|
Discussion: Americans hate the Electoral College
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 37,384
|
Americans hate the Electoral College
"Why are you all suddenly after the electoral college? You loved it last week" Sure, jan
Quote:
Reference sources indicate that over the past 200 years, over 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College. There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject. The American Bar Association has criticized the Electoral College as “archaic” and “ambiguous” and its polling showed 69 percent of lawyers favored abolishing it in 1987. Public opinion polls have shown Americans favored abolishing it by majorities of 58 percent in 1967; 81 percent in 1968; and 75 percent in 1981.
|
https://www.archives.gov/federal-reg...q_content.html
"OK, but have anything newer than 1987?"
Quote:
Americans are nearly as open to major electoral reform when it comes to doing away with the Electoral College. Sixty-three percent would abolish this unique, but sometimes controversial, mechanism for electing presidents that was devised by the framers of the Constitution. While constitutional and statutory revisions have been made to the Electoral College since the nation's founding, numerous efforts to abolish it over the last 200+ years have met with little success.
There is even less partisan variation in support for this proposal than there is for term limits, with between 61% and 66% of all major party groups saying they would vote to do away with the Electoral College if they could. Similarly, between 60% and 69% of all major age groups take this position.
|
http://www.gallup.com/poll/159881/am...l-college.aspx
"700 propositions yet no change? Wow that really says something"
Quote:
Of 11,000 attempts to amend U.S. Constitution, only 27 amendments have passed
|
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...only-27-amend/
Quote:
The problem starts with Article 5 of the Constitution. It provides that an amendment can be proposed either by a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate or by a convention, called into being by Congress, after a request from two-thirds of the states. That’s version A and version B of step one. If an amendment makes it through either one, then comes step two: ratification by three-quarters of the states. In other words, an amendment requires a supermajority twice—the pig must pass through two pythons. By contrast, ordinary legislation requires the approval of a simple majority in each house.
But the founders blundered. They made passing an amendment too hard. In the 220-plus years since ratification of the Constitution, more than 11,000 amendments have been proposed, but only 27 have been enacted. The first 10 amendments were added immediately to appease critics of the Constitution during the ratification debates. The three critical post*–Civil War amendments (13th, 14th, and 15th), which expanded individual rights, are also a special case because the Southern states were coerced into ratifying them. From 1870 to today, only 12 amendments have been enacted. And since 1971, only a single amendment has been ratified—a trivial change that prohibits Congress from giving itself a raise that takes effect before the following election—and that ratification took place 203 years after the proposed amendment was submitted to the states in 1789.
In setting the bar for amendment so high, the Framers didn’t foresee that as the country became more populous and diverse, it would become harder for people to reach the near-consensus required for change. The Senate began with 20 members; now it has 100. The House increased from 59 to 435. And the U.S. population has increased from 4 million to more than 300 million.
|
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a..._founders.html
any more questions Trumpettes?
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 68,548
|
That system makes no sense whatsoever
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/13/2012
Posts: 13,577
|
This tea.
While I do think there are more important issues to face right now, this needs to be gone ASAP.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/18/2012
Posts: 20,576
|
Wouldn't it suck if we had a great presidential candidate. And they lost because of the popular vote.
Another issue is the two-party system. It's not working. How many third candidates votes did we get this election that could've went to either candidate? The US has to fix its electing system, like they still use winner takes all, or first past the post. The system is still democratic, but doesn't allow for everyone opinions to matter (one of the bad things about democracies).
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/24/2006
Posts: 24,963
|
I agree, the one who gets more votes should be president, yes to popular vote; BUT dont lie to us saying you werent ok with the electoral process last week.
Most of those lawyers against it are not the Katy Perry or Gaga stans causing riots right now.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 37,384
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tropez
Wouldn't it suck if we had a great presidential candidate. And they lost because of the popular vote.
Another issue is the two-party system. It's not working. How many third candidates votes did we get this election that could've went to either candidate? The US has to fix its electing system, like they still use winner takes all, or first past the post. The system is still democratic, but doesn't allow for everyone opinions to matter (one of the bad things about democracies).
|
Democracy in all honesty is a terrible system of government, but it's better than anything else in the world's history
Quote:
Originally posted by MrDeeds
I agree, the one who gets more votes should be president, yes to popular vote; BUT dont lie to us saying you werent ok with the electoral process last week.
|
Sis the numbers are right there. Read them. And speak for yourself, I was talking to my coworkers about how stupid the EC is literally HOURS before the first polls closed.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/18/2012
Posts: 20,576
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MrDeeds
I agree, the one who gets more votes should be president, yes to popular vote; BUT dont lie to us saying you werent ok with the electoral process last week.
|
Its not very popular, and hasn't been for a very long time. Example Bush vs Gore.
Same situation. Gore had the popular vote, Bush had the electoral. Nader had the third party vote. Bush won because of Florida.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/18/2012
Posts: 20,576
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Jackson
Democracy in all honesty is a terrible system of government, but it's better than anything else in the world's history
|
Democracy can fully work if everyone is well educated on the candidates and the system. It can wreck havoc due to the majority voting against minorities.
Many governments can work effectively. For instances a dictatorship can be good only if you have a benevolent ruler, and everyone works together for a common good. The issue is human nature, which makes governments not so great.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/13/2012
Posts: 13,577
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tropez
Wouldn't it suck if we had a great presidential candidate. And they lost because of the popular vote.
