Right Wingers, is there ANY level of popular vote/Electoral College disparity that would make you call for abolishing the EC?

@Sharonna -- I had forgetten this in the recent brouhaha, but I remember in 2012 hoping Obama would win reelection...but LOSE the popular vote, just so Right Wingers' heads would explode when they tried to reconcile their belief in the legitimacy of George W. Bush's 2000 election with their wish that the Nig...er, Nazi Kenyan Marxist Socialist Indonesian Terrorist Communist Muslim was not legitimately reelected.

But here we are.

As I noted in my previous EC thread, I am in favor of eliminating the Electoral College. It serves three primary functions: 2 legimate and 1 illegimate.

It's illegimate function is to provide The Plutocracy a was to subvert the will of the people. This is profoundly undemocratic although, thankfully, the current methods for choosing EC electors tend to minimize this problem.

One legitimate function of the EC was to provide a country dependent upon horses for transportation time to gather and tabulate votes. This, of course, has been obviated by modern technