ELECTORAL COLLEGE
-
The debate has started again as to whether the US Constitution should be amended in order to change the presidential election process. Some promote
eliminating the Electoral College in favor of a direct popular vote for president while others believe the Electoral College should remain unchanged. Just as compromise solved the initial problems of the framers so it is that compromise can solve this problem. The solution is to change the electoral votes to electoral points and reward each candidate a percentage of points based on the percentage of popular votes received in each state.
This would eliminate the "winner take all" system thus allowing for all the votes to count. A voter is more apt to believe their vote counted when a percentage of popular votes are taken into account rather than the "all or nothing" system currently in existence. Further, this new system would integrate the desire for a popular vote for president with the need for the individual states to determine who actually gets elected.
As for political primaries the number of delegates awarded in each state should be determined by the percentage of votes won by each candidate.
For 2016 multiplying the percentage of votes each candidate received {in each state} times the number of electoral votes {in each state} results in the following: Clinton 256.985 and Trump 253.482.
-
Go suck Hillary's cock.
-
Democrats are reactionary morons that think like 1 week in advance, Remember when filibusters were out? Now they want the filibuster back because ofc now they're mot in power. So instead of just confronting the fact hillary lost because of her dirty shit, they want to change some rules or some shit and them it'll bite them right in the ass next election.
-
Democrats are reactionary morons that think like 1 week in advance, Remember when filibusters were out? Now they want the filibuster back because ofc now they're mot in power. So instead of just confronting the fact hillary lost because of her dirty shit, they want to change some rules or some shit and them it'll bite them right in the ass next election.
Democrats are reactionary morons that think like 1 week in advance, Remember when filibusters were out? Now they want the filibuster back because ofc now they're mot in power. So instead of just confronting the fact hillary lost because of her dirty shit, they want to change some rules or some shit and them it'll bite them right in the ass next election.
Damn...You said something I agree with? A Christmas miracle.
Though everybody is a reactionary moron not just Democrats
-
It was the end of the world when both Trump and Obama won
-
I can see why the democrats want the electoral college done away with because twice now (recently) they have lost a presidential election having won the popular vote. Of course they would want to get rid of it, it doesn't benefit them. But it was put in place as part of the country being set up as a republic and not a true democracy by the founders. With the demographics today I look for the forseeable future any reasonably close election won by a republican they will win it by the electoral college and not the popular vote. Large heavily democratic states like California and New York run up the margins so large now it is bound to happen. While not happening often before it will be happening now more frequently.
If the shoe were on the other foot it probably would be the republicans wanting to do away with the electoral college. It is a tough pill to swallow to win the popular vote and lose the election.
-
Oh well dont like it? Go start your own country.
-
-
The day 3/4 of states agree to be nothing more than California's bitch will never come.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
California and New York already deride us as "flyover country" but now they want us to bend the knee to them? Fat fucking chance.
-
I think that the electoral college is overall not a bad idea, but it could use a bit of tweaking. As it stands, the number of electoral votes each state has is based off of that state's number of Representatives in the House (population), which allows for candidates to avoid campaigning in lower population states in favor of those with the most electoral votes.
I think that we could keep the Electoral College, except that instead of basing the votes off of population, we could base it similarly to how the Senate is set up: Each state would get two electoral votes each, with Washington D.C. having one electoral vote, for a total of 101. The candidate with a simple majority of electoral votes would win, and the individual states could choose how they award their 2 electoral votes. With all states having the same number of votes, that would force candidates to actually go out and campaign in more states instead of just focusing on a few.
-
actually, I have to think about that. Offhand, I think it's a great idea - gets rid of the influence of the mega-populated
giant cities like NY, Chicago, etc.
-
After further reading, I found that the Electoral College is based off of both the House and Senate numbers, but I did find another interesting idea from the Cato Institute: https://www.cato.org/policy-report/marchapril-2013/should-we-reform-electoral-college
-
-
It's great just how it is.
It's great just how it is.
I agree but I am very much against the democrat party and the electoral college has cost them two elections in the last 16 years. If the shoe were on the other foot and the republicans were winning the popular vote and losing in the electoral college it would be hard to resist not wanting to change it.
Because it is almost impossible to do away with the electoral college some democrat states are trying to get around it by signing on to an electoral college compact to give the electors to the winner of the popular vote. The article I read talked about how this would benefit all the states
...I love it when they try to insult our intelligence...there is a reason only blue states have signed on to this. -
I guess it really depends on whose ox is being al gored.
But beyond that apart from political allegiance it really doesn't seem right but New York Chicago and Los Angeles should run the entire country.
Look at the tiny blue splotches on the map interspersed among the red.
WSS
-
The day 3/4 of states agree to be nothing more than California's bitch will never come.
The day 3/4 of states agree to be nothing more than California's bitch will never come.
His proposal (the same proposal many others on here have made) would weaken California...
-
I think it's a good idea. But you'll just get some combination of
"Stupid liberal!"
"We can't ever change the Constitution!"
"You'll never get the votes!"
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
"scary dark people".
-
I think it's a good idea. But you'll just get some combination of
"Stupid liberal!"
"We can't ever change the Constitution!"
"You'll never get the votes!"
I think it's a good idea. But you'll just get some combination of
"Stupid liberal!"
"We can't ever change the Constitution!"
"You'll never get the votes!"
Skeptics Realists.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login