Another issue is the two-party system. It's not working. How many third candidates votes did we get this election that could've went to either candidate? The US has to fix its electing system, like they still use winner takes all, or first past the post. The system is still democratic, but doesn't allow for everyone opinions to matter (one of the bad things about democracies).
|
“We are not a democracy. That has been a misconception for many years. America is a Democratic Republic. Democracy is a noun, Democratic is an adjective. We have a "democracy-like" republic. That is why we cast our votes and the electoral college decides for us who who we should be. Our vote is the Democratic quality, the electoral college is the republic quality. That is why we have representatives for ourselves and why we don't cast votes for every decision and count them up and make decisions that way. The word democracy is not mentioned once in our pledge of allegiance. If you go on our Wikipedia page we are listed as a republic."
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/13/2012
Posts: 13,577
|
Also, our government was built on white supremacy so in all honesty, we need to change the whole thing in order for it to ever work for everyone.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 37,384
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tropez
Democracy can fully work if everyone is well educated on the candidates and the system. It can wreck havoc due to the majority voting against minorities.
Many governments can work effectively. For instances a dictatorship can be good only if you have a benevolent ruler, and everyone works together for a common good. The issue is human nature, which makes governments not so great.
|
Yeah, basically. Human nature prevents any form of government from being perfect. Democracy in that sense is better than a dictatorship because it allows for some level of human error, but apparently we've passed that point as a country
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/18/2012
Posts: 20,576
|
Quote:
Originally posted by swiftie13
“We are not a democracy. That has been a misconception for many years. America is a Democratic Republic. Democracy is a noun, Democratic is an adjective. We have a "democracy-like" republic. That is why we cast our votes and the electoral college decides for us who who we should be. Our vote is the Democratic quality, the electoral college is the republic quality. That is why we have representatives for ourselves and why we don't cast votes for every decision and count them up and make decisions that way. The word democracy is not mentioned once in our pledge of allegiance. If you go on our Wikipedia page we are listed as a republic."
|
That's great. But a republic is a form of democracy with people choosing someone to represent them.
The United States is a democracy, with a different form. Just because the United Kingdom has a monarchy doesn't mean they don't have a democratic government, which too is a different form of democracy, just like them having a constitution gives them a different form on a monarchy.
Quote:
Democracy (Greek: δημοκρατία, Dēmokratia literally "rule of the commoners"), in modern usage, is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body, such as a parliament.[1] Democracy is sometimes referred to as "rule of the majority"."[2] Democracy was originally conceived in Classical Greece, where political representatives were chosen by a jury from amongst the male citizens: rich and poor.
|
Did you miss that important point? The US is a democracy where citizens elect representatives.
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/4/2009
Posts: 6,471
|
#DownWithTheElectoralCollege #DownWithTheTwoPartySystem
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/19/2012
Posts: 29,579
|
Wow even republicans want it gone when it handed them two presidents against the popular vote
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 37,384
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Artemisia
Wow even republicans want it gone when it handed them two presidents against the popular vote
|
It's actually the 5th time. The first time neither candidate won and the House chose the president. The other 4 times Democrats lost to Republicans who won the EV
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/1/2011
Posts: 10,384
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MrDeeds
I agree, the one who gets more votes should be president, yes to popular vote; BUT dont lie to us saying you werent ok with the electoral process last week.
Most of those lawyers against it are not the Katy Perry or Gaga stans causing riots right now.
|
Oh my God We were literally having this same argument 16 years ago!
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 1/3/2014
Posts: 11,976
|
Clock these people!
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/12/2012
Posts: 7,989
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MrDeeds
I agree, the one who gets more votes should be president, yes to popular vote; BUT dont lie to us saying you werent ok with the electoral process last week.
Most of those lawyers against it are not the Katy Perry or Gaga stans causing riots right now.
|
The electoral college has been loathed for as far back as I can remember... The system makes no ****ing sense. The idea of it was that the people had no access to information to make an informed decision, so the electors were informed voters that were elected by the people to make an informed opinion. With the Internet and others ways to access information we have today, that shouldn't be an issue. It has no use anymore. Further, it is the highest act of voter suppression. It's no coincidence we have abysmal voter turnout compared to other Democratic countries around the world and we're the only one with an electoral college.
The system is stupid. Tuesday just reminded people how horrible of a system it was. Even Donald Trump bitched about it in 2012.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 28,773
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tropez
Wouldn't it suck if we had a great presidential candidate. And they lost because of the popular vote.
Another issue is the two-party system. It's not working. How many third candidates votes did we get this election that could've went to either candidate? The US has to fix its electing system, like they still use winner takes all, or first past the post. The system is still democratic, but doesn't allow for everyone opinions to matter (one of the bad things about democracies).
|
There's no such thing as a two-party system. The other parties sit on their asses between elections and do nothing and then come out to split some votes. That's not how it works. The democratic party didn't just birth itself. It built itself up by starting with counties then moving up to cities then states then general elections.
The third partis are too lazy to do that so how can they be trusted with the government?
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/12/2002
Posts: 21,317
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MrDeeds
I agree, the one who gets more votes should be president, yes to popular vote; BUT dont lie to us saying you werent ok with the electoral process last week.
Most of those lawyers against it are not the Katy Perry or Gaga stans causing riots right now.
|
Not true
Al Gore for example wont he popular vote, and it was protested just as it is now. Those protesting have always supported doing away with it.
|
|
|
|
|