Fixing the Electoral System

HornHuskerDad

HornHuskerDad

5,000+ Posts
Interesting article on the American electoral system - The Link.I noted especially item 3 on the Electoral College. IMO, this will never happen. First, it would require the smaller states to give up significant power, and since the change would require an Amendment, it won't happen. Second, it would invite large-scale vote fraud. Considering the huge backlash in Texas against the Voter ID requirement, I doubt it would be supported on a national scale.

I personally support the Voter ID requirement. The basic concept is to see that all those legally entitled to vote, and only those legally entitled to vote, get to vote.

Back to the Electoral College issue - Nebraska apportions electoral votes by Congressional district, with the two other votes going to the overall winner. I wouldn't mind seeing that as a requirement - it would tend to dilute the "winner-take-all" power and attraction of the larger states (California, New York, and so on).

Thoughts?

HHD
hookem.gif
texasflag.gif
coolnana.gif
ousucksnana.gif
 
A popular vote in place of the electoral system puts the emphasis on where the people live. All other formats disenfranchise millions of voters.

I think a Republican in New York is a waste as is a Democrat in Utah- about 40% of the voters in this country knowingly vote into a trash can. Only a popular vote fixes this. Votes only matter in swing states with the current system.
 
i disagree. i think the electoral college was incredibly prescient and ingenious. if we went to a popular vote format, then presidential candidates would mostly campaign in the 20 largest cities and leave behind much of the country. i think the electoral college is a brilliant solution to that issue.
 
Agree with MOP. The Electoral College is much better than a straight popular vote, which would essentially allow California and New York to control everything. The states have the right to determine how their electors are allocated.

What is broken, in my opinion, is our primary system. We need a better method of generating truly qualified candidates.
 
if we went to a popular vote format, then presidential candidates would mostly campaign in the 20 largest cities and leave behind much of the country. i think the electoral college is a brilliant solution to that issue.

Lol. Because we all know politicians now don't focus on CA, NY, or other high-electoral vote states.
 
The unfounded fear that politicians would focus on NY and California is silly.

First of all- Texas has more people than New York. Secondly- NO ONE ever spends time in NY or California or Texas or Illinois when running- and that is the point. Those 4 states together have about 100MM Americans- and we never see candidates before the election. Talk about people getting ignored- I don't think it makes sense that you can have 4 GOP candidates running across the 3rd most populated city in Iowa or New Hampshire but ignoring Houston, Los Angeles and Chicago. I want politicians where the people are- if you're worried about someone giving attention to LA or NY- that's a separate, personal issue- because any politician would be dumb if they also ignored Dallas, Austin, Denver, Kansas City etc- where the people are.

What mop meant to say was ingenious was the Senate/House system which gives disproportionate and proportionate representation to states, and their population. The electoral system unfortunately evolved to ignore half of the population.

HornHusker- I think voter fraud is a separate issue from the electoral system. I am ok with voters presenting an SS card or drivers license etc to prevent repeat voting.
 
"presidential candidates would mostly campaign in the 20 largest cities and leave behind much of the country"

They already do this. At least the 20 largest cities in swing states, which is even worse than the 20 largest cities in my opinion.

Voter fraud in direct popular vote does not outweigh voter fraud in the EC. Pretend that ACORN could generate 1 million popular votes in favor of the democratic candidate. If these votes are spread out around the country, it still might not be enough to win the national election. But pretend that ACORN could generate a couple thousand votes in a swing state and give those 20+ electoral votes to their candidate... that has more power to swing it (or make the election seem more "decisive").

I think the states that are entrenched in the EC system (REALLY red or REALLY blue) like having their little media party on election night showing that their state is soooo definitive and soooo important in the grand scheme of things. And the swing states like being the center of attention, so even if they flip flop between red and blue, at least they get the candidates on TVs and in the local ice cream shops. Direct popular vote would negate these psychological impacts.

To address the column:
1. I love the idea of national primary day, although it would be tough to tally everything in this age of immediacy.
2. I don't like the top-two primary. Let's disenfranchise more people who don't call themselves red or blue!
3. All for elimination of the EC.
4. Gerrymandering has little to do with national presidential elections, although I've never been a fan of it. I'd love to see what would happen if states would go back to an "at large" system for the House of Reps. Candidates would actually have to answer to the issues rather than face near-automatic reelection.
 
First of all- Texas has more people than New York.

Is Texas in play? That works both ways of course, but it's incredibly silly to think that the same thing isn't being done now in the electoral system (focusing on just a few key states).
 
Texas would be in play if it was a popular vote- not electoral. Suddenly everyone becomes relevant in Texas, Illinois, Massachusetts etc.

(I have a good friend in Mass who is a bigtime Republican- he couldn't be more for a popular vote.)
 
It would be interesting to use the Nebraska method.

As it stands now (and already mentioned) if you're an X in a heavily Non-X state, then your vote is for all practical purposes worthless; it doesn't count for anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top