• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you understand the purpose of the electoral college? Do you agree with it?

How do you feel about the electoral college?

  • I understand the purpose of the electoral college and I agree with it.

    Votes: 77 67.0%

  • I understand the purpose of the electoral college and I disagree with it.

    Votes: 27 23.5%

  • I don't understand the purpose of the electoral college but I agree with it.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I don't understand the purpose of the electoral college but I disagree with it.

    Votes: 1 0.9%

  • Other - Please Explain

    Votes: 10 8.7%
  • Total voters
    115

molten_dragon

Anti-Hypocrite
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
11,155
Reaction score
5,594
Location
Southeast Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Since Hillary won the popular vote while Trump won the electoral vote, there have been a lot of protests and disagreements about the electoral college.

The most common counter-argument I see from people who support the electoral college is some variation of "Well you just don't understand the reason for it".

So I'm curious how true this is. Do you understand the purpose of the electoral college? And do you agree with it?
 

Near as I can figure, unless I misunderstand, the purpose of the Electoral College was to get a couple of low-population colonies to join the Union, because the office of President wasn't intended to be the huge deal it is now.
 
It's an outdated rigged system which works most of the time but not all of the time. It should reflect the popular vote and it usually does, but in 5 out of 45 it has not. Get rid of it.
 
It was meant to be the ultimate superdelegate system. But that's no longer how it does, can, or should function in our modern political system so there's no longer a reason to have it.
 
Russell797 said:
It's an outdated rigged system which works most of the time but not all of the time. It should reflect the popular vote and it usually does, but in 5 out of 45 it has not. Get rid of it.
Click to expand...

Yeah.....

Let's allow a handful of states with very populated democrat voting cities have their way with the rest of the republic.

:rofl
 
RetiredUSN said:
Yeah.....

Let's allow a handful of states with very populated democrat voting cities have their way with the rest of the republic.

:rofl
Click to expand...

That's were most of the people are. People are affected by elections. More people will be disaffected by this election than not. I don't care about states, I care about people.
 
Russell797 said:
That's were most of the people are. People are affected by elections. More people will be disaffected by this election than not. I don't care about states, I care about people.
Click to expand...

See, that is where your personal popular vote utopia ends, and becomes that of of person who actually prefers mob rule.
 
Russell797 said:
That's were most of the people are. People are affected by elections. More people will be disaffected by this election than not. I don't care about states, I care about people.
Click to expand...

Sucks to be you then because as a Nevadan I don't want to be the dumping ground for other state's nuclear waste. Big states don't get to run roughshod over smaller less populous states.
 
RetiredUSN said:
See, that is where your personal popular vote utopia ends, and becomes that of of person who actually prefers mob rule.
Click to expand...

It's called majority rule, not mob rule. You can't win a straight up election so you defend a convoluted system. Why is the president the only public office which is determined this way? Your "mob rule" seems to work for the governorships in every state and for every member of Congress.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Yeah.....

Let's allow a handful of states with very populated democrat voting cities have their way with the rest of the republic.

:rofl
Click to expand...

Do you realize that under the current EC system if a candidate gets one single vote more than the other candidate in each of the 12 largest states and is not even on the ballot to get a single vote in the other 38 states, that they will win despite being out voted by tens of millions of Americans?

The nightmare you speculate about is already possible in the EC system.
 

The term MOB RULE is far too often invoked by the right as a substitute for majority rule simply because them majority is rarely on their side and they need a weapon to use against it. Mob rule suggests criminality and violence and violations of the law. And a peaceful election process is not mob rule.
 
There's no logically defensible reason for the electoral college other than it gives the opportunity for the electors of that body to defy the popular will of the people.

I don't think the Trump Cult would be expounding on its glory if faithless electors were to reflect the actual will of the nation, and elect HRC president in December. There'd be a lot more civil disorder than a handful of peaceful protests.

No electoral system should give more influence to a particular group of citizens than the rest. Yet ours rewards people for living in a less populated state. It is indeed a "rigged system".
 
reinoe said:
Sucks to be you then because as a Nevadan I don't want to be the dumping ground for other state's nuclear waste. Big states don't get to run roughshod over smaller less populous states.
Click to expand...

I can't blame you. Maybe that's one reason we should not be having nuclear power plants. We have no where to deposit the waste. But I'll make a deal with you. Keep your air born pollution from blowing over my state so I don't have to breath it. Under Republican rule the EPA is set to be gutted so I'm gonna suffer the consequences....Nice job...thank you! You hypocrite.
 

Once again, I'm a Nevadan. My state's not producing a ton of Airborne pollution. STFU.
 


Oh....you mean voting in which people elect officials within their individual states?

A very poor answer on your part.
 
Getting rid of the EC would make campaigning easier as candidates would only need to visit maybe 10 cities. We are a republic, not a democracy. In a democracy, majority rules. In a republic the individual is supposed to be protected from the majority. That's the ideal anyway. Not saying we've executed it perfectly by an stretch.
 
Russell797 said:
That's were most of the people are. People are affected by elections. More people will be disaffected by this election than not. I don't care about states, I care about people.
Click to expand...

But apparently you don't care about the people living in all the Red States that voted for President Elect Trump



How do you justify not caring for those people?

President Elect Trump carried significantly more States than Hillary - That doesn't matter? The people in those States don't get a voice?
 

I could get hit by lightning on a sunny day as well.
 

One would have thought George Bush and Donald Trump where both pretty convincing arguments against the electoral college. If you want a consensus based system then there are other ways to achieve that.
 
reinoe said:
Once again, I'm a Nevadan. My state's not producing a ton of Airborne pollution. STFU.
Click to expand...

I don't care where you are from. Other states can pollute the air people in my state are forced to breath. It's not just about you. You voted to have the EPA gutted. Thanks. I'm in the northeast where all the crap from the mid-western states blows over my state in the prevailing atmospheric wind flow. So don't talk to me about not wanting sh#t from other places coming at you. You do it to me by voting Republican.
 
RetiredUSN said:
I could get hit by lightning on a sunny day as well.
Click to expand...

Sadly that is beyond our reach. Changing the EC system is within our abilities.... if Republicans join in the effort.
 

Because they lost. States are not people. There are more people in those few states than there are in the many states, those that voted anyway. The majority lost...There is something wrong with that.
 
RetiredUSN said:
See, that is where your personal popular vote utopia ends, and becomes that of of person who actually prefers mob rule.
Click to expand...

Popular vote is "mob rule"? So I guess all the other political offices we vote for are "mob rule":doh
 
Russell797 said:
Because they lost. States are not people. There are more people in those few states than there are in the many states, those that voted anyway. The majority lost...There is something wrong with that.
Click to expand...

It would only be wrong if the country were called The United STATE of America. In a Republic, all people are allowed to participate in the process. In a pure Democracy, apparently preferred by liberal/socialist progressives, the potential tyranny of the majority would decide.

The Founding Fathers knew this was a recipe for disaster, and created a system to avoid that outcome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…