Dear liberals:Why the electoral college is around

Join Date: 2009-09-23
Post Count: 14335

#208141213Tuesday, January 24, 2017 11:16 PM GMT

I'm not continuing. I could argue at great length on this but I have to do it soooo often with people I grow tired of it. There's nothing fundamentally unfair about our electoral college as is, despite first passed the post being garbage and unnecessary. I'd say that you're underestimating the framers in supposing they weren't considering gradual changes over time. Simply because they did a very fine job for something that was very fresh for the time.

BIoodPatriot

Join Date: 2015-05-02
Post Count: 12067

#208141344Tuesday, January 24, 2017 11:18 PM GMT

me when we repeal the senate because it gives rural america more power over big cities like lol WTF haha

BIoodPatriot

Join Date: 2015-05-02
Post Count: 12067

#208141460Tuesday, January 24, 2017 11:21 PM GMT

seriously you guys rip the electoral college of its basis of giving small states more power when that's what the majority of the constitution is based off of, federalism states might as well be administrative districts and not their own entities without the electoral college and the basis of federalism

BIoodPatriot

Join Date: 2015-05-02
Post Count: 12067

#208141505Tuesday, January 24, 2017 11:22 PM GMT

but again, i've said this before and i'll say it again this debate is entirely political and will blow over in a few months like it did in 2000

BIoodPatriot

Join Date: 2015-05-02
Post Count: 12067

#208141668Tuesday, January 24, 2017 11:24 PM GMT

i can't even blame people like romuluz and zep going after posts like these because they're below sub-human ######## meme tier conservative bias and should be eradicated off the face of the earth

ErvvinSmith

Join Date: 2009-09-23
Post Count: 14335

#208164690Wednesday, January 25, 2017 5:22 AM GMT

Okay, can't keep my trap shut. How does this give rural America more power? As I said earlier, this is the only rural America has ANY power or say in the Presidential election. Or in other words, their national representative. Federalism means power is shared at all levels of government. That would be an absolute lie if we were to look only at the popular vote, because not all levels of government would have equal representation. Rather, large urban areas would have huge representation. Furthermore, what problem arises under our current system? I have yet to see anything more than idealistic reasoning- the idealism of course being this idea that we're supposed to be a full and true democracy. What flaws emerge that require this country to do away with the electoral college? Because you feel like an overall popular vote is more fair?

ErvvinSmith

Join Date: 2009-09-23
Post Count: 14335

#208165138Wednesday, January 25, 2017 5:33 AM GMT

Also @zep Like I said, there is no reason to define a current existing mob. The electoral college and proportional elections are a counter to mobs. I set BLM/NRA/the "clan" and other violent groups as an example of a mob. They may not hold much power, and hey guess why that is? The electoral college / proportional representation means they can't just intimidate big cities into adhering to their desired candidate. And your point about people being unequally represented: Districts / levels of government are what's being represented. Like I said earlier, here it is again, WE SHARE POWER AT ALL LEVELS. This would not be true without our current system or a drastic move away from it. Not all levels of government would receive a say in their national representative. Furthermore, What do you say about unequally represented rural America? Your popular vote concept differs mainly in that larger cities will receive more attention and will take priority in the eyes of the President. Meaning large portions of the contiguous United States will receive little attention in that respect. Meaning, your argument about the EC and current Presidential election set up resulting in unequal representation proves moot. Moot point. Because no matter how you slice it, no matter what the system, someone's voice becomes unheard. Why then, if in both scenarios there is inequality in representation, should we adopt a popular vote?

Wowgnomes

Join Date: 2009-09-27
Post Count: 26255

#208188878Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:29 PM GMT

California has the same amount of representation in the presidential as the smallest 13 states combined. That shows how necessary the system is, and how fair it actually is.

ErvvinSmith

Join Date: 2009-09-23
Post Count: 14335

#208189130Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:33 PM GMT

California has the same amount of representation in the presidential as the smallest 13 states combined. That shows how necessary the system is, and how fair it actually is. [2]

flybomb

Join Date: 2010-05-14
Post Count: 3659

#208189198Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:34 PM GMT

thanks for being a rational human being ^ MAKE DEAD ASOV

BrokenRyan916

Join Date: 2010-12-09
Post Count: 1703

#208199514Wednesday, January 25, 2017 7:24 PM GMT

It gives rural america more of a voice to be heard, doesn't make it more powerfull than the population centers it just balances them out.

Wowgnomes

Join Date: 2009-09-27
Post Count: 26255

#208216986Wednesday, January 25, 2017 11:16 PM GMT

Exactly... that's what my statement should have shown to ppl. It's not like the electoral college is crazy weighted for small states -- it's really not.