223
Majority of Americans continue to favor moving away from Electoral College
(www.pewresearch.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
223 points (91.4% liked)
conservative
920 readers
7 users here now
A community to discuss conservative politics and views.
Rules:
-
No racism or bigotry.
-
Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn't provide the right to personally insult others.
-
No spam posting.
-
Submission headline should match the article title (don't cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
-
Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
-
No trolling.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It was designed to be unequal on purpose. The electoral is what keeps us from being ruled by the masses. It should not change.
What a convincing argument of its continued existence.
It doesn't do that, all it does is give people in swing states a bigger voice than anybody else, which is a terrible thing for our country.
Everybody should have a voice, instead it's just a handful of people in a small set of states.
Doesn’t sound like you’re a conservative or believe in a republic.
A popular vote would mean the costal areas would have the largest vote and rural areas would get ignored.
It would quickly lead to a breakup up of the union.
I'm not.
I do. But ours is in need of reform to make it a better republic that more accurately reflects the will of the people.
That's already what happens under the electoral college.
And every single other electected position in government goes by what is essentially a popular vote, if this was such a problem, all other positions would also be electoral college.
The U.S. is the only country that uses an electoral college. All other countries that exist, and are democratic republics use a popular vote and they're just fine.
If a popular vote for presidency would cause the destruction of this country, why hasn't popular vote for all other positions done so already? It's because this is just fearmongering based on zero evidence. Actually it's worse, because there is plenty of evidence it wouldn't do this because of the aforementioned other countries that use popular vote.
Not sure you understand what a republic.
Every other vote is at a state level. What other position is elected nationally?
They’re not fine. They’re ok. America is unique and why we are the only super power.
We only do popular votes at the state level.
The level at which the election runs is not what I am getting at.
And they don't destroy our country despite our states having a rural/urban divide. So our federal elections should be no different.
The level makes a difference. We are a combination of states.
Popular vote for the president would destroy our country. It’s not going to happen unless we are ready for the nation to break up. The smaller states will leave.
No it doesn't. If a popular vote would destroy this country because of the imbalance between rural/urban areas, then it would have already done so on a state level.
You’ve yet to make compelling argument as to why we would change a system that works perfectly.
I've said it in several other places in this thread.
All votes should be counted equally.
It doesn't work perfectly.
It makes it so that if you don't live in a swing state, your vote is effectively meaningless. If you're a democrat in a heavy republican state, then your vote will never go towards supporting your candidate of choice. If you're a republican in a heavy republican state, the same applies. If you're a republican in a heavy republican state, your vote also doesn't do shit, because your state was going to vote republican anyway. Unless you're in a swing state, the current system basically ignores you.
It also makes it so presidential candidates only ever cater towards swing states, and the cities within those swing states. All the rest of the states are basically ignored.
The electoral collage prevents third party candidates from ever having a chance because it is inherently a FPTP system, which inherently biases a two party system, which is a huge part of why our country is so fucked right now.
And on top of all of that, there have been several elections in which the candidate with the most votes has lost. That is a broken system.
That isn't a compelling argument. It isn't even a logical argument.
That isn't a broken system. That is a system working as designed. You may not understand the perfection of the electoral college but you've yet to create a compelling reason to change it. The flaws you are mentioning are the strengths of the system.
What you want to do would require a constitutional amendment to change it and the smaller states would not allow that to happen for the reasons I have explained. It would negate their vote and we a government of 50 states, which means the states want to keep their power.
We are not a democracy, as our founding fathers understood the flaws. There is a reason we are still ticking while other nations have fallen or never prospered the way we have and part of that is by not allowing changes on a whim. The system was meant to move slowly and methodically. It was meant to have checks and balances.
While it isn't perfect, it is a pretty damn good system. The most popular person shouldn't be the one to win. It should be the one selected by the states through the electoral college. It allows the states to have a say in who becomes president.
Now if we could just remove the voting rights from poor people, we would be able to get this country back on track.
Popular doesn't mean good. Joe won the popular vote and now we are all paying for his incompetence with rampant inflation. We can't survive another four years of having such a popular president.
You didn't ask for a syllogism.
Then it is a terrible system. I don't care what synonym for bad you think is most accurate here. The electoral college is inferior.
