• 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!

Proposition for changing the US presidential popular-vote

Lafayette

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
9,594
Reaction score
2,072
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
We must fix the manner in which the winner of the popular-vote can lose an election to the presidency. Which is wholly unacceptable to a truly fair and honest democracy.

Ours is dysfunctional because it does not reflect the pure total-vote of the presidency due to a dishonest manipulation of the vote-count in the Electoral College (EC). Only the pure total popular-vote is acceptable in any Real Democracy.

At the basis of the EC is a law passed and signed by Ulysses S. Grant in 1877. Voting needs a more modern rethink.

One that the basics of which might look like this:
*Only registered electronic-voting-machines are authorized to account for and deliver to DC electronically the presidential vote by state! (That method of communication can be made non-manipulable externally.)
*Each state decides (and is responsible for) how only Registered Voters access the also registered voting-machines (for the Presidency and Congress). Said machines can be kept under permanent-scrutiny to assure no tampering.
*The original vote-count - certified in each state by its Electoral College - is then sent to the head of both Houses of Congress that publishes the count immediately on their Web-site (the same date, hour and second programmed).
*The winner of the vote is then publicly simultaneously announced by the Senate and the HofR on their respective web-sites.


If and only if the above were passed into law by Congress and signed by the PotUS.

Which I think, btw, is highly unlikely - but you are most welcome to comment ...

PS: Comments adding to or subtracted from the above most-welcome!
 
We must fix the manner in which the winner of the popular-vote can lose an election to the presidency. Which is wholly unacceptable to a truly fair and honest democracy.

Ours is dysfunctional because it does not reflect the pure total-vote of the presidency due to a dishonest manipulation of the vote-count in the Electoral College (EC). Only the pure total popular-vote is acceptable in any Real Democracy.

At the basis of the EC is a law passed and signed by Ulysses S. Grant in 1877. Voting needs a more modern rethink.

One that the basics of which might look like this:
*Only registered electronic-voting-machines are authorized to account for and deliver to DC electronically the presidential vote by state! (That method of communication can be made non-manipulable externally.)
*Each state decides (and is responsible for) how only Registered Voters access the also registered voting-machines (for the Presidency and Congress). Said machines can be kept under permanent-scrutiny to assure no tampering.
*The original vote-count - certified in each state by its Electoral College - is then sent to the head of both Houses of Congress that publishes the count immediately on their Web-site (the same date, hour and second programmed).
*The winner of the vote is then publicly simultaneously announced by the Senate and the HofR on their respective web-sites.


If and only if the above were passed into law by Congress and signed by the PotUS.

Which I think, btw, is highly unlikely - but you are most welcome to comment ...

PS: Comments adding to or subtracted from the above most-welcome!


We must fix the manner in which the winner of the popular-vote can lose an election to the presidency.

Sorry, Our Founding Fathers thought Mob Rule is Not a good thing
 
We must fix the manner in which the winner of the popular-vote can lose an election to the presidency. Which is wholly unacceptable to a truly fair and honest democracy.

Ours is dysfunctional because it does not reflect the pure total-vote of the presidency due to a dishonest manipulation of the vote-count in the Electoral College (EC). Only the pure total popular-vote is acceptable in any Real Democracy.

At the basis of the EC is a law passed and signed by Ulysses S. Grant in 1877. Voting needs a more modern rethink.

One that the basics of which might look like this:
*Only registered electronic-voting-machines are authorized to account for and deliver to DC electronically the presidential vote by state! (That method of communication can be made non-manipulable externally.)
*Each state decides (and is responsible for) how only Registered Voters access the also registered voting-machines (for the Presidency and Congress). Said machines can be kept under permanent-scrutiny to assure no tampering.
*The original vote-count - certified in each state by its Electoral College - is then sent to the head of both Houses of Congress that publishes the count immediately on their Web-site (the same date, hour and second programmed).
*The winner of the vote is then publicly simultaneously announced by the Senate and the HofR on their respective web-sites.


If and only if the above were passed into law by Congress and signed by the PotUS.

Which I think, btw, is highly unlikely - but you are most welcome to comment ...

PS: Comments adding to or subtracted from the above most-welcome!


Some how you left out that small states will be out voted by large ones?
 
We must fix the manner in which the winner of the popular-vote can lose an election to the presidency.
Why? The popular vote is irrelevant. In other words...it doesn't matter.
Which is wholly unacceptable to a truly fair and honest democracy.
We don't have a "democracy". Why should we have one?
Ours is dysfunctional because it does not reflect the pure total-vote of the presidency due to a dishonest manipulation of the vote-count in the Electoral College (EC). Only the pure total popular-vote is acceptable in any Real Democracy.
Again, we don't have a democracy. If you want one, you'll need to rewrite the Constitution.

Good luck.
 
Why? The popular vote is irrelevant. In other words...it doesn't matter.

We don't have a "democracy". Why should we have one?

Again, we don't have a democracy. If you want one, you'll need to rewrite the Constitution.

Good luck.


Why? The popular vote is irrelevant. In other words...it doesn't matter.

It matters in the sense it tells us who our citizenry is made of

Which is way more important than a presidential election
 
They also thought owning slaves was a good thing.... We changed the constitution for that and we can change it for this...

Tex, only a little more than 1/4 of them owned slaves(Minority)

Next!
 
They also thought owning slaves was a good thing.... We changed the constitution for that and we can change it for this...

You forgot to add we went to war over it, than changed it
Well gosh, I guess those slaves were okay with it since only 1/4 of the founders owned slaves... LMAO

Why do you try and keep slavery going?

Just curious
 
Well gosh, I guess those slaves were okay with it since only 1/4 of the founders owned slaves... LMAO

Great Job poo pooing that it was a MINORITY of our Founders that were slave owners
 
Did they still vote to ratify the constitution that allowed it?

Did you think the issue of Slavery was going to be resolved at the time of our constitution or something?

*sigh*
 
The 3/4 of founders who didn't own slaves...


Did you think the issue of Slavery was going to be resolved at the time of our constitution or something?

Wow!!!
 
So the founders had no moral courage?


Some did

Some were realist and knew that it couldn't be resolved at that time

But you knew that already(wink)
 
Some did

Some were realist and knew that it couldn't be resolved at that time

But you knew that already(wink)

Enslavement was just a minor issue then?
 
Enslavement was just a minor issue then?


It was a Big issue that wasn't going to be Resolved at that time(You know that)

The constitution was to form a union and new gov(sigh)
 
It was a Big issue that wasn't going to be Resolved at that time(You know that)

The constitution was to form a union and new gov(sigh)

A union and new government that protected the right to enslave people....
 
It matters in the sense it tells us who our citizenry is made of

Which is way more important than a presidential election
How so?

I mean, we find out all the time from polls "who our citizenry is made of". Politicians listen to those polls.

But that has nothing to do with how the presidential election is conducted.

As I said, if you want to change how it's conducted, get busy trying to rewrite the Constitution.
 
How so?

I mean, we find out all the time from polls "who our citizenry is made of". Politicians listen to those polls.

But that has nothing to do with how the presidential election is conducted.

As I said, if you want to change how it's conducted, get busy trying to rewrite the Constitution.


It's DURING an ELECTION and NOT A POLL

You bad mouth polls almost daily right?
 
Sorry, Our Founding Fathers thought Mob Rule is Not a good thing
Mob rule? Voting is now mob rule? I say one person one vote add them all together and there's your winner. No electoral college needed. I'm sure the founding fathers didn't envision mass school shootings by united states citizens either.

Well son, that's the way they did it two hundred years ago.
 
Back
Top Bottom