Electoral College: Do We Need It? (U.S. National)

Does it really have a purpose? I have never been an advocate of the electoral college. This only got stronger after Bush lost the popular vote twice and still got in office.

I have a few ideas of what to keep it and a bunch of why to drop it, but I want to know what you all think.

I'm not a big supporter of the American voting system (as many here know) However the electoral college over represents mid level and smaller states this way candidates almost always have to take their specific needs into account.

I don't consider it's the best system but I think a system in which the president is elected by popular vote only would decrease the power of the small and mid level states too much.

I could be wrong but I thought Bush won the popular vote in his second election.

Originally posted by Fire
I'm not a big supporter of the American voting system (as many here know) However the electoral college over represents mid level and smaller states this way candidates almost always have to take their specific needs into account.

I don't consider it's the best system but I think a system in which the president is elected by popular vote only would decrease the power of the small and mid level states too much.

I could be wrong but I thought Bush won the popular vote in his second election.

Anyway, "Electroal College really blows." -- Al Gore

Originally posted by lord xyz
Well, here's the other thing. In 2004 there was many complaints about votes being missed for Kerry and votes being added for Bush in virtually every state. The government admitted the tallies are unreliable and a few missed votes can is likely, but all of them giving Bush an advantage and the fact that before the elcetion they got in new more unreliable machines is very suspicious.

Anyway, "Electroal College really blows." -- Al Gore

I'm not saying the system isn't faulty or 'abused' by some, but that doesn't mean the idea behind it is bad.

Originally posted by Fire
I'm not saying the system isn't faulty or 'abused' by some, but that doesn't mean the idea behind it is bad.

I find it ironic how voting is literally one of the most fundamental parts of a democracy and we still manage to **** it up.

Originally posted by chithappens
Does it really have a purpose? I have never been an advocate of the electoral college. This only got stronger after Bush lost the popular vote twice and still got in office.

I have a few ideas of what to keep it and a bunch of why to drop it, but I want to know what you all think.

You should ask Hillary Clinton. She swore several years ago to lead the charge to get rid of it, after the 2000 election if I recall correctly. We still have it, though, don't we?

This is why she's leading in the polls. Because she's willing to say anything that incites one half over the other.

its pointlesss. let the people decide. and i say george bush should fight in iraq i do nt give a flying **** how old he is, time for george to see some war. lets let him stay in office to. see how long he lasts in the fronlines. texan dumass piece of shit. (i just hate him, not all southerners are retarded)

Originally posted by Devil King

This is why she's leading in the polls. Because she's willing to say anything that incites one half over the other.

What's another example of her doing this? I'm just curious because I really do not know her politics at all.

Originally posted by chithappens
What's another example of her doing this? I'm just curious because I really do not know her politics at all.

Without sounding like I don't know what I'm talking about, pretty much 90% of what she says.

That's not to say that a lot of what she says isn't right. She's just better at the game than most.

What do you think of her health plan for kids

I'd much rather we just had popular vote.

agreed

Originally posted by Naz
I'd much rather we just had popular vote.

Originally posted by Fire
I'm not a big supporter of the American voting system (as many here know) However the electoral college over represents mid level and smaller states this way candidates almost always have to take their specific needs into account.

But is that really the only way to make candidates to takes smaller states into account? I considered this but it does seem they would need to cater to those voters regardless for just total number.

Maybe, but I seriously doubt it. You have some states with a very LOW amount of people living in it.

I don't have a problem with the electoral college unless it defies the popular vote (as it did in 2000, and two times previously). Most people don't even know that it exists.

I think that there are problems with both the current system, as well as the idea of a national popular vote. Mostly in terms that it's unfair to the smaller states.

I'm not sure it makes a difference. The states are still going to hardly be represented.

True, but you will still have an overpresentation of smaller states which a popular vote will de facto not provide.

I suppose so but the bigger states have too much. Isn't Cali 50 points? I'm guessing, I really can't remember.