How should United States Presidential Elections be contested?

[Blondie]

How should elections for President be contested?

 

[phoenix2020]

For democrats, independents and RINOs, they should be contested through facts and our courts.

For MAGA, they should be contested by following the path of Ashly Babbitt.

 

[OrphanSlug]

I'd like to go with Popular Vote, but we are stuck with the Electoral College until there is enough outcry to go through a very challenging Constitutional change process.

 

[Rumpelstil]

• Ranked Choice Voting & Popular Vote​

 

[Rumpelstil]

but we are stuck with the Electoral College

Couldn't you get unstuck?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Other. Your thread title doesn’t match your (poorly worded) poll question. Elections, regardless of their system (format?), are contests. Perhaps what you meant to ask is how: how should POTUS elections be conducted?

Even then, the EC system (format?) doesn’t require states to allocate their EC votes using any particular method.

 

[jaypatriot]

How should elections for President be contested?

The Electoral College works to balance the less populous states and the heavily populated states. It's worked for over 230 years.
If Congress wants to change that, then that is what Constitutional Amendments are for.

 

[Bok Tuklo]

The Electoral College works to balance the less populous states and the heavily populated states.

If that’s the case, it failed. When was the last time candidates for President campaigned in Wyoming or Vermont?

It's worked for over 230 years.
If Congress wants to change that, then that is what Constitutional Amendments are for.

No it hasn’t. It was obsolete by the 3rd presidential election. It doesn’t even remotely work as intended.

 

[Loulit01]

Popular vote followed by an obstacle course.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I don't really have a problem with the electoral college (EC).

The problem isn't the EC, it's winner take all.

The EC can be improved by making state EC Electors chosen by:

• 1 EC Elector per House Congressional District in the state, on other words 1 per House Representative.
• 1 EC Electors equal to the number of Federal Senators.

WW

 

[rahl]

The Electoral College works to balance the less populous states and the heavily populated states. It's worked for over 230 years.

No it doesn't, and hasn't. The EC has resulted in republicans not having a president in this century that americans actually chose. All the EC does is give states with almost no population, greater weight to their votes than states with higher population. Essentially, wide open empty space is electing presidents, and not actual americans.

If Congress wants to change that, then that is what Constitutional Amendments are for.

Correct.

 

[jaypatriot]

If that’s the case, it failed. When was the last time candidates for President campaigned in Wyoming or Vermont?



No it hasn’t. It was obsolete by the 3rd presidential election. It doesn’t even remotely work as intended.

If you don't like the way the EC is working, then you should petition your Congressional representative to develop an Amendment to change the EC or replace it. That's how changes to a general election work unless of course you have state legislators who want to defy their own voting laws to suit certain segments of their populations - like in 2020.


Good luck.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Only count votes for Republicans, all other ones are fake and done with fraud.

Problem solved.

 

[Peter]

The Electoral College works to balance the less populous states and the heavily populated states. It's worked for over 230 years.
If Congress wants to change that, then that is what Constitutional Amendments are for.

All this does is mean the votes of people in cities are less valued than votes in rural areas.
How is that even slightly fair?
Every vote should count exactly the same.

 

[Taylor]

The states are who elect a President. Hence the name.

 

[Mycroft]

How should elections for President be contested?

According to the Constitution of the United States of America.

The Constitution currently states that Presidential elections WILL be conducted by way of the Electoral College, so that IS the way they should be conducted.

If those who would like Presidential elections to be conducted in another manner, I say fine. Change the Constitution and I'll still answer "According to the Constitution of the United States of America."

 

[jaypatriot]

All this does is mean the votes of people in cities are less valued than votes in rural areas.
How is that even slightly fair?
Every vote should count exactly the same.

YOu ignore political ideology in certain blue states which compel voters to vote for Progressive and Liberal platforms. That is what the Founders felt they needed to combat in general elections.
I don't want to see major blue (failing) states (with large voting populations) control who gets elected president to the detriment of smaller states who happen to be Conservative in nature.

 

[WorldWatcher]

If you don't like the way the EC is working, then you should petition your Congressional representative to develop an Amendment to change the EC or replace it. That's how changes to a general election work unless of course you have state legislators who want to defy their own voting laws to suit certain segments of their populations - like in 2020.


Good luck.

If the State Legislature modified their law in how their EC Electors are selected, than they wouldn't be violating their state laws.

They could:

• Choose winner take all,
• Choose EC electors by district with 2 for Senators,
• Choose not to have an election at all and the legislature chooses the EC Electors,
• Choose EC Electors by a round robin competition of rock-paper-scissors.

WW

 

[Noodlegawd]

How should elections for President be contested?

I'm fine with the Electoral College. Most of our governing should be done at the state level anyway, which would help alleviate any concerns about disproportional representation. Too much of it is currently handled by the federal government, IMO.

 

[Cardinal]

The Electoral College works to balance the less populous states and the heavily populated states. It's worked for over 230 years.
If Congress wants to change that, then that is what Constitutional Amendments are for.

I would debate this, but people who support the EC never stick around to actually support their arguments. They're just all drive-byes.

 

[Tender Branson]

Like in Austria or France.

Popular vote winner is elected President (normal).

If no candidate gets 50%, a runoff is held 4 weeks later.

 

[Loulit01]

The fact that every state elects 2 U.S. Senators eliminates the need for the electoral college.

 

[Cardinal]

How should elections for President be contested?

I assume you meant "conducted." Popular vote.

 

[Cardinal]

Here are some extremely obvious problems with the EC position that we frequently see here, and why all pro-EC arguments are just drive-byes:

1) A president is a representative of people. You can say that he's a representative of states, but who lives in states? That's right. People.
2) Voting power in an EC is based on the population of states. Lower populations actually result in more voting power, which makes a mockery of the "one man one vote principle.
3) "The EC prevents tyranny of the majority." Okay, so what's so great about tyranny of the minority? [Crickets]

Or, if they do actually respond to this, it'll be some weird ass response like "minority isn't the opposite of majority." Uh, okay.

4) "The EC prevents cities from choosing the President." What's wrong with people who live in cities? [Crickets]
5) "The EC prevents candidates from only running in a few states." Uh, candidates always run in just a few states. The EC quite specifically creates that dynamic. [Crickets]
6) "Under a popular vote the most populous states would choose the president." Under a popular vote there are no states. [Crickets]
7) "We're a Republic, not a Democracy." Aaaaaand that means what, exactly? [Crickets]

And then there are all the "what the Founders wanted" arguments that they never ever support. Are you nervy enough to cite the Federalist Papers #68? Welcome to their ignore list!

 

[CharloTexan]

YOu ignore political ideology in certain blue states which compel voters to vote for Progressive and Liberal platforms. That is what the Founders felt they needed to combat in general elections.
I don't want to see major blue (failing) states (with large voting populations) control who gets elected president to the detriment of smaller states who happen to be Conservative in nature.

We've had this argument before. You want the minority to rule over the majority, regardless of the issues.