Informal Survey: The Electoral College

Home Forums Politics Informal Survey: The Electoral College

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #596299

    Here is my question:

    Do you support the Electoral College in its current form?

    Do you support…

    a. The Electoral College as it currently is

    b. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

    c. A Constitutional amendment changing the method of election to a national popular vote

    d. An alternate solution (explain)

    As the originator of this thread, I hereby place my vote for choice a. As a states’ rights proponent, I believe that, being as we are a federal and not unitary republic, each State must have its own say.

    #759237
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    D. An (slightly) alternate solution.

    I like the fact that the presidential campaign is, in essence, fifty-one smaller campaigns. So, I don’t mind the theory behind the current set-up.

    The one small change I would make is getting rid of the actual electors. Instead of electing a slate of electors, have each state count for a number of points (calculated the same way that the current Electoral Votes are calculated). The winner is the first candidate that gets a majority of the points.

    What does this do? It gets rid of potential faithless electors (electors who vote for candidates other than those whom they are pledged to vote for).

    The Wolf

    #759238
    commonsense
    Participant

    personally i think they should abolish the electoral college and let each vote count. with computers today there is no reason we cannot have the actual popular vote.

    #759239
    gavra_at_work
    Participant

    D: State legistators should vote for their state’s choice, as well as their choice for senator (after the election).

    #759240
    Bowwow
    Participant

    D- Make the electoral count similar to the way most state primary delagates are awarded. For example, if NY has 34 electoral votes they should be awarded proportion to the state’s popular vote. Let’s say the democrat beats the republican 55% -45% the electoral votes should be divided 18 – 16. As a New York Republican, my vote does not really count…..

    Just my two cents

    #759241
    A23
    Participant

    B or C. Electoral college is ridiculous.

    #759242

    i also think its ridiculous that there has to be a special college to teach people how to elect someone. you just use common sense, why do you need a degree?

    #759243
    Josh31
    Participant

    No Apikorsus has ever been taught in the Electoral College.

    It is remarkably free of Pritzus.

    There are no coed dorms.

    #759244
    toto
    Member

    The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

    Every vote, everywhere would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Elections wouldn’t be about winning states. Every vote, everywhere would be counted for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states.

    Since World War II, a shift of a handful of votes in one or two states would have elected the second-place candidate in 4 of the 13 presidential elections. Near misses are now frequently common. There have been 6 consecutive non-landslide presidential elections. 537 popular votes won Florida and the White House for Bush in 2000 despite Gore’s lead of 537,179 popular votes nationwide. A shift of 60,000 votes in Ohio in 2004 would have defeated President Bush despite his nationwide lead of over 3 Million votes.

    The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes–enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would thus guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

    The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.

    In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support is strong among Republican voters, Democratic voters, and independent voters, as well as every demographic group surveyed in virtually every state, partisan, and demographic group surveyed in recent polls in closely divided battleground states: CO – 68%, FL – 78%, IA 75%,, MI – 73%, MO – 70%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM– 76%, NC – 74%, OH – 70%, PA – 78%, VA – 74%, and WI – 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE – 75%, ID – 77%, ME – 77%, MT – 72%, NE 74%, NH – 69%, NV – 72%, NM – 76%, OK – 81%, RI – 74%, SD – 71%, UT – 70%, VT – 75%, WV – 81%, and WY – 69%; in Southern and border states: AR – 80%,, KY- 80%, MS – 77%, MO – 70%, NC – 74%, OK – 81%, SC – 71%, VA – 74%, and WV – 81%; and in other states polled: CA – 70%, CT – 74%, MA – 73%, MN – 75%, NY – 79%, OR – 76%, and WA – 77%.

    The bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers, in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR, CT, DE, DC, ME, MI, NV, NM, NY, NC, and OR, and both houses in CA, CO, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA, RI, VT, and WA. The bill has been enacted by DC, HI, IL, NJ, MD, MA, and WA. These 7 states possess 74 electoral votes — 27% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.

    http://www.NationalPopularVote.com

    #759245

    WolfishMusings:

    I’d agree with your plan, except, as UCLA professor Daniel Lowenstein explains in http://bit.ly/f0TA3B in his defense of the electoral institution, a candidate may die or become ineligible sometime in between November and the meeting of the electors, as happened in the 1872 election. While Democratic candidate Horace Greely only was pledged 66 votes, if it would have been he and not Grant who won, it would be problematic.

    toto:

    The enormous problem with the National Popular Vote is that let’s say it is passed by the 2011-2013 State legislatures. Then, in the 2016 election, New Jersey’s population votes Democratic but the country votes Republican. The problem is that by the national vote deciding the State’s electors, the State itself – the people and/or the incumbent legislature – has no say. Such a scenario is completely unconstitutional.

    #759246
    deiyezooger
    Member

    “personally i think they should abolish the electoral college and let each vote count. with computers today there is no reason we cannot have the actual popular vote. “

    The electoral college has noting to do with the inability to count

    votes, its about state rights. And every vote is counted within each state.

    #759247
    AinOhdMilvado
    Participant

    Many years ago, I actually had an athletic scholarship to the Electoral College (for their water polo team) but alas, the schedule irreparably clashed with my night Kolel, so I had to give it up.

    Sometimes I still wonder if I could have had a very rewarding career in pro water polo….

    #759248
    toto
    Member

    The National Popular Vote compact does not abolish the Electoral College. It simply reforms the method of choosing the presidential electors so that they reflect the choice of all the people of the United States, instead of the choice of the people on a state-by-state basis using the winner-take-all rule.

    The same presidential electors would be available under the National Popular Vote compact to replace the dead, disabled, or discredited President-Elect as would be available under the current system.

    Neither of the two most important features of the current system of electing the President (namely, universal suffrage, and the 48 state-by-state winner-take-all method) are in the U.S. Constitution. Neither was the choice of the Founders when they went back to their states to organize the nation’s first presidential election.

    In 1789, in the nation’s first election, the people had no vote for President in most states, only men who owned a substantial amount of property could vote, and only three states used the state-by-state winner-take-all method to award electoral votes.

    The winner-take-all method is not entitled to any special deference based on history or the historical meaning of the words in the U.S. Constitution. The current 48 state-by-state winner-take-all method (i.e., awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in a particular state) is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, the debates of the Constitutional Convention, or the Federalist Papers. The actions taken by the Founding Fathers make it clear that they never gave their imprimatur to the winner-take-all method.

    The constitutional wording does not encourage, discourage, require, or prohibit the use of any particular method for awarding the state’s electoral votes.

    As a result of changes in state laws enacted since 1789, the people have the right to vote for presidential electors in 100% of the states, there are no property requirements for voting in any state, and the state-by-state winner-take-all method is used by 48 of the 50 states. States can, and frequently have, changed their method of awarding electoral votes over the years.

    #759249

    Actually, toto, I don’t think you read my response to you.

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.