay in power. (Well, theoretically it could, but then it would be painfully obvious and noticeable, that hasn't really happened yet)
The majority of voters in a state could still stand up and put a stop to unfair gerrymandering if it was a priority. That being said, the issue of gerrymandering can have a very blurry line.

"Stacked"? No, now it is balanced. You're just worried about Justice Ginsburg croaking.

And I bet you don't have any problem with her "voting" from a hospital bed in a coma. (Something that very likely is going to happen)

 

Silliness becomes you so ...

 

Responds to "one-liner nonsense" with one-liner nonsense!
That is awesome.

^^^^^^^
2 lines

 

Nah, they did good by leaving out the "positive rights" which are an anathema to individual liberty.

 

Yes because a person too hungry, or doesn't have access to clean drinking water and can't participate in politics is clearly the best citizen the U.S. could ever hope for.

 

My mistake I was thinking of something else. But yeah, there was democracy in Europe prior to the US.

 

The lack of positive rights which makes Individual liberty possible has led to the most successful society in history. The "best citizens" who need no positive rights have always greatly outnumbered society's parasites. But unfortunately, as left of center politicians have been increasingly discovering, one path to power is promising more free stuff to the parasites. And the ranks of the parasites grow when they are increasingly subsidized. The country needs less "positive rights" and more self-responsibility.

 

I can't go to South Carolina because it took basketball teams to tell people I can go to the bathroom. How's that for the most successful society ever?

 

Were the basketball teams successful?

 

I wouldn't call that a success because it revealed deep issues within the state that even if they were successful is revoking the bathroom bill, I could never go there due to discrimination and potential abuse.

But I suppose if you need an answer to your question? Sure.

 

The successes just keep coming! The good ol' USA rocks!

 

"Yay! We revealed deep seated issues to the point where social isolation is needed by members of the community to protect themselves! Hurray!"

I pity that kind of world.

 

I'm glad to live in the United States. Overjoyed, honestly. But since we are off-topic, I'll give you the opportunity for the last word about your feelings that the country is horrible....

 

Meh, I said my piece on the matter.

Do you want to talk about the OP's topic?

 

It is a world of its own making. Gun-laws very seriously inhibit massive public-murder as practiced presently in the US. (The US has the highest death-rate from automatic weapons of any developed nation on earth.) And for what? So that automatic and semi-automatic weapons can be readily obtained commonly? It's good business!

Then also accept the consequences and why not do the same for drugs? Let's make automatic weapons perfectly legal and their obtention by all-and-sundry also open and without registration for narcotics! (Wow! Enhanced tax-revenues!)

After-all, isn't owning a machine-gun not also a fundamental right in any real-democracy? To protect ourselves and our children with our "freedom" to die in a public place under a hail of machine-gun bullets by sick-minded whackos ... ?

PS: I say, get them first before they get you!

 

Could you source this claim, "The US has the highest death-rate from automatic weapons of any developed nation on earth?"

I can't even recall the last time I heard of a US death in the US from automatic weapons fire.

 

Can you recall this as regards overall death due to guns?



Worse yet - from here:

In effect, there is no ban today on automatic weapons in the US.

From here: Data Confirm Semiautomatic Rifles Linked to More Deaths, Injuries

Excerpt:

So, it's ONLY a quarter of all gun deaths that are due to automatic weapons in the US.

All I can say is that I am pleased that the deaths in France attributed to automatic weapons is wholly due to an incident some years ago when jihadists invaded a theater killed spectators. Automatic weapons in Europe are banned uniformly throughout the EU. (As explained here.)

 

What planet do you live on?

The presidency in America is elected by popular-vote in each state, and by means of a rule that the southern states forced upon northern states (they threatened to secede) the Electoral College was created in order for the said-states to manipulate the popular-vote. Which indeed they did.

And no one since has ever threatened that rule.

That may be changing however. Forty percent of Americans think that elections are not fair. From here: NPR/Marist Poll: 40 Percent Of Americans Think Elections Aren't Fair

Who is surprised that 91% of Replicants think that today's manipulated voting is fair? I'm not.

They are quite pleased with the voting-manipulations that allow THEIR CANDIDATES to win elections. Surprise, surprise.

When a democracy gets this rotted, it's high time to repair it ...

 

True democracies always fail and why we are not one. We are a confederation of States so States hold elections and the EC gives minority States some say.

A popular vote would lead to majority State domination and if the vote were close a recount would have to be done nationwide.