Welcome to PatsFans.com

The Dissolution of the Electoral College

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Wolfpack, Jul 19, 2010.

  1. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    This is an issue which I do not think gets anywhere near the amount of attention I feel it deserves. It would completely change the way we elect our Presidents, and it is gaining steam. It is called the National Popular Vote Referendum. This movement wants to get enough states (totalling 270 electors) to agree to assign all their electors to whichever candidate wins the national popular vote - no matter how the citizens of that particular state votes.

    Massachusetts is going to be voting on whether or not to enact this legislation into state law. 5 states have already done so (but with the caveat that it only goes into effect once enough states sign on). This is an issue which I don't think really falls along normal party lines (except for those few remaining democrats still smarting over their anger from the 2000 election where Gore own the popular vote but lost the electoral vote).

    Mass. may join effort to bypass Electoral College - Local News Updates - MetroDesk - The Boston Globe
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2010
  2. efin98

    efin98 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Unconstitutional in principle and would be a slap in the face of voters when the choice directly contradicts the choice of who the voters wanted in the state.
  3. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Well, for those who oppose this referendum, the problem is that there is nothing unconstitutional about it. The Constitution doesn't saying anything about how states must choose their electors. Back in the old days, there were a lot of states that would just have the legislature (and not the citizenry) vote on it. Even today, there is no one single set standard because something like 2 states (I wanna say Maine and Nebraska but don't quote me on that) do not have the "winner take all" set up which the other 48 states have.
  4. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    15,888
    Likes Received:
    328
    Ratings:
    +562 / 9 / -5

    #24 Jersey

    At first glance, without reading and researching further, it sounds like a fairly good idea.

    But that's just what I think now - and I'm not sure that's how I'd feel tomorrow.

    The whole electoral college thing never made much sense to me in the first place, though.
  5. khayos

    khayos Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,675
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It's incredibly important in terms of the rights of states with small populations ... then again, the states haven't exercised their power in quite some time. Immigration and healthcare may change that.
  6. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    IMHO, these people are trying to solve a problem by simply creating a different one.

    Right now, the problem (as they see it) is that so much of the election simply comes down to a few key battleground states, with everyone else being left out in the cold. Of course, if this referendum comes to pass, then campaigning will shift into large population centers and cities.
  7. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    The Electoral College is EXACTLY like the college bowl series. The popular vote is like
    every other NCAA sport.

    The bowl series was put in place for a regional reason that nobody can understand today. It is in place today because those same old timers are still getting filthy rich off of keeping the system the way it is.

    Every other sport in college, including Division 2 football are decided by a playoff system (popular vote). Its the right thing to do.


    The way it stands today, if you voted for John McCain and lived in California, your vote didnt count.

    Imagine if all of our votes counted for the presidential election?


    The electoral college can lick my *&%%s
  8. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Ignoring your football analogy (because it is too stupid to address), you statement that someone in California's "vote didn't count" if they voted for McCain is silly. Why didn't that person's vote count? Because McCain lost CA? Well according to that logic, anyone who votes for the losing candidate's vote "didn't count."
  9. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    yeah.

    If you lived in Orange County, voted for McCain (which is probably true), your vote didnt count. The ELECTORAL VOTES used to seat a president all went to Obama. tilt it however you want, but McCain didn't get a single electoral vote for president from the golden state. Meaning his total electoral vote count for California (The kind of vote NEEDED to become presaident) was zero. Not sure how else to explain that to you.

    And the analogy is spot on, Every college championship is decided fairly, and on the field....except one. In a system of elections, EVERY single one of them is decided by a popular vote at all levels of the democratic process...all save 1.

    The Presidential.

    You must be a USC or Florida fan ... Screw Boise State and Utah!
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2010
  10. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,119
    Likes Received:
    218
    Ratings:
    +519 / 6 / -2

    Terrible idea, and if it were to ever happen, which I don't think it will, then we could potentially see some states secede. Who could blame them?
  11. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    According to this logic, anyone that votes for a loser has their vote "not count."

    Not sure how else to explain that to you.
    The analogy is moronic and has absolutely nothing to do with this issue at hand.
    This proves how stupid your analogy is. I hate the BCS setup precisely because it screws teams like Utah and Boise State. But, once again, your analogy has absolutely zero to do with the Presidential election, so please stop trying to hijack my thread.
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2010
  12. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey



    the BCS does the EXACT injustice to a championship won ON THE FIELD that the Electoral college does to democracy.

    if you cant see it, its not my fault.

    now do yourself a favor.... check out this Dokken Video:

    YouTube - dokken-dream warriors HQ
  13. chicowalker

    chicowalker On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,102
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +252 / 3 / -4

    How so?

    How might they exercise their power in a way they haven't done in some time?
  14. chicowalker

    chicowalker On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,102
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +252 / 3 / -4

    I don't think we'd see any states secede over this, nor should they -- it's up to each state to decide how they vote. (and the only way a state could be forced to do this unless the Constitution were changed)

    I don't see why any state would decide to do this, though. Fine with me if they do, but it would seem an odd abdication of their rights.
  15. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I don't really like the idea for a couple reasons. I like that the electoral college prevents small states from being totally ignored, I see problems with 1 voting block but different balloting systems, recount rules, and frankly levels of corruption among different states, and I would hate to see a candidate win Massachusetts but have all the electoral votes go to the other guy because he/she won other states. Holy, doesn't that system have the exact same problem of "wasting your vote" that the electoral college system does? You voted for one candidate but the votes from your state were given to the other guy!

    That said there is nothing unconstitutional with the idea IMO, as states are free to apportion their votes as they see fit. That part is pretty clear in the constitution.
  16. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Your analogy is epic fail, as demonstrated by your bogus assumption that since I support the current format of the electoral college, that must mean I also support the BCS.
  17. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    OK but what if the 13 biggest states (in terms of population) decide to get together and decide who is going to be President, regardless of the results in other other 37? They have the electoral votes to do it if they wanted.
    Well there's a couple of people in here that seem to think it is a good idea, so maybe you should ask them what they are thinking.
  18. chicowalker

    chicowalker On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,102
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +252 / 3 / -4

    How exactly would that scenario arise from this proposal? Isn't the possibility of that occurring a result of the electoral college existing in the first place?
  19. efin98

    efin98 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I am aware of the past and how Maine and Nebraska do their voting. However without it becoming the 28th ammendment of the US Constitution I don't believe that the changes are within the intent of the Constitution and are going against the direct wishes of the founding fathers- thus the unconstitutional part.

    I would support states choosing to adopt the Maine and Nebraska method of allocating the votes to the individual congressional districts so that it more accurately reflects on the people of the state and/or reflects on the wishes of the country. The remaining 2 votes per state would be in keeping with the past of winner take all and does not favor big states over small ones since you have 435 votes up for grabs then you have 50 plus the 3 to DC.
  20. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    That scenario would not arise from this particular referendum, hence my usage of the term "what if?"

    But what we could theoretically have is the top 13 states (I think it's 13 - I may be off by 1 or 2) deciding that the entire nation will switch to popular vote instead of electoral votes we are all familiar with. None of the huge states have signed on yet, but it is being considered.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>