The Electoral College has elected 5 Presidents all REPUBLICAN

Then you are one of a vey rare few.

 

Don't matter and gas it made it to scotus yet? By the way the likelihood of them voting for someone not of the party that won the popular vote is quite small and they'd likely only be an elector once.

 

It happened quite often, in the past, but they were always quickly replaced, which is why this case wound up in court to begin with, an unhappy replaced elector.

 

Meh, that is how it is. Like it or lump it.

 

Lincoln (R) was elected with 39% of the popular vote. EC worked so very well, so truly magnificent.

 

Why bother having the citizens fall out and stand in lo ng lines for an election that has no real purpose at least not the purpose voters think it has.We spend millions on an election that elects no one!!!

 

Somewhat misleading 61.

John Quincy Adams won the electoral vote despite Andrew Jackson winning the popular vote. Jackson also had the most electoral votes but not quite the majority. Adams won by making a deal for the electoral votes of one of the other two candidates besides himself and Jackson.

Rutherford B. Hayes probably won the overall popular vote if there had not been the massive fraud committed against black voters in the south. As someone regarding that election said "the Democrats stole the election then the Republicans stole it back".

George W. Bush was close enough to Gore (500,000 votes) that it is entirely possible that if all the votes had been counted (some 3 million were discarded for various reasons which is typical in U.S. general elections) that Bush might actually have won more of the popular vote.

 

CRY! Me a river, still Butthurt that Trump waxed Old Battle Axe Hildebeast in 2016. If you want to Bitch about the election outcome, start with the way the DNC Super Delegates screwed poor Bernie Sanders in the Primaries for the DNC. Had the Democrats chose Bernie Sanders, I believe he had a better chance of beating Donald Trump in the General Election, BUT! they went with HILDABEAST and lost in one of the most Epic Electoral College trouncing in the History of America.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/11/democrat-primary-elections-need-reform

 

So change it. States have the power to apportion their electors as they see fit. Complaining about the electoral college now is like saying the 2017 Dodgers didn't lose to the Astros because they scored the same number of runs. You knew the rules going into the election.

Whose fault is it that Hillary spent her time holding fundraisers in California and New York, because money is all that matters to her, while Trump spent his days flying all over the US to win battleground states?

 

Then you do. Just stop thinking of the federal government as some all powerful government and think more like the europeans view the EU.

The brits are trying to leave (they won't) the EU because they don't think of themselves as europeans so much as british or english. As an American, you should be thinking more locally like caring about your own state government and trying like hell to reduce the power of the federal government so that your state really is just one semi-sovereign nation state, as the founders intended.

 

Is this not the core problem then, the widespread ignorance of the general public about the workings of the political system? Changing the system won’t improve anything if you don’t address the ignorance, that just means the new system could end up not representing the real vies of the voters (be that by design or inadvertently). If you could improve public understanding of the system, you would naturally increase the pressure to fix some of the actual flaws in the system but leave less scope for simply replacing them with different ones.

 

The electoral college elected all of our Presidents except Gerald Ford.

 

That would be the point

 

I think your premise that anyone is supposed to “rule” is where you veer off track. If you think anyone should rule I don’t see any point arguing over it. It’s just an authoritarianism vs. individual liberty debate at that point. And the only value in that is learning what type each individual is.

 

Your vote is and always has been meant to determine who your STATE prefers for president. POTUS means something. I actually wouldn’t mind doing away with the EC. It would force breakup of the Union. If all the authoritarians lived in one place like in North Korea, they’d have to build a wall to keep their people at home. Everyone would be happier.

 

Well, those used to highly industrialized with plenty good jobs for their citizens before some ******* dreamed up globalization.

 

Globalization is wanted and desired by all world wide capitalist businesses that want and indeed need to both produce and market their products to a worldwide market and audience.To have these businesses shrink to within their national borders would result in laying off hundreds of millions of employees worldwide.

 

The Founders decided otherwise. It was known as the Great Compromise, and was needed in order for this country to be founded. The early states had discrepancies between small states and large states. The small states wanted everything to be split evenly between the states in terms of political power. The large states wanted everything to be based on population. The compromise was had, so that neither the states nor the people had all the power. The power was dispersed to preven tyranny. It's worked pretty well for over 200 years.

 

If you want to prove that, and hold one big national election, you're going to have to have a national voter ID law.
Something Democrats have strenuously opposed (even on the state level).

It only takes some basic common sense to see why a voter ID law would be a virtual necessity if the system were changed from what it is now.

 

Which may have been all well and good in an era of no mass communications and horse speed and rideable distance limiting the travel of any and all news but today the vast majority of our 329 million citizens have instant access to all news and information,the electoral college has long ago outlived any degree of usefulness it may ever have had.We should have direct popular vote election of all of our political offices including the president and V.P.We should also be voting on modern up to date computers and not the old fashioned jumble of antiquated voting machines in use throughout country today many of which have no hardcopy record of votes cast and registered.We are EXACTLY like a third world banana republic in how we vote,it is a system deliberately designed to be gamed.

 

You are free to leave if you don't like our form of government.

Or lobby for a constitutional amendment.

Good luck with that.

 

I fear if they did, it might pass. Because people would not understand why the Electoral College system is there.

Just like they did not understand why it was state legislatures who appointed Senators when they decided they were going to do away with that and pass the Seventeenth Amendment.

It would drastically change the underlying structure of government in certain ways, changing the underlying design of the Constitution and leading to unforeseen problems and issues.

 

The Electoral College makes absolutely no sense in todays modern world where voters are inundated with daily election news and communications morning to night dyring the last few months prior to the election.It is just another reason for voters NOT to bother voting since they know their presidential vote elects no one.

 

We have a voter ID law, you cannot vote unless you are a registered voter that is verified before you are permitted to vote.

 

In many liberal democracies the highest office isn’t an elected office - PM of the U.K. and chancellor of Germany are not elected by popular vote.
In the U.K. the upper chamber of their parliament is not elected as well (house of lords).
President of EU is an appointed figure as well.