Electoral College idiocy

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

Unfortunately, you are wrong in two of your basic premises. First, the American people actually DO decide who is elected president, they just do it in a different system than you prefer. The American people, on a state by state basis select the EC electors and they take the will of their state's people forward and cast EC votes for their states people. Each state's people are REPRESENTED by their electors, you know, as a representative democracy.

Secondly, the popular vote may be the cornerstone of other countries, but it is NOT the cornerstone of OUR country. The cornerstone of our country is the United States Constitution, plain and simple.

Finally, the fact is that the USA actually IS a republic, and you not liking that does not change that fact. To try to argue that will just make you look dumb.

Now go ahead and say the Pledge of Allegiance out loud and contemplate the meaning of the words.

Is the United States a Republic or a Democracy?

The United States of America is governed as a federal republic, and therefore some argue that the U.S. is not a democracy. Learn more about the government of the US.

www.worldatlas.com

Regardless of how you argue this, two things to ask yourself:

Just because this has been the way things have been done (appeal to antiquity) should it necessarily continue now that the technology exists that was absent then? Why NOT continue to have senators selected by state legislatures? That was essentially the same system as the EC that existed for about half our history.

Second, how would eliminating the EC adversely affect the will of the people? As you point out, we are not a direct democracy. No one is. We are not only a democratic republic, but a representative democracy. No one is or has advocated for direct democracy in legislation. Only in electing representatives. The house represents the districts (direct election), the Senate represents the state (direct election) and the president represents the American people and the uSA (NOT direct election???)

Why not have governor's elected the same way? Meaning, have each county, based off population have "electors" that voters elect to reach a magic number ( 74 in Washington based off the 147 total legislators)

 

[95coug]

Unfortunately, you are wrong in two of your basic premises. First, the American people actually DO decide who is elected president, they just do it in a different system than you prefer. The American people, on a state by state basis select the EC electors and they take the will of their state's people forward and cast EC votes for their states people. Each state's people are REPRESENTED by their electors, you know, as a representative democracy.

Secondly, the popular vote may be the cornerstone of other countries, but it is NOT the cornerstone of OUR country. The cornerstone of our country is the United States Constitution, plain and simple.

Finally, the fact is that the USA actually IS a republic, and you not liking that does not change that fact. To try to argue that will just make you look dumb.

Now go ahead and say the Pledge of Allegiance out loud and contemplate the meaning of the words.

Is the United States a Republic or a Democracy?

The United States of America is governed as a federal republic, and therefore some argue that the U.S. is not a democracy. Learn more about the government of the US.

www.worldatlas.com

Gotta disagree with the bolded portion of your statement.

In the electoral college system, each state’s electors only represent - typically - 50-60% of the state’s people. The remaining voters are not represented at all.

Except in Maine and Nebraska, where there’s a chance for a split vote.

 

[Suudy]

I dunno. How about going to a democratic voting system? Where Biden won by 7 million votes. Plenty of cushion to mitigate all this BS voter fraud crap.

You didn’t answer the earlier question. You assume a popular election for a solitary executive is a given. Why should that be the case? There are reasons that have been given against such an election (such as being beholden to dense population areas). What’s the sell for a popular election other that “ it feels good”?

 

[Loyal Coug1]

You didn’t answer the earlier question. You assume a popular election for a solitary executive is a given. Why should that be the case? There are reasons that have been given against such an election (such as being beholden to dense population areas). What’s the sell for a popular election other that “ it feels good”?

Uh, because it is democratic? WTF is wrong with you people?

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Actually, it's the other way around.

The UK, Britain, England, went from a King, to COPYING the USA's Democratic Republic, Electoral College system in their Presidential/Prime Minister election.

That's why their Parliament uses a Electoral College like system to Elect their Prime Minister.

The USA's Electoral College system did not copy England.

England copied the USA.

Really? and who is our King?

