Bill Introduced To Abolish Electoral College

#28
#28
AirVol said:
Dems tried to fix the election, they're hoping this will do it for them. The desperation is comical, what's next?
Click to expand...

Should another economic crisis happen theyll lay years of bad fiscal policy at his feet and try to blame it all on him and the republicans.
 
#29
#29
DancingOutlaw said:
Based on population, which determines reps, which determines votes. ND has 1 rep and 2 senators so that's 3. TN has 9 reps and 2 senators, so 11. No matter how small a state will have at least 3 votes, so that balances the popular vote concentration in urban areas.
Click to expand...
Thanks, that makes sense and I kinda remember that now. I agree no fewer than 3 makes sense in that respect. I also understand why larger populations feel under repped though. Seems like addressing the total electoral votes and state reps is the only fair way to make everyone happy.
 
#30
#30
If they abolish this here electrical college, who is going to train all the electricians in the future?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#31
#31
AirVol said:
Dems tried to fix the election, they're hoping this will do it for them. The desperation is comical, what's next?
Click to expand...


I was kidding. The result is the result.

I think that what is going on is a recognition that there being two electoral votes to represent each state's two Senators locks in too much electoral weight for small states, with small populations.

It makes no sense to say that Florida gets that same two vote value that Idaho does.

On the flip side, the concern is that the large population centers can impose their will on small states. So keeping the electoral college promotes the value of each state, independent of the weight to be given the votes.

I get the argument from both sides. Haven't made up my mind on it just yet.
 
#32
#32
It is outdated. Small states with no population have a disproportionate amount of influence. Many of those small states should have only 1 or 2 EC votes. EC votes should be based on population or go to a true popular election.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#34
#34
k-town_king said:
It is outdated. Small states with no population have a disproportionate amount of influence. Many of those small states should have only 1 or 2 EC votes. EC votes should be based on population or go to a true popular election.
Click to expand...

It exists for the same reason that we have a house and senate. Do you think we should get rid of the senate too?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#36
#36
k-town_king said:
It is outdated. Small states with no population have a disproportionate amount of influence. Many of those small states should have only 1 or 2 EC votes. EC votes should be based on population or go to a true popular election.
Click to expand...
Why not just exclude the states that you don't like?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#38
#38
Josh Earnst ‏:
Democrats are making it a top priority to abolish the Electoral College. Jobs, healthcare, and national security will just have to wait.
Click to expand...
.
 
#39
#39
k-town_king said:
It is outdated. Small states with no population have a disproportionate amount of influence. Many of those small states should have only 1 or 2 EC votes. EC votes should be based on population or go to a true popular election.
Click to expand...

Yeah, those small states really throw their weight around. Let's see - how many of them did it take to balance out CA?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#40
#40
1972 Grad said:
Why not just exclude the states that you don't like?
Click to expand...

There aren't any states I don't like. If a vote in one state represents a million people a vote in another state should represent a million people. Pretty logical.

"on average a state is awarded one electoral vote for every 565,166 people. However, Wyoming has three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens (as of 2008 estimates). As a result each of Wyoming's three electoral votes corresponds to 177,556 people. Understood in one way, these people have 3.18 times as much clout in the Electoral College as an average American, or 318% "

That is not American. Wyo should have one vote. I don't hate Wyoming. It is beautiful and I would love to have enough to buy property there one day. They don't deserve 3 votes though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#41
#41
k-town_king said:
There aren't any states I don't like. If a vote in one state represents a million people a vote in another state should represent a million people. Pretty logical.

"on average a state is awarded one electoral vote for every 565,166 people. However, Wyoming has three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens (as of 2008 estimates). As a result each of Wyoming's three electoral votes corresponds to 177,556 people. Understood in one way, these people have 3.18 times as much clout in the Electoral College as an average American, or 318% "

That is not American. Wyo should have one vote. I don't hate Wyoming. It is beautiful and I would love to have enough to buy property there one day. They don't deserve 3 votes though.
Click to expand...
Do you begrudge them their 2 Senators, or their one House member?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#42
#42
The 12 Amendment says:

"The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate.

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.

The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President."

The 12th Amendment amends Article 2 of the Constitution regarding Presidential elections. Now maybe I'm missing something, but I think it takes an amendment - not a piece of legislation - to amend the Constitution or another amendment. Of course, the liberals hold the SC sacred in all matters they don't like - unless the decision doesn't go their way, and the SC does have a way of redefining words - even simple one syllable words like "speech".
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#44
#44
k-town_king said:
That is not American. Wyo should have one vote. I don't hate Wyoming. It is beautiful and I would love to have enough to buy property there one day. They don't deserve 3 votes though.
Click to expand...

You would hate Wyoming.

Far too conservative for your tastes.
 
#45
#45
I'm in favor of the electoral college and would maintain that position regardless of who won the election. i don't blame Boxer for sponsoring the bill; she's from California. If I lived there, I'd probably be for abolishing it too.
 
#46
#46
TheDeeble said:
I'm saying nothing about the skill of his campaign that he ran. Only that it likely would have been a different campaign had popular vote been the rules.

Which is why you can't judge popular vote as the deciding factor when the rules dictated a different game.

Similar to a team losing a football game and trying to say after the fact that they should be declared winner because they gained the most yards.
Click to expand...

Bad analogy. I think it's more akin to a team losing despite having more points on the scoreboard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#47
#47
Grand Vol said:
You would hate Wyoming.

Far too conservative for your tastes.
Click to expand...

I have conservative friends. I have worked several places where I was the only liberal and we got along great. I love the outdoors and shooting guns and things like that. I would do fine thanks. If I was there it would be because I have a large amount of land so I wouldn't worry about other people. Plus as long as people treat me with respect they get the same in return regardless of political leanings.
 
#49
#49
Septic said:
Bad analogy. I think it's more akin to a team losing despite having more points on the scoreboard.
Click to expand...

No, it's more like the team with the most points on the board wins regardless of how many yards each team has on offense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#50
#50
Dr H Lecter said:
I'm in favor of the electoral college and would maintain that position regardless of who won the election. i don't blame Boxer for sponsoring the bill; she's from California. If I lived there, I'd probably be for abolishing it too.
Click to expand...

Precisely, the entire point is that narrowly defined interests (in this case urban population centers) can't ride roughshod over huge swaths of land/people that might have other interests. It's not supposed to happen that way...on purpose...for any particular interest regardless of Left or Right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top