Over 80% of Democrats recognize the flaws in the Electoral College and support abolishing it in favor of a National Popular Vote.

[Razoo]

Over 80% of Democrats recognize the flaws in the Electoral College and support abolishing it in favor of a National Popular Vote. And 89% of those respondents want a constitutional amendment to get rid of it!

But the vast majority of Republicans oppose changing anything about it. They benefit from the Electoral College and its skewed representation – which means an amendment would never get through the 50-50 tied Senate.

That’s why the states have a plan to bypass Congress, ignore Mitch McConnell, and elect the popular vote winner directly.

It’s called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Let's make it law.

https://www.history.com › news › electoral-college-near...

Aug 25, 2020 — The House approved a constitutional amendment to dismantle the indirect voting system, but it was killed in the Senate by a filibuster

 

[Razoo]

Over 80% of Democrats recognize the flaws in the Electoral College and support abolishing it in favor of a National Popular Vote. And 89% of those respondents want a constitutional amendment to get rid of it!

But the vast majority of Republicans oppose changing anything about it. They benefit from the Electoral College and its skewed representation – which means an amendment would never get through the 50-50 tied Senate.

That’s why the states have a plan to bypass Congress, ignore Mitch McConnell, and elect the popular vote winner directly.

It’s called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Let's make it law.

Petition to Eliminate Electoral College - History House Gov​

https://history.house.gov › Listing

This petition from the secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts suggests the necessity of a constitutional amendment to change the method for choosing the ...

Abolish the Electoral College - MoveOn​

https://sign.moveon.org › petitions › abolish-the-elector...

Amend the constitution to abolish the Electoral College. Hold presidential elections based on popular vote. One person one vote to determine the one leader ...

​

 

[SoCal]

...It was great swaths of Georgia, Ohio, or Kentucky. Only the names changed...

As I said and as the census shows, in 1790 90% of all Americans were farmers and in 1776 when they came up with the idea of the EC, only 4% of Americans lived in cities.
Now it's 83% and they estimate it will grow to 89% by 2050.
Those great swaths of Georgia, Ohio and Kentucky were populated by voters who were evenly spread across the country and being pretty well served by the EC. As you can see, times have changed and now the majority of our voters are being denied the right to choose their leader. Look at the trend, it's only going to get worse, a smaller and smaller minority will be choosing our President as time goes on.

...At best the EC provides a small protection for minorities...

This is not providing, "protection" for minorities, it's giving them undue, undeserved, 'power' to thwart the will of the American people.

...It's hard to take you seriously when you say really inane falsehoods like this. England does not elect the Prime Minister, for example, and many nations use that model.

I know of know other democracy where the electors are free to choose whomever they want regardless of the voters choice. "...There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote..." The Prime Minister for example can only be elected by the party that wins the majority of seats.

...Everyone knows why you want to scrap a system that is working as designed...

I want to scrap a system that allows the looser of the popular vote to become our President. I prefer a government controlled by a majority of it's voters.

...More political spin verging on outright lies...

The number of Georgia's voters has increased by nearly 2 million, yet they cut polling locations statewide by nearly 10%, this results in 5+ hour waiting lines. Then to top it off they make it illegal to give those voters water. I'm surprised they don't bring back polling taxes.

Repubs have always made voting as arduous as they possibly could, they've always opposed same day registration, voting on Saturdays and any other method to make voting easier and more accessible. They always have, they always will. Of course there are no 5 hour waiting lines in Beverly Hills. And that is no spin...

 

[PoS]

I have been providing examples of distrust of urban populations. Despite my asking you several times, you have yet to explain your problem with “urban hordes.”

Your moronic woke BS doesnt fool anyone. Give it up.

 

[Jay59]

As I said and as the census shows, in 1790 90% of all Americans were farmers and in 1776 when they came up with the idea of the EC, only 4% of Americans lived in cities. Now it's 83% and they estimate it will grow to 89% by 2050.

Even allowing that, so what?

Those great swaths of Georgia, Ohio and Kentucky were populated by voters who were evenly spread across the country and being pretty well served by the EC.

If you cannot get your facts straight, how can anyone take you seriously? You said yourself that they were not spread evenly across the country.

Even allowing for this factual mishap, the people are served equally well now. The EC was designed to protect people who live in lower-density areas from those who live in higher-density areas. Nothing fundamental has changed.

As you can see, times have changed

By your own statements, they have not

and now the majority of our voters are being denied the right to choose their leader. Look at the trend, it's only going to get worse, a smaller and smaller minority will be choosing our President as time goes on.

Nor this.

This is not providing, "protection" for minorities, it's giving them undue, undeserved, 'power' to thwart the will of the American people.

You speak as one who wished to have power and was thwarted.

I know of know other democracy where the electors are free to choose whomever they want regardless of the voters choice. "...There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote..." The Prime Minister for example can only be elected by the party that wins the majority of seats.

You provide your own counter-example.

Since you have refuted yourself, stop digging.

I want to scrap a system that allows the looser of the popular vote to become our President. I prefer a government controlled by a majority of it's voters.

Just admit that you want an outcome-based system that favors you.

The number of Georgia's voters has increased by nearly 2 million, yet they cut polling locations statewide by nearly 10%, this results in 5+ hour waiting lines. Then to top it off they make it illegal to give those voters water. I'm surprised they don't bring back polling taxes.

Repubs have always made voting as arduous as they possibly could, they've always opposed same day registration, voting on Saturdays and any other method to make voting easier and more accessible. They always have, they always will. Of course there are no 5 hour waiting lines in Beverly Hills. And that is no spin...

Beverly Hills is in Georgia. That's new.

Election security is a legitimate issue. Secure and verifiable do not describe the 2020 election. If you could show that the process was less secure or less verifiable you might have something.

 

[SoCal]

Even allowing that, so what?


If you cannot get your facts straight, how can anyone take you seriously? You said yourself that they were not spread evenly across the country.

Even allowing for this factual mishap, the people are served equally well now. The EC was designed to protect people who live in lower-density areas from those who live in higher-density areas. Nothing fundamental has changed.


By your own statements, they have not


Nor this.


You speak as one who wished to have power and was thwarted.


You provide your own counter-example.

Since you have refuted yourself, stop digging.


Just admit that you want an outcome-based system that favors you.


Beverly Hills is in Georgia. That's new.

Election security is a legitimate issue. Secure and verifiable do not describe the 2020 election. If you could show that the process was less secure or less verifiable you might have something.

Weak...

 

[Jay59]

Weak...

Says the guy who wants to reject the Constitution.

 

[Razoo]

Petition to Eliminate Electoral College - History House Gov​

https://history.house.gov › Listing

This petition from the secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts suggests the necessity of a constitutional amendment to change the method for choosing the ...

Abolish the Electoral College - MoveOn​

https://sign.moveon.org › petitions › abolish-the-elector...

Amend the constitution to abolish the Electoral College. Hold presidential elections based on popular vote. One person one vote to determine the one leader ...

​

Have we woke up yet?

 

[SoCal]

Says the guy who wants to reject the Constitution.

Not reject, amend. Much to the ever lasting chagrin of conservatives, our founding fathers saw fit to include Article V of the Constitution. Conservatives have always been averse to ever make use of it. Conservatives fought against it's use when it freed the slaves, when it give us Citizenship Rights, our Civil Rights, Women’s Right to Vote, and the Abolition of Poll Taxes.

We can add their current refusal to allow a majority of Americans to elect their leader to their long sad list of being on the wrong side of history...