Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
5th Letter;9491171 said:Stiff;9491155 said:5th Letter;9491136 said:The_Jackal;9491077 said:Go figure;9491055 said:JokerzWyld;9490978 said:Go figure;9490946 said:What are peoples' arguments against getting rid of the electoral college in favor of the popular vote? Not arguing here just genuinely curious to hear the reasoning.
And i think people were tired of 'business as usual' in politics which is why the candidate who was promising drastic change, no matter how terrible a lot of it sounds to half the country, ended up winning. Another reason why I'm assuming Bernie might've fared better in this election with a higher voter turnout in his favor.
But this election felt like the blatant racist vs the undercover pandering racist. Seems like only people who've won under Dems were gays, no other 'minority' groups.
To answer your question, the process of the electoral college is undemocratic. In a democracy people vote and the law/person with the higher vote wins. It is that simple.
The electoral process is a republican system designed for representatives to decide for us, even if it's unpopular. In a political climate like this one where politics as usual don't fly, the people want a purer and simpler process.
We can argue the downfalls or merits of a democracy vs. a republic, but either way it's nonsensical to have such a process used in a nation where the politicians refer to the method of governance as a democracy.
Thanks and while I understand your explanation what I dont understand is why someone would be against doing away with the electoral college. Not that I would agree or disagree, I just simply never heard an explanation in favor of the electoral college.
Its to insure that every has an equal vote that a few larger cites don't get to dominate and dictate the policy of this nation.
Here is the easiest example I can give. Just throw out numbers lets say NY has a population of 50 million. Of those 50 million 30 million live in highly urban populated areas, most likely share similar views while dealing with similar issues.
Then you have Idaho or Washington, which is lowely populated with a few million spread throughout the whole state.
You can easily see how problems would arise with whole states of this nation could be ignored. That would overall harm the democratic process.
Edit
To sum it up its to PREVENT the tyranny of the majority.
Not even close, but here's a clue, "large cities" didn't exist when the electoral college was started. States were still called colonies at the time.
If I'm not mistaken the formation of the electoral college had something to do with a compromise between non-slave holding northern states which were more populous and slave holding rural states which were more sparse..the slave holding states were worried that they would get bullied by northern states if it was simply a direct popular vote that determined the president
That's not it either. The answer is a lot more simpler and something I've argued about on here recently.
5th Letter;9491181 said:The founding fathers did not trust the regular citizens to make the choice so they started the electoral college as a way for more "qualified" people to actually pick the next president.
5th Letter;9491181 said:The founding fathers did not trust the regular citizens to make the choice so they started the electoral college as a way for more "qualified" people to actually pick the next president.
JokerzWyld;9491217 said:In a democracy the majority rules. If that is not the case then their is no need for a national presidential election. We should just allow the House of Representatives to choose the president for us. They
JokerzWyld;9491217 said:In a democracy the majority rules. If that is not the case then their is no need for a national presidential election. We should just allow the House of Representatives to choose the president for us. They
5th Letter;9491224 said:JokerzWyld;9491217 said:In a democracy the majority rules. If that is not the case then their is no need for a national presidential election. We should just allow the House of Representatives to choose the president for us. They
But I was told on here that the popular vote means something?
Stiff;9491228 said:5th Letter;9491224 said:JokerzWyld;9491217 said:In a democracy the majority rules. If that is not the case then their is no need for a national presidential election. We should just allow the House of Representatives to choose the president for us. They
But I was told on here that the popular vote means something?
The popular vote of states is what won trump the election...
Be logical here. Hillary won the popular vote nationally right? If the election is determined by the electoral college and NOBODY'S vote matters except for theirs..and people going to cast their votes at the ballot boxes has nothing to do with the election, like you claim, then how come everybody is saying Trump won? The electoral college don't cast their votes until December (which is basically a symbolic ceremony).
VIBE;9491199 said:regardless of anything, why would a dem want to be pres when everything is controlled by the republicans? they'll have it worse than Obama, if this happens, and not only that, these Trump supporters will take the streets.. if that happens, hell will break loose
Fosheezy;9490772 said:fucc no
The_Jackal;9491225 said:JokerzWyld;9491217 said:In a democracy the majority rules. If that is not the case then their is no need for a national presidential election. We should just allow the House of Representatives to choose the president for us. They
Right that's true. US is a representative democracy for that very simple reason. If we went by popular vote then you honestly might as well abolish the electoral process and tell the majority of Americans that simply because they live in a smaller state their problems and concerns don't matter.
NoCompetition;9490816 said:Too many sat out in close key states and want a do over.