Alternative To The Electoral College

[RetiredGySgt]

I don't particularly agree or disagree with the concept. But no it wouldn't take an Amendment. State legislatures determine allocation of EC Electors and they don't have to use winner take all.

WW

best they can do is by district

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

you don't like the electoral college? Create an amendment and get rid of it. Or just quit whining like a 5-year-old that didn't get his way.

Shut up jerk. We don't have to pass an amendment to discuss it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I get the point of the EC.

However, it's inception was tonpretect slave owners and to keep a person like Trump out of office.

The first raison d'etre is obsolete, and clearly it has been a spectacular failure on the second reason.

 

[WorldWatcher]

best they can do is by district

Actually they (States) can allocate their EC votes as they wish as long as it's prior to the election. (That being one of the rules Congress has put in place in the United States Code per Article I, Section 4.)

States don't even have to technically have general elections for the Electoral College. Under Article II, Section I, Para 2 - the legislature has full authority to allocate EC Electors. They can even use the national vote as the standard.

WW

 

[task0778]

No, they’d still get one vote per voter, just like anywhere else- including urban areas

One vote is one vote

We have one vote is one vote now. What you want is for the densely populated areas to determine who the next president is, which essentially minimizes the rural vote and that is no more fair than what we have now with the EC. And the reason you want it your way is because your party would benefit, since it currently owns the big population centers. What you really want is not more democracy, what you want is a one-party, democrat-run gov't.

 

[rightwinger]

We have one vote is one vote now. What you want is for the densely populated areas to determine who the next president is, which essentially minimizes the rural vote and that is no more fair than what we have now with the EC. And the reason you want it your way is because your party would benefit, since it currently owns the big population centers. What you really want is not more democracy, what you want is a one-party, democrat-run gov't.

The power of your “one vote” depends on which state you are in.
Wyoming is the most powerful
California is the least powerful

 

[rightwinger]

What you want is for the densely populated areas to determine who the next president is, which essentially minimizes the rural vote

The vote of the person living in a city will count the same as the vote from someone living in a rural area.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Actually they (States) can allocate their EC votes as they wish as long as it's prior to the election. (That being one of the rules Congress has put in place in the United States Code per Article I, Section 4.)

States don't even have to technically have general elections for the Electoral College. Under Article II, Section I, Para 2 - the legislature has full authority to allocate EC Electors. They can even use the national vote as the standard.

WW

Only if they disallow voting all together. If they allow voting, then per the declaration of type of Government then the allocution as to be per the vote IN THAT State.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Only if they disallow voting all together.

Which is what I said.

If they allow voting, then per the declaration of type of Government then the allocution as to be per the vote IN THAT State.

Nope there is no "in that state" requirement. The State legislature can assign EC Electors based on the national results if they so choose.

The could hold a round robin Tiddley-Winks competition if they wanted, although I wouldn't recommend it.

WW

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Which is what I said.



Nope there is no "in that state" requirement. The State legislature can assign EC Electors based on the national results if they so choose.

The could hold a round robin Tiddley-Winks competition if they wanted, although I wouldn't recommend it.

WW

Nope would instantly be challenged as disenfranchising the voters and their rights as citizens the Constitution guarantees the Government type.

 

[Independent thinker]

If California had a 5 million vote advantage for the GOP, you would be a staunch defender of the Electoral College. You and all the other Regime supporters want One Party Rule in perpetuity.

You just set off my lightbulb. Democrats are always bitching about gerrymandering but deciding the presidency by popular vote is the worst gerrymandering there is.

 

[Independent thinker]

Like I said. Math isn't a strong suit of most radical leftists.

That's for sure. To them 1 +1 = 5, 5 + 5 = 20, and 10 +10 = 32 trillion dollars.

 

[rightwinger]

You just set off my lightbulb. Democrats are always bitching about gerrymandering but deciding the presidency by popular vote is the worst gerrymandering there is.

Popular vote means no gerrymandering at all.

The EV is gerrymandering

 

[Independent thinker]

Only if they disallow voting all together. If they allow voting, then per the declaration of type of Government then the allocution as to be per the vote IN THAT State.

Let's see how they can disallow voting. I guess they could take nominees off the ballot they don't like. Or, they could try locking up their competition. They could just have phony court cases to make their opposition look bad. Or, they could get the media on their side to unfairly bias their readers.

 

[Independent thinker]

Popular vote means no gerrymandering at all.

The EV is gerrymandering

Having the popular vote heavily skewed to democratic areas is gerrymandering.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Let's see how they can disallow voting. I guess they could take nominees off the ballot they don't like. Or, they could try locking up their competition. They could just have phony court cases to make their opposition look bad. Or, they could get the media on their side to unfairly bias their readers.

A state could vest the ec in the legislature and have no voting that is how half the States did it until 1824.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Nope would instantly be challenged as disenfranchising the voters and their rights as citizens the Constitution guarantees the Government type.

Correct. Never said it wouldn't be challenged.

It wouldn't be disenfrancising any voters. As all votes would count toward the national outcome. Kind of hard to say you were disenfranchised (vote not counted) when your vote was literally counted.

I don't understand you "government type" theme. It's still a republic with three different levels: local, state, and federal. No change.

WW

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Correct. Never said it wouldn't be challenged.

It wouldn't be disenfrancising any voters. As all votes would count toward the national outcome. Kind of hard to say you were disenfranchised (vote not counted) when your vote was literally counted.

I don't understand you "government type" theme. It's still a republic with three different levels: local, state, and federal. No change.

WW

if the majority of the state voted for A and the national Vote total was for B then the state voters would disenfranchise of their legal vote.

 

[WorldWatcher]

if the majority of the state voted for A and the national Vote total was for B then the state voters would disenfranchise of their legal vote.

No they wouldn't as those in a state that voted for "A" had their votes counted. Supporters of candidate A not winning doesn't mean voter A was disenfranchised, it means candidate B got more votes.

Not Winning =/= Disenfranchising.

I voted for Kasich, he didn't win. Doesn't mean I was disenfranchised.

I voted for Haley, she didn't win. Doesn't mean I was disenfranchised.

WW

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No they wouldn't as those in a state that voted for "A" had their votes counted. Supporters of candidate A not winning doesn't mean voter A was disenfranchised, it means candidate B got more votes.

Not Winning =/= Disenfranchising.

I voted for Kasich, he didn't win. Doesn't mean I was disenfranchised.

I voted for Haley, she didn't win. Doesn't mean I was disenfranchised.

WW

God you are stupid.