How the electoral process works.

[Kadagar_AV]

Ok, so I ask again... since no one really answered.

Why not one person = one vote?

Is two persons in a more populated state worth the same as one person in a less populated state in the US of A?

I just don't get it...

[Koga No Goshi]

Ok, so I ask again... since no one really answered.

Why not one person = one vote?

Is two persons in a more populated state worth the same as one person in a less populated state in the US of A?

I just don't get it...

It's complicated, Kad. I would be in favor of what you are saying, but it's not how our Constitution is set up. But it's a lot of factors from our history. One being the civil war, and the north and south trying to keep their power equal to avert violence. So there is disproportionate weight to many southern states and midwestern states despite their relatively sparse population. Just as one example.

There are not a lot of clear cut "oooooh... I see" reasons why it's "good" and why we use it. The reasons for using/defending it have changed over time as circumstances changed. Originally, as in at the founding of the U.S., it was written in to allow final veto power by the landowning elite to make sure that the "uneducated rabble" didn't vote themselves out of being a democracy by voting themselves in a popular dictator over and over. Electoral voters can commit "infidelity" and not vote for the same candidate as their district they represent did. The consequences for this I don't recall at the moment as this is a rather undusted topic of Constitutional study that isn't visited very often. But I know these electoral voters are not "voted in" nor in any way directly accountable to the voters themselves.

But, you will hear a variety of arguments as to why it's good and works. My cynical answer is, the major parties have adapted to this and all of their strategies revolve around it. I'd go further and say the Republicans are at a marked disadvantage carrying what looks like "most of the country" on a blue vs. red map... but they're largely the unpopulated, large, sparsely developed states in the center of the country. Population centers and major cities and industrialized areas TEND to lean blue.

[Kadagar_AV]

I would love to comment your post... Because I do honestly think the system is stupid.

However, you kind of highlighted the stupid areas, so there is really no need to:)


I will however write something for the trolls.

A)

Electoral voters can commit "infidelity" and not vote for the same candidate as their district they represent did

This is not very democratic, is it? I mean, The word is based on the old greek tradition, this rule goes completly against this tradition... Am I wrong?


B)

it was written in to allow final veto power by the landowning elite to make sure that the "uneducated rabble" didn't vote themselves out of being a democracy by voting themselves in a popular dictator over and over

Does not the constituation say no one can be president for more than two terms (8 years)?

So is this not a moot point?

C)

My cynical answer is, the major parties have adapted to this and all of their strategies revolve around it. I'd go further and say the Republicans are at a marked disadvantage carrying what looks like "most of the country" on a blue vs. red map... but they're largely the unpopulated, large, sparsely developed states in the center of the country. Population centers and major cities and industrialized areas TEND to lean blue.

Meaning a hillbillys vote is worth more than a Yale students?
Interesting form of voting system...

Again: I wrote interesting because these boards have rules about language used.

[Strike For The South]

Bush is a yale student

[ICantSpellDawg]

I like the Electoral College. I like living in a Republic with a transparent, but indirect election for President.

If you'd like to change the rules making it mandatory that electors vote for who their state has chosen to support - fine, but it is written in the Constitution that the individual states have jurisdiction over their electors.

Also - voter fraud is generally more likely in cites - therefore it is reasonable to say that city vote tallies are more likely to be skewed to a higher ratio than those in rural areas. The electoral college helps to protect people in suburban or rural states from larger states that can fudge their books more easily and with exponentially greater results.

[Kadagar_AV]

I like the Electoral College. I like living in a Republic with a transparent, but indirect election for President.

If you'd like to change the rules making it mandatory that electors vote for who their state has chosen to support - fine, but it is written in the Constitution that the individual states have jurisdiction over their electors.

Also - voter fraud is generally more likely in cites - therefore it is reasonable to say that city vote tallies are more likely to be skewed to a higher ratio than those in rural areas. The electoral college helps to protect people in suburban or rural states from larger states that can fudge their books more easily and with exponentially greater results.

Putin already offered to help the US elections fair... So why are you worried about fraud?





SFTS> That says something about the education system in the US, no?

Where I went to university, a dumb like him would have been kicked out long ago:)

[Strike For The South]

Putin already offered to help the US elections fair... So why are you worried about fraud?





SFTS> That says something about the education system in the US, no?

Where I went to university, a dumb like him would have been kicked out long ago:)

my. Bush is not dumb. The more you post the more I weep

[Kadagar_AV]

my. Bush is not dumb. The more you post the more I weep

That is true, he is anti-intellectual though.

[yesdachi]

Well the more I look at it the more I don’t think it matters, either the politician panders to the most populated states or the more populated cities. Gore almost won in 2000 by going after the populated cities, he only had 676 counties while Bush had 2,436 but Gore still had the popular vote.

The entire system is irritating me today after doing some reading. Gore won Michigan after winning Detroit and the same thing happened with our governor election. There are so many people in the big cities that it doesn’t matter what the rest of a state wants. Win 1 city in most states and you take the entire state, popular or electoral vote. It wouldn’t be an issue if we had a slam dunk leader run on either side.

[gaelic cowboy]

Also - voter fraud is generally more likely in cites - therefore it is reasonable to say that city vote tallies are more likely to be skewed to a higher ratio than those in rural areas. The electoral college helps to protect people in suburban or rural states from larger states that can fudge their books more easily and with exponentially greater results.

Eh are you joking rural areas are way more prone to voter fraud everyone knows each other and people often know if somone is away for weekend they can then impersonate the voter the rural nature of the place often means the person looking after the ballots is in on it too.
It doesnt happenas much now I hope but its just as prevalent in a rural area as urban.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Eh are you joking rural areas are way more prone to voter fraud everyone knows each other and people often know if somone is away for weekend they can then impersonate the voter the rural nature of the place often means the person looking after the ballots is in on it too.
It doesnt happenas much now I hope but its just as prevalent in a rural area as urban.

Well I guess we'd need to compare stats, but they are lacking. Was ACORN heavily operative in rural areas? I'd imagine not, because there weren't as many voters to impersonate. What i'm saying is that, although it is odd, cities have a nameless aspect. If someone came into a metropolitan voting office, how likely is it that you would know everyone and not be swamped by the sheer number of people you didn't know? There is nowhere near the level of accountability in cities. I can't remember the last time I went into a voting office and the woman didn't know my family and mention how they had just come in to vote befroe I got there.

Does anybody have any stats?

[Koga No Goshi]

Well I guess we'd need to compare stats, but they are lacking. Was ACORN heavily operative in rural areas? I'd imagine not, because there weren't as many voters to impersonate. What i'm saying is that, although it is odd, cities have a nameless aspect. If someone came into a metropolitan voting office, how likely is it that you would know everyone and not be swamped by the sheer number of people you didn't know? There is nowhere near the level of accountability in cities. I can't remember the last time I went into a voting office and the woman didn't know my family and mention how they had just come in to vote befroe I got there.

Does anybody have any stats?

I love these claims of voter fraud from concerned Republicans. Like we don't have such lovely gems as the Help America Vote (Republican) Act and ongoing efforts to limit voter turnout, purge new voter registrations, etc. Not to mention the attempts to get required national photo ID and all sorts of other methods basically meant to just inconvenience or increase the expense of the process of getting registered, which will overwhelmingly discourage the poor and minorities from voting. Not likely Republican voters.