Should the President be elected by direct popular vote, or the current electoral college system (winner take all in each state)? (UserQ)
The purpose of the electoral college was so that illiterate people could vote during the 18th century. It made sense then. Different kind of transportation, different kind of media, and a very different kind of population. It's simply not needed now.
He's the leader of the American people. The Vice-President is the leader of Congress. Let states determine who gets that spot then.
An why would getting rid of the electoral college be violating the issue of republicanism? You still have the congress and local/state governments. Wouldn't it make sense to have a direct popular vote for President when that President is suppose to represent the PEOPLE, not the STATES?
Lbrtrn no only a few states have laws saying electoral votes must be in accordance with popular votes. In most states popular votes mean nothing.
The Super Bowl analogy is trash. It's majorly oversimplifying the issue of democracy and voting. We're not talking about a sports game.
We are 'the United States'.
Not 'the State'.
It's the very foundation of our name, that we are a group of states that have chosen to unite, into one Republic. We did not choose to become one single Democracy. We can't drop the electoral college without forgetting who we are!
Throw party politics into this, and you have a situation I do not very much like.
There is currently no individual right to vote for President democratically. The Constitution simply says that the state legislature has the right to determine how they determine electors. Meaning the state could simply choose the electors without any vote and it would be perfectly Constitutional.
Do the electoral college and give the winner of the popular vote 225 making it a de-facto popular vote election.
DOm333.. the system is OUTDATED as I said earlier.
rainfire, we aren't a Democracy, we are a Republic of republics, and each of those republcs has rights.
Our current voting system is just one example of many of how messed up our government is.
The old electorial college is out dated,it worked back in the 1700-1800s when communications were slow.But today with everything so fast we don't need it now.
Every American should have a vote that is considered equally against all others. My vote should mean just as much as someone in another state. It seems like electoral college gives too much power to the separate parties, not the people.
It just doesn't make sense to me that we call ourselves a democracy and have this idea of 'one man, one vote,' but the votes of people in underpopulated states count more than the votes of people in large states. A popular vote for president would return us to one man one vote.
What is next? does this mean that who scores the most points yet loses all their football games will be the Super Bowl champion too?
It's hysterical that someone is complaining that an election was not fair, when all elections are not fair. Is it ever fair that 51% of the people tell the other 49% what they can do with their property?
So much for “one person one vote”. This is way worse than any voter fraud we have ever seen — can you imagine the uproar if we found out that people from certain areas were voting three times instead of once?
You can't say that popular vote won't work, everyone is elected by popular vote except for the President of the United States.
The power is to the people not the electoral college. You have power to vote in and out of office. Exercise your right and make a difference!
We have a good system that works. Why change it
Direct election "mobocracy" is exactly what our founding fathers warned us about. It doesnt work.. We are a Republic, not a Democracy
@DR Hawkeye this isn't a football game dumba$$. I hate when people use stupid analogies that have nothing to do with the topic.
Also people often favor the popular vote because it adds a certain level of individualism that they don't feel from the electoral college.
I feel that if the popular vote were to be ratified there would be much more corruption in the election system.
The best analogy I've heard for this debate is, "Should the team that makes it to the Superbowl be based on the number of points they've accumulated throughout the season (popular vote) or the number of games won (electoral)."
Has anyone here finished high school!!!! Direct Democracy's don't wouldnt work because (drum roll please) IT doesnt work for a reason! Although this isn't that still EVERYONE has a different opinion! If it was a direct peoples vote then you all could vote Tony into office. Itdon't work. EC ATW!!!
Locke: democrats won, huh? Did they win in 2004 also?
Why wouldn't politicians want a popular vote?
Likely to cater to the rural population if he can win all of or over instead of just a state-full. The office of president is too important to not be a representation of the people. The electoral college is just one example of what's wrong with our constitution, government of, by, and for the people
Because the president doesn't represent Texas and California and new York. The president represents the American people. That is who they should campaign to win. The popular system allows presidents to target the different groups of Americans in their considerations. A candidate is much more...
The mindset that Republicans make up California by getting small states like KS is complete bunk. Texas is worth over 50 votes and guess which way it always votes? The small states have low representation now. A popular system is far better because then the candidates aren't campaigning for states..
@Frankluntz: the problem with your statement is that democrats DID win the 2000 election,
But remember, the EC also have their political affiliations as well. So each states may vary based on the majority amount of dema or reps.
Of course the electoral college are made up by educated political analysts. But whats the use of the average citizen having to take the time to go out and vote when the popular vote wont even really matter upon a candidates victory.
Oh that's right. Republicans don't want illegal immigrants voting. Those jerks!
The Democrats wanted the electronic ballots and then complained when they lost the 2000 election.
Like what laws? and a Jobs bill that both your Democrats and the Republicans are voting against.
Should we eliminate state borders, governors, senators, and representatives as well?
Can't believe we're not discussing the recent voting laws put in place by Republicans.
They promised jobs, but instead of passing jobs bills they're passing bills that make it more difficult for those that normally vote Democratic to vote.
The electoral college was designed with the idea that every citizen didn't have access to information to make an informed vote as its base. Now whether or not people actually make informed choices is a different matter- but we all have access to that information. Thus, it is outdated.
Was going to say popular then remembered places like Oregon wouldn't count for a thing. Same for Alaska and Montana.
The electoral college helps to prevent candidates from concentrating campaign efforts in the cities of their base states to simply maximize turnout. Don't forget we are the United States, not a united state.
The framers were right to set up a system that prevented a 50+1 majority from ruling over the massive minority.
9teufel- uh, if you trust the individual man, do you trust him to lead a bunch of mindless sheep?
I trust the individual man, but as soon as they form groups they become mindless sheep willing at follow any idiot.
badbadber- i think the problem is when the president has to weigh the needs of smaller states vs bigger states. if the smaller states are irrelevant in elections, then they are irrelevant in policy making too
I don't know about you guys, but I don't need the candidates to campaign in my region to know where they stand. I don't pay any attention to the ads they run, either. Modern communications allows me to follow them wherever they go and speak.
Yes but I'm alot of cases the popular vote of a state is decided by the larger cities and that leaves rural people in the dust.