The founding fathers were not gods. They intended for the constitution to change over time as things become outdated, and this is one of those things. The president elected president should most accurately represent the people, and we don't get that with the current system.
This is a separate tangent, so I won't bother addressing it.
We are a democratic republic.
Democratic - we vote
Republic - for representatives
This is grade school levels of understanding that you are missing out on.
https://www.npr.org/2022/09/10/1122089076/is-america-a-democracy-or-a-republic-yes-it-is
It ain't the electoral collage that got us here.
An electoral college doesn't have anything to do with allowing changes on a whim, or moveing slowly and methodically. All it is, is a way of counting votes. Counting the votes in a more accurate method doesn't change the speed of the process. And you can still have checks and balances under a popular vote.
Are you joking, or are you actually this misinformed/malicious/mislead?
Never said it did.
He won because of the electoral collage, because of how it forces a two party system. Joe Biden is the result of your oh so fond electoral college. If we had something that actually elected officials that we all like (see STAR voting), Joe Biden would never have become president.
No I’m very serious. Allowing the plebes to vote has done a lot of damage to the country. They just vote to take from others. That isn’t how to run a country.
You keep saying there is something wrong with the system when there isn’t. It works as designed and it won’t change in our lifetime.
The voters don’t matter as much as the state. That’s how the system was designed and works.
Also it isn’t a rented. It while require an amendment and it won’t happen for the reasons I’ve described. The little states won’t want to lose their power. As such it’s a thought exercise at best
We have the senate, which is needed to pass any law and gives equal representation to the states. We have the supreme court, which can strike down any law as unconstitutional. We have plenty of checks on mob rule without disenfranchising a gigantic swath of voters.
So instead we get minority rule. Soooooo much better when the small number of loonies get to derail a functional government with a temper tantrum that 'the masses' want.
It's a badly designed system, and claiming it's like this on purpose doesn't negate how bad the system is. Also, we should not be chained to ideas that came around 250 years ago when other people have improved on the idea and made it less shitty.
Not at all. We are ruled by the states.
The system is fine. It allows all states to have some say in the process.
Who gives a fuck about the states' vote? States are just containers for people, and an excuse that the minority loves to use to explain how they get to rule over majority.
The electoral college is an undemocratic and broken system that makes my vote in a small state worth more than your vote in a bigger state.
A vote is a vote, and only losers need to remove the vote from the masses to be able to win. It's literally the only reason there's been a Republican president since H.W., and it's no surprise they're desperate to keep around the undemocratic voting method that allows them to steal elections they didn't win.
Wow fascist much?
States are entities under the government with their own laws.
We are not a democracy fascist. We are a constitutional republic. The founding fathers had no interest in a rule by the masses nor do i.
Maybe you should learn the history of our government and why it was designed the way it was rather than pushing weird fascist ideology that states don’t matter and only the federal government counts.
We’d break as a nation quickly under your ideology.
Lol, you don't know what words mean and are just trying to sound cool. ProTip: just because you don't like something doesn't make it fascist.
But I would love to see your melted brain actually explain how 'every citizen having an equal vote' resembles fascistic tendencies like only protecting the in group, but that would require an actual understanding of fascism.
They also didn't want anyone other than landholding white men to vote, but we've realized that's a stupid idea. The founding fathers didn't give you a holy document to be reversed, they wrote a framework they expected us to modify.
Bold of you to think I don't understand why they did what they did and still think it's a bad system. Also, again with the uneducated claim of fascism.
And you really need to work on your reading comprehension, I said the states' votes don't matter, because I think every citizen should vote, not land.
Ahahaha, you clearly don't see how the nation is breaking down around us under the current system.
So you don’t want democracy?
God no. I want a constitutional republic. That’s what America is.
Personally I wish we’d have more restrictions around voting. The old days of property owners being able to vote is a good idea. I’m not a fan of the poor voting.
Then why don't we institute the "
" It's not "rule by the masses" but much more representative of what the population wants.
Or why don’t we just keep the system that works and has kept the country running. Why change something when it works as designed ?
This argument could unironically have been used to support the continued use of gas chambers in Nazi Germany.
Just because something is "working" as designed doesn't mean we should keep using it. If the design is terrible then it needs replaced.
Godwins law.
The design is fine. It keeps us stable as a nation.
Also it’ll never pass. 3/4 of the states will never approve it. It’s a non-starter