is usa electoral college the worst system ever?

Started by jaden_2.07 pages
Originally posted by dadudemon
Edit - Best system is Rank Choice Voting with electronic voting. We'd have instant results. No waiting. And we'd get to exit the 2-party system the US currently has. No more paper ballots or in person ballots.

Which type of rank choice voting?

Democrats would have to do a flip flop from "dat populah vote" to "ranked choice".

Originally posted by Surtur
Democrats would have to do a flip flop from "dat populah vote" to "ranked choice".

We discussed this before. The losing side always complains about the voting system and the winning side always wants to keep it. Then any thoughts of changing it get forgotten about in the time until after the next election.

It would be a rare thing for a winning candidate to seek to change the system that just allowed their victory.

There's also nigh on zero attempts or funding given to try and explain and educate voters on alternative voting systems.

Considering five times in the history of the USA the candidate who got the most votes didn't win the Presidency, I think popular vote should be an important factor. I don't have a definite answer, but I think the two party system is too limiting for you. Up here in Canada, you can vote Center Right (Conservative), Center Left (Liberal), Far Left (New Democratic Party), and the Green Party. We even tolerate a federal French Canadian Separatist Party based in Quebec (Parti Quebecois)[I swear we are too tolerant of those traitors. 😒 ]

Considering the popular vote will have now gone to Dems for 16 consecutive years, they might be motivated to try. Without the Senate though, good luck. It would take a constitutional amendment.

So question as I'm politically ignorant. But why are there...2 voting...systems? A popular and then an electoral? And one of them doesn't even matter? Soo...why is there two?

Originally posted by Zenwolf
So question as I'm politically ignorant. But why are there...2 voting...systems? A popular and then an electoral? And one of them doesn't even matter? Soo...why is there two?

There is really only one that is used to determine elections: the electoral vote.

The popular vote exists because... well, it just does lol.... it's not actually relevant nor should it ever be in a country that is a Constitutional Republic as the United States is.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
There is really only one that is used to determine elections: the electoral vote.

The popular vote exists because... well, it just does lol.... it's not actually relevant nor should it ever be in a country that is a Constitutional Republic as the United States is.

And yet almost every other elected official here is chosen by popular vote, hmmmm 🙄

The popular vote in each state determines the electoral vote, so it is necessary and relevant. Adding the state popular votes together is basically trivia.

Newjak: So thankful that our founders were so much wiser and smarter than people like you.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Newjak: So thankful that our founders were so much wiser and smarter than people like you.
You do know I'm talking about here in America right.

Senators: Elected by popular vote in their district.

Same with the house of representatives.

Governors, Mayors, state representatives all popular vote.

Originally posted by Newjak
You do know I'm talking about here in America right.

Senators: Elected by popular vote in their district.

Same with the house of representatives.

Governors, Mayors, state representatives all popular vote.

Do you not see why that is? California ppl elect california ppl, ny ppl elect ny ppl, the nation elects a president and NY doesn't reflect north dakota or missouri etc.

Really it's very simple but don't get creative with it just stick to simple things.

It was never about the big state/small state thing. The Presidential Election is the ONLY national election, all others are state or local. In the late 1700s it could literally take months to get full results from the Presidential Election, the founding fathers wanted a faster way, so they came up with the Electoral college. The invention of the telegraph in the 1830s made it obsolete, but as it is hard to amend the constitution it was never changed.

The best argument for abolishing it is everybody's vote isn't equal under it and everybody's vote should be. We are Americans first and residents of our respective states second. The fact that the EC currently works for Republicans and against Democrats isn't the point. That could change in the future.

Everyone's vote should be equal, time to abolish the EC.

Originally posted by snowdragon
Do you not see why that is? California ppl elect california ppl, ny ppl elect ny ppl, the nation elects a president and NY doesn't reflect north dakota or missouri etc.

Really it's very simple but don't get creative with it just stick to simple things.

Um, if the president is elected by popular vote, the nation—collectively—is electing the president. Under the electoral college, states in which fewer people live, get to decide who is the president for states in which more people live. It is not hard to understand, even for the clinically simple.

Nah.

F*** the popular vote system. The electoral system is infinitely superior in every way. Nothing anyone in this thread has said has changed that fact nor is anything anyone says later on gonna change that.

I'll take the founders' great wisdom over any of you "electoral college sucks!" morons' so-called "wisdom" any day. The EC isn't going anywhere even if the dems get the House, the Senate, and the presidency.

Cry about it.

Great explanation of your beliefs there. Alabama you said?

Um, if the president is elected by popular vote, the nation—collectively—is electing the president.

OK

Under the electoral college, states in which fewer people live, get to decide who is the president for states in which more people live.

The house of repsentatives gives you plenty of representation, based on population. You are welcome.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Which type of rank choice voting?

I'm only aware of one type of rank choice voting.

Are you referring to things like "no majority forces next round" or "simple majority wins it all" and things like that?

Rank choice voting would be a great option for a system like the US

Originally posted by snowdragon
The house of repsentatives gives you plenty of representation, based on population. You are welcome.

The Senate gives you plenty of representation based on geography. You are welcome. See how dumb you sound?