 

[longtimecoug]

You didn’t answer the earlier question. You assume a popular election for a solitary executive is a given. Why should that be the case? There are reasons that have been given against such an election (such as being beholden to dense population areas). What’s the sell for a popular election other that “ it feels good”?

EXplain why dense population areas should be beholden to rural areas

 

[Loyal Coug1]

EXplain why dense population areas should be beholden to rural areas

Silly. Because toothless and brainless hillbillies (sorry Deep South and the Dakotas) deserve to have an inordinate influence on our alleged democracy.

 

[longtimecoug]

Silly. Because toothless and brainless hillbillies (sorry Deep South and the Dakotas) deserve to have an inordinate influence on our alleged democracy.

We have an example of this drivel here in oregon, eastern oregon wants to join idaho because "portland controls everything" portland et al also pays for their schools roads etc... they dont bitch about that

 

[95coug]

We have an example of this drivel here in oregon, eastern oregon wants to join idaho because "portland controls everything" portland et al also pays for their schools roads etc... they dont bitch about that

That movement comes up in E WA every couple years too. Not to join Idaho, but to form a separate state with E OR. They never realize that that state would rank like #49 in state economies.

 

[Suudy]

Uh, because it is democratic? WTF is wrong with you people?

Democracy is good in and of itself? Why? It is a good, but is that really the end of government? Is it not to facilitate the good of *all* people, not just 50.00001%? The EC and parliamentary systems develop support of larger coalitions over a broader area than a direct, popular one does. Do you think voters in NYC, LA, SF, Boston, and the Beltway give two rat farts about the Dakotas, Iowa, or anything else between them?

It’s not perfect, but it is better than dense population centers choosing for those they don’t know, don’t care about, and don’t understand. It is a balance.

There is talk here of hillbillies overriding the majority. It’s quite the opposite. It’s prevent the self styled elite running roughshod over their inferiors.

One final point. If congress weren’t such pansies and didn’t delegate their power to the executive, we wouldn’t (and shouldn’t) care about the presidency. Same if each and every president quit consolidating power. Too much power in one man (and his/her/zher? administration) is a problem. You rail against monarchies but don’t see that our obsession with the presidential election is just a vote for a monarch, rather than a democracy.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Democracy is good in and of itself? Why? It is a good, but is that really the end of government? Is it not to facilitate the good of *all* people, not just 50.00001%? The EC and parliamentary systems develop support of larger coalitions over a broader area than a direct, popular one does. Do you think voters in NYC, LA, SF, Boston, and the Beltway give two rat farts about the Dakotas, Iowa, or anything else between them?

It’s not perfect, but it is better than dense population centers choosing for those they don’t know, don’t care about, and don’t understand. It is a balance.

Geezus Christ - WTF is wrong with you? Majority rules. Why is that such a foreign concept to you fools?

And BTW, there is nothing between Iowa and the Dakotas. Go look at a map.

Edit - every argument you d-shits are coming up with is premised upon the notion that majority rule is bad, and that the unwashed MINORITY masses should rule the country.

 

[Suudy]

Geezus Christ - WTF is wrong with you? Majority rules. Why is that such a foreign concept to you fools?

And you still haven’t articulated a reason why. There is a reason thousands of years of philosophers and political scientists have advocated a republic over democracy.

And BTW, there is nothing between Iowa and the Dakotas. Go look at a map.

I wrote that poorly. I meant between the coasts, citing Iowa and the Dakotas as an example.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

And you still haven’t articulated a reason why. There is a reason thousands of years of philosophers and political scientists have advocated a republic over democracy.


I wrote that poorly. I meant between the coasts, citing Iowa and the Dakotas as an example.

Link(s) please.

 

[Suudy]

Link(s) please.

Tomorrow. I’m at my kids’ school auction and can’t dig into the philosophical library.

But do you really think a bunch of links will change your mind? Will you read them?

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Tomorrow. I’m at my kids’ school auction and can’t dig into the philosophical library.

