Bill Introduced To Abolish Electoral College

[LouderVol]

Seems it’s trending up recently if we’re working off percentages.

Because the values are in flux. The republicans didnt just start to win with Bush 2 winning the EC counts. They had won the popular plenty of times previously.

As the demographics continue to shift this narrow window of threading the needle will disappear.

Who knows this census might do it.

You have to have or allow that flexibility if you want the system to last.

The Democrats can thread the same needle.

 

[OHvol40]

I haven’t heard you make a compelling point on either topic I listed. Ever. So.... of course I’m not interested in hearing anything else from you until you get better arguments. This really isn’t that hard.

Just like I said, you’re only interested in your own benefit. If you don’t want to have the conversation (for or against), what are you doing here?

 

[OHvol40]

The discussion needs to begin with you explaining how you see a constitutional amendment getting passed or whether you have a plan to get rid of the EC outside of an amendment.

You’re jumping to the remedy without even talking about the problem.

 

[OHvol40]

Apples and tomatoes.

One EC vote does equal one EC vote. The presidential election makes no distinction between an EC from California or one from Mississippi.

What about my vote vs your vote, do they count equally?

 

[hog88]

You’re jumping to the remedy without even talking about the problem.

There isn’t a problem

 

[NorthDallas40]

Just like I said, you’re only interested in your own benefit. If you don’t want to have the conversation (for or against), what are you doing here?

Telling you to get better damn arguments instead of rehashing the worn out non compelling ones you are using.

What is your plan to modify the constitution to modify the EC delegate count?

 

[hog88]

What about my vote vs your vote, do they count equally?

Yes

 

[NorthDallas40]

What about my vote vs your vote, do they count equally?

They never have and until you modify the constitution they never will. Not beyond the state level

Worn. Out. Argument

 

[hog88]

They never have and until you modify the constitution they never will.

Worn. Out. Argument

You are wrong. All votes count equally.

 

[NorthDallas40]

You are wrong. All votes count equally.

Yep. At the state level they do! Look at the edit.

 

[LouderVol]

Republic: a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.

I don’t see where that fits into a conversation about weighting votes.

And in this republic we have established how those elected representatives are established. It's been the same this whole time. At least for the presidential. One person voting has NEVER equaled one person voting in the presidential.

If Trump won the popular vote but lost the EC would you think he had won or not? How do you think most on this board would act? I can see the flip.

Which is why it shouldnt change the system. The current worry is purely politics and not a right (consitutional, not right as in republican) issue.

I havent looked into the matter but what was the political conversation about the 17th amendment? Seems like there was a fundamental change there that was inevitably someone losing power. It can happen.

 

[hog88]

Yep. At the state level they do! Look at the edit.

Exactly, nobody but electors actually vote for the president. When we vote we are voting for electors and all votes count equally.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Exactly, nobody but electors actually vote for the president. When we vote we are voting for electors and all votes count equally.

Agreed.

 

[LouderVol]

What about my vote vs your vote, do they count equally?

I would say yours matters more than mine does. You vote, I am guessing, i dont.

Why do you matter more than me? Or the 70 million others who dont vote?

It's one of the reasons i dont vote. I dont believe i am more important than anyone else. So my vote should not influence anyone else's outcome.

I am guessing you have no issue with that contradiction.

You complain that a person in wisconsin vote matter more than a persons in californias. But you dont care that under a democracy that the winners vote matters more than the losers. Why should, in this case, party affiliation with the winner, matter as to whose vote matter?

 

[OHvol40]

Yes

No

 

[NorthDallas40]

No

Incorrect

 

[OHvol40]

They never have and until you modify the constitution they never will. Not beyond the state level

Worn. Out. Argument

It’s still a fact. All I see is heads in the sand and the taking of collective balls to go home.

 

[ajvol01]

This should have been done decades ago.

 

[LouderVol]

It’s still a fact. All I see is heads in the sand and the taking of collective balls to go home.

You have yet to establish why majority rule is correct, or good, or preferable. All you are doing is redefining victory to suit your argument without supplying a valid reason behind it.

 

[hog88]

No

You must not understand how the EC works.

 

[NorthDallas40]

It’s still a fact. All I see is heads in the sand and the taking of collective balls to go home.

You: I don’t like the current system because I think my vote counts less than a vote in less populated states

All of Us: it’s working exactly the way it was designed.

You: but I don’t like it

All of Us: convince us why the original method isn’t working as intended.

You: because my vote counts less.

All of us: it counts in exactly the fashion the founding fathers convinced us it should.

You: but I don’t like it.

All of us: make a compelling argument why we should change it.

Rinse repeat as nauseam

 

[NorthDallas40]

You must not understand how the EC works.

He just doesn’t like it.

 

[VolunteerHillbilly]

There is a theory that lots of Republicans who live in large cities on the West Coast and in the Northeast do not bother to vote because it's a fait accompli. Probably some Democrats who live in heavily Republican areas who do the same. It's hard to know what the real numbers are without compulsory voting.

 

[hog88]

There is a theory that lots of Republicans who live in large cities on the West Coast and in the Northeast do not bother to vote because it's a fait accompli. Probably some Democrats who live in heavily Republican areas who do the same. It's hard to know what the real numbers are without compulsory voting.

The campaigning would be completely different that anything before if we went to a popular vote.

 

[OHvol40]

You have yet to establish why majority rule is correct, or good, or preferable. All you are doing is redefining victory to suit your argument without supplying a valid reason behind it.

I’m not an advocate of absolute majority rule, but nobody seems to want to delve into the topic. I will say, though, that a basic understanding of the value of the majority is understood as children by taking straw polls for contended decisions and everyone agreeing to go with the side with the most votes.

That idea extends all the way up to our legislative processes where majorities carry every decision every made. I’m tired of people playing dumb like they don’t understand the importance of the majority.