If You could Change one thing...

**Hooahguy** · 10-17-2012, 05:25

Originally Posted by rvg

I would abolish the Electoral College. In this day and age it's just downright silly.

I dont know, wouldnt then politicians just concentrate on the high-population centers?
Looking at this map it seems like the higher population densities are on the east and west coasts. While its undeniable that there are more people in those areas, but Id say that the Electoral College is there to ensure that the candidates go to all the states and not just the important ones with the most people. I mean, without the electoral college, who would go to Wyoming? Or North and South Dakota? Or really anywhere in the midwest? Id say that the Electoral College ensures that all states have some importance to an election.

A better system would be the Alternative Voting system, and then instead of the 270 to win, it would just be the majority of the electoral votes since we can assume that there would be more than two main candidates.

**a completely inoffensive name** · 10-17-2012, 05:45

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

I dont know, wouldnt then politicians just concentrate on the high-population centers?

No, they would not. If you combine the top 50 most populous cities together, you don't even get 30% of the population. At that point you are talking about "high-population" centers like....Spokane as well. It just doesn't follow. The vast majority of people live in suburban areas which can be either left leaning or right leaning or very contested.

**Hooahguy** · 10-17-2012, 05:55

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

No, they would not. If you combine the top 50 most populous cities together, you don't even get 30% of the population. At that point you are talking about "high-population" centers like....Spokane as well. It just doesn't follow. The vast majority of people live in suburban areas which can be either left leaning or right leaning or very contested.

Sorry I should have clarified. By centers I meant states. My point is that candidates wouldnt pay attention to everyone.

**a completely inoffensive name** · 10-17-2012, 06:14

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Sorry I should have clarified. By centers I meant states. My point is that candidates wouldnt pay attention to everyone.

Hmmm, no still doesn't hold. The most populous states have wildly different philosophies and interests. Say you wanted to cater to Californians in general because California has the most people in it. You quickly realize the problem that the current California government has, nobody can agree on anything!

Besides, by focusing on the populous states, you are going to have a handful of states most of which want to go in different directions. How are going to cater to both New Yorkers and Texans? To both Californians and Floridans?

Even if we assume, that the candidates will focus on the most populous states, that is still for the better because now, there will be about 6-8 states to jockey over rather than the what....two states of Ohio and Florida that have decided the past 4 elections now?