But do you really think a bunch of links will change your mind? Will you read them?

Yeah I will read them. I prefer some level of alleged facts over the rantings of lunatics. Sorry Mik. You have Suudy beat by a whisker.

 

[mikalalas]

Geezus Christ - WTF is wrong with you? Majority rules. Why is that such a foreign concept to you fools?

And BTW, there is nothing between Iowa and the Dakotas. Go look at a map.

Edit - every argument you d-shits are coming up with is premised upon the notion that majority rule is bad, and that the unwashed MINORITY masses should rule the country.

How did Majority Rule, work out, when the NAZI Majority, elected HITLER, through a POPULAR VOTE SYSTEM, and KILLED 6 MILLION JEWS?

How well did Majority Rule, popular vote for Governors, State Legislatures work, when Majority Rule, Popular Vote elected KKK Governors, State Legislators, USA Senators that passed the JIM CROW LAWS, etc?

 

[longtimecoug]

How did Majority Rule, work out, when the NAZI Majority, elected HITLER, through a POPULAR VOTE SYSTEM, and KILLED 6 MILLION JEWS?

How well did Majority Rule, popular vote for Governors, State Legislatures work, when Majority Rule, Popular Vote elected KKK Governors, State Legislators, USA Senators that passed the JIM CROW LAWS, etc?

Minority rule elected trump, twice impeached and tried a coup,

 

[Loyal Coug1]

How did Majority Rule, work out, when the NAZI Majority, elected HITLER, through a POPULAR VOTE SYSTEM, and KILLED 6 MILLION JEWS?

How well did Majority Rule, popular vote for Governors, State Legislatures work, when Majority Rule, Popular Vote elected KKK Governors, State Legislators, USA Senators that passed the JIM CROW LAWS, etc?

Oh fer F-s sake. Hitler, really? So what do you propose? Minority rule? What f-ing system would work for you, Mikky? Oh let's let the toothless Idahoans and Davenport, WA rednecks make the rules, because, well, what? Because they are downtrodden by those evil city folk?

 

[mikalalas]

Minority rule elected trump, twice impeached and tried a coup,

Wrong, FAIR, EQUAL REPRESENTATION OF BOTH MAJORITY, MINORITY, PEOPLE, STATES, ETC, ELECTED TRUMP.

THE MINORITY DID NOT EXCLUSIVELY, INDEPENDENTLY OF THE MAJORITY, ELECT TRUMP

The Majority and the Minority both had a balanced, fair, equal representation, vote, choice, etc, in choosing president, electing trump.

And the Majority Rule, Popular Vote electing HITLER, killing 6 million Jews is WORSE then electing Trump, as bad as Trump is.

 

[mikalalas]

Oh fer F-s sake. Hitler, really? So what do you propose? Minority rule? What f-ing system would work for you, Mikky? Oh let's let the toothless Idahoans and Davenport, WA rednecks make the rules, because, well, what? Because they are downtrodden by those evil city folk?

I didn't advocate minority rule.

I am advocating a balanced, fair, equal, shared, CO RULE BETWEEN BOTH THE MAJORITY AND THE MINORITY.

And yes Farmers are downtrodden by the Evil King County, Seattle folk.

Eastern WA has suffered under the TYRANNY of King County, Seattle for YEARS.

But Go ahead let Seattle, King County TYRANNICALLY BOSS, TELL YOU AND THE REST OF EASTERN WA WHAT TO DO.

Go ahead let them keep poking their noses in your business, telling you what to do, since you like it when majority people do that to you so much.

 

[longtimecoug]

Wrong, FAIR, EQUAL REPRESENTATION OF BOTH MAJORITY, MINORITY, PEOPLE, STATES, ETC, ELECTED TRUMP.

THE MINORITY DID NOT EXCLUSIVELY, INDEPENDENTLY OF THE MAJORITY, ELECT TRUMP

The Majority and the Minority both had a balanced, fair, equal representation, vote, choice, etc, in choosing president, electing trump.

