|
|
| Should we have electoral college reform? |
| Yes- get rid of it completely and only have popular vote |
|
34% |
[ 19 ] |
| Keep it, but it could use some reforms |
|
12% |
[ 7 ] |
| No- keep it the way it is |
|
52% |
[ 29 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 55 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Occulis
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 13293
Location: Moral Relativity Central
|
 Posted: 11/04/04 - 13:15 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Khrath wrote: | | using big words usually baffles stupid people into submission though. |
Oh yeah, buddy? OH YEAH?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
 |
Silvermouse
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 11015
|
|
Posted: 11/04/04 - 14:05 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Just make it a popular vote. If farmers in Iowa complain, tell them to have more kids.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Therros
Rookie
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 68
|
|
Posted: 11/04/04 - 14:07 Post subject:
|
|
|
Yep, a pure democracy would be popular vote. We instead are a republic of states, which supports the 'theory' of an electoral collage.
I like the idea of splitting the votes states can give based on candidate and abolishing the 'winner take all' part of it, but this would require other changes. Maybe just as simple as lowering the number required to 'win' and not go to Congress, maybe more, I'm not an expert on the subject.
I agree though, even though we think things are decided by the 'swing states', each state DOES get to make it's statement, even it's 80% republican and 80% democrat. The issue with popular vote is that candidates would never leave the top four or five populated areas, and those in the heartland of America really would NOT matter at all.
I don't like the focus of politics on urban centers that such a system would cause.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
themy
Sir Postalot
Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 1153
|
|
Posted: 11/04/04 - 14:17 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Small states complain because they say they will get nobody compaigning in their small ass state. As it is now however, nobody will come to the big states because they always vote one way! Now who do you guys think should actually get the most political support? a small state with a relatively small population, or a big state with a huge population?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Brael
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 2122
|
|
Posted: 11/04/04 - 16:35 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
The problem with splitting EV's is that it basically has the same effect as simply using a popular vote. You just have every EV=50k peoples votes or whatever and unless a state is extremly solid one way or the other (say 95%+) it gets split the way the popular vote does, at which point you might as well not use the electoral college at all.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
themy
Sir Postalot
Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 1153
|
|
Posted: 11/04/04 - 16:47 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Brael wrote: | | The problem with splitting EV's is that it basically has the same effect as simply using a popular vote. You just have every EV=50k peoples votes or whatever and unless a state is extremly solid one way or the other (say 95%+) it gets split the way the popular vote does, at which point you might as well not use the electoral college at all. |
exactly, we need to do away with the system ^.^
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Conqueso
Luke Warm
Joined: 25 Jun 2003
Posts: 388
|
|
Posted: 11/04/04 - 16:48 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
You are arguing the same thing as getting rid of the Senate and only having a House of Representatives in Congress.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
themy
Sir Postalot
Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 1153
|
|
Posted: 11/04/04 - 16:50 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Conqueso wrote: | | You are arguing the same thing as getting rid of the Senate and only having a House of Representatives in Congress. |
That is for making laws, not for deciding who should preside over the whole country. You are argueing for keeping the country a loose confederate where the whole population doesn't matter, but rather what the majority of a state votes.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
