Discussion » Questions » Politics » Should the US have an electoral college?
Just Asking

Should the US have an electoral college?

The reason that the Constitution calls for this extra layer, rather than just providing for the direct election of the president, is that most of the nation’s founders were actually rather afraid of democracy. James Madison worried about what he called “factions,” which he defined as groups of citizens who have a common interest in some proposal that would either violate the rights of other citizens or would harm the nation as a whole. Madison’s fear — which Alexis de Tocqueville later dubbed “the tyranny of the majority” — was that a faction could grow to encompass more than 50% of the population, at which point it could“sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens.” Madison has a solution for tyranny of the majority: “A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking.”

As Alexander Hamilton writes in “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” The point of the Electoral College is to preserve “the sense of the people,” while at the same time ensuring that a president is chosen “by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.”
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/11/07/why-do-we-have-an-electoral-college/93440438/

Posted - November 9, 2016
Tags : None

Responses


  • 1002
    I think we should have an electoral college, but I think we need to revisit how those votes are allocated and cast. I also think we should revisit our system of voting altogether and adopt something like approval voting in exchange for the two-headed party snake we have now.
      November 9, 2016 9:13 AM MST
    2

  • Exactly!  Or a system of range  voting.   We should be able to vote for more than one candidate and at least be able to pick a number two choice that is factored in.  It's the only way to control  the parties. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at November 9, 2016 4:36 PM MST
      November 9, 2016 9:34 AM MST
    5

  • 3375
    reaction agreeing kevin corrigan
      November 9, 2016 11:01 AM MST
    2

  • Australia has this system.
    Voters can vote for one candidate or can number the preferences.
    If the vote count is tied, the preferences are counted and this decides the outcome.
    However, we still have the serious problem of gerrymanders in regional boundaries
    and more than anything, we need a system of proportional representation.

    It is possible for a majority of people to vote in a change that turns out to be undesirable -
    but I doubt if it's possible to predict what, when, how or why.

    Perhaps a system that compels listening to expert advice from specialists might help mitigate some risks. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at November 9, 2016 4:41 PM MST
      November 9, 2016 1:34 PM MST
    1

  • Aye but I believe the other  choices should be factored in the regular vote.  Not just in the case of tie breakers.  The one thing I cannot abide by though in y'all's system is mandatory voting.
    If 51% of people vote for one candidate as #1 and 80% vote for a candidate as their #2.  #2 should win.


    Honestly I think the position of a President is archaic and is silly in this day and age.
      November 9, 2016 1:40 PM MST
    1

  • 1002
    Totally agree, there are still a great many completely disenfranchised voters who will likely never have someone who truly represents them because of the control these two parties exert over the primaries process.

    I'm all for an electoral check and balance and if some states wish to provide a winner take-all or even allow the electorate more discretion, go for it. But that should be decided state by state, perhaps by referendum, in the here and now, not indefinitely left in the hands of those who lived 240+ years ago. jmo
      November 9, 2016 4:40 PM MST
    1

  • Is that where you can get one of them in-demand cyber security degrees?
      November 9, 2016 9:46 AM MST
    2

  • 34293
    Yes. It prevents mob rule.  It protects the minority opinions.
      November 9, 2016 10:48 AM MST
    0

  • 46117
    What good did it do us? 

    We cannot protect ourselves from this?  What good is it?
      November 9, 2016 1:49 PM MST
    0

  • 152
    No, we should have the popular vote, with the popular vote Conservatives would actually come out to vote with real passion in states like NY, NJ, CT, IL, MA, CA. These people wouldn't stay home in droves and feel their vote meant nothing. The Democrats start out with a huge advantage every electoral election for the simple reason Conservatives in those Blue states stay home in huge numbers.The only "advantage" Republicans have is TX but oh I forgot that is going Blue soon also, the liberal pundit freaks trumpeted this huge lie two weeks ago along with a Democrat senate and a Hillary landslide. Alotta fun to live in a delusional "reality" like the NY Times, CNN, MSNBC, Hillary and Obama do. But sooner or later the truth awakens the voter, if truth and reality cease to surface, you wind up with a country like North Korea, Iran, Cuba, or Velenzuela. All countries Obama and Hillary love with such fervor. 

    One thing this election did was confirm that both the Republican Party and Democrat parties are nothing but shills for globalism, their own selfish interests and the lobbyists who control them. Fat boy, Michael Moore had it right, this is a big middle finger directed at those two parties and the statist media. The establishment is a fossil, everybody knows all the people within the establishment are a fraud. This post was edited by peaceofmind50 at November 9, 2016 2:17 PM MST
      November 9, 2016 2:14 PM MST
    0