And the Majority Rule, Popular Vote electing HITLER, killing 6 million Jews is WORSE then electing Trump, as bad as Trump is.

Minority of the vote electex trump, more voted against him than for him

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Minority rule elected trump, twice impeached and tried a coup,

Hey longtime. I think you and I would get along just fine. These loons. not so much.

 

[mikalalas]

Minority of the vote electex trump, more voted against him than for him

The states, legislative districts, elected trump.

Trump won a MAJORITY of the States, legislative districts, electoral college votes, based on population density, with states, legislative districts, with more population density, having more Electoral Votes, having a MAJORITY over smaller, less population states, legislative districts.

Thus in that way, Trump did win the MAJORITY by winning Majority of States, Legislative Districts, Electoral College, etc.

 

[longtimecoug]

Hey longtime. I think you and I would get along just fine. These loons. not so much.

It seems to me that i have met a guy that called himself loyal coug. Ive been going to games since 78, used to go with my brother, pat. He has kind of pooped out now i go with my son. My real name is paul

 

[Loyal Coug1]

It seems to me that i have met a guy that called himself loyal coug. Ive been going to games since 78, used to go with my brother, pat. He has kind of pooped out now i go with my son. My real name is paul

Well that was probably me. Had season tickets for 20 years, from about 1990 to 2010-ish. dumped them during the Wulff years. Was this guy handsome and a chick magnet? That would be me.

So many stories to tell. Do you remember Camp Coug in the RV lot? They basically put up a shed in the RV lot. Think they had a keg in there.

I've told this one before, but when in college (79 though 84) We tore that place up. Pretty sure it was 1983 playing Arizona (they kicked our ass on a sunny October day). Back then, as you know, students got in for free, and you could bring in anything as long as it wasn't glass. We brought in a 5 gallon gas can full of Spodie Odie (spelling?). Swear to gawd. Ran out at halftime, and me and my buddy ran down and jumped on my Yamaha 850 and ripped on down to the liquor store for another half gallon of Vodka. Good times.

 

[longtimecoug]

Well that was probably me. Had season tickets for 20 years, from about 1990 to 2010-ish. dumped them during the Wulff years. Was this guy handsome and a chick magnet? That would be me.

So many stories to tell. Do you remember Camp Coug in the RV lot? They basically put up a shed in the RV lot. Think they had a keg in there.

I've told this one before, but when in college (79 though 84) We tore that place up. Pretty sure it was 1983 playing Arizona (they kicked our ass on a sunny October day). Back then, as you know, students got in for free, and you could bring in anything as long as it wasn't glass. We brought in a 5 gallon gas can full of Spodie Odie (spelling?). Swear to gawd. Ran out at halftime, and me and my buddy ran down and jumped on my Yamaha 850 and ripped on down to the liquor store for another half gallon of Vodka. Good times.

I had season tiks fron 88 through 09, the wulff era broke my spirit, its never fully returned

 

[95coug]

Minority of the vote electex trump, more voted against him than for him

That was courtesy of the winner-take-all electoral college system. Pretty sure if it was split by district, he would not have won.

And then we would have had president Hilary. God, our choices suck.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

The states, legislative districts, elected trump.

Trump won a MAJORITY of the States, legislative districts, electoral college votes, based on population density, with states, legislative districts, with more population density, having more Electoral Votes, having a MAJORITY over smaller, less population states, legislative districts.

Thus in that way, Trump did win the MAJORITY by winning Majority of States, Legislative Districts, Electoral College, etc.

How would a popular vote infringe on anyone's civic or political rights. How would it adversely affect how this country governs?

 

[dgibbons]

How would a popular vote infringe on anyone's civic or political rights. How would it adversely affect how this country governs?

Tyranny of the majority. The reason we have the Electoral College.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

Tyranny of the majority. The reason we have the Electoral College.

I understand that is what the fear was. But with a robust house and senate as well as a competent judiciary AND state governments all under a Supreme law of the land (constitution), what kind of "tyranny" are.we really worried about?

When a minority can choose national leaders I would think the risk of the same tyranny exists. Taihtsat

 

[dgibbons]

I understand that is what the fear was. But with a robust house and senate as well as a competent judiciary AND state governments all under a Supreme law of the land (constitution), what kind of "tyranny" are.we really worried about?

When a minority can choose national leaders I would think the risk of the same tyranny exists. Taihtsat

When was the last time there was a “robust” house and senate? The 80s? Now it’s just culture war bullshit to avoid having to govern.

And I see nothing wrong with the possibility of a minority being able to elect a president. Much better than a handful of metro areas electing the president.

But feel free to spearhead that amendment.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

When was the last time there was a “robust” house and senate? The 80s? Now it’s just culture war bullshit to avoid having to govern.

And I see nothing wrong with the possibility of a minority being able to elect a president. Much better than a handful of metro areas electing the president.

But feel free to spearhead that amendment.

Point taken. What I mean by "robust" is a functioning body that still behaves by their own rules and pretty much their duties within the constitution.

To me, if metro areas are where the majority of people live, hence the majority that will be affected by decisions of their nation leader makes, then I have no issue with those areas having the larger pull.

 

[Stretch 74]

I dunno. How about going to a democratic voting system? Where Biden won by 7 million votes. Plenty of cushion to mitigate all this BS voter fraud crap.

Mone on-think man! That would do exactly nothing to eliminate the issue of voter fraud. In fact it may make it worse. if one party (say the Democrats) get worried about how close things are in some swing states, I can see them going all in with fraud efforts in CA, NY, IL, etc, making a cushion in the strong Dem states to overcome weakness in others. The temptation is still there, the rewards are still great.

 

[Stretch 74]

Gotta disagree with the bolded portion of your statement.

In the electoral college system, each state’s electors only represent - typically - 50-60% of the state’s people. The remaining voters are not represented at all.

Except in Maine and Nebraska, where there’s a chance for a split vote.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Every person in the state is represented by the electors, just as they are represented by the state's senators. Just because I was disgusted by Patty Murray, and did not vote for her, she was elected by the majority (or plurality) of the voters in WA State and thus she did represent me in the US Senate.

Just because a voter is on the losing side does not mean their vote doesn't count, it is simply that there was not enough other voters that agreed with him or her. The only time a vote does not count is when a valid vote is improperly disallowed or when it is cancelled by an illegal vote.

 

[Observer11]

Tyranny of the majority. The reason we have the Electoral College.

The masses killed Socrates for such thinking.

 

[95coug]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Every person in the state is represented by the electors, just as they are represented by the state's senators. Just because I was disgusted by Patty Murray, and did not vote for her, she was elected by the majority (or plurality) of the voters in WA State and thus she did represent me in the US Senate.

Just because a voter is on the losing side does not mean their vote doesn't count, it is simply that there was not enough other voters that agreed with him or her. The only time a vote does not count is when a valid vote is improperly disallowed or when it is cancelled by an illegal vote.

Patty Murray isn’t elected by the electoral college. Only the president is. And in that tally, if you vote for anything but a democrat in Washington state, your vote doesn’t count. The state pledges all of its electors to the candidate who gets the most votes. Winner take all. It’s that system that makes it possible for the winner of the nationwide popular vote to lose the election.

Mathematically, a candidate can win a presidential election by only carrying 11 states. And nearly all of those (if not all) can be carried by winning 1-2 metro districts. That hasn’t been a real danger before, but looking at the list of states, and considering the increasing urban/rural divide in the country, it seems increasing likely that we’ll see democrats consistently elected even when the electoral map is mostly red. We’ll have 20ish urban districts deciding the direction of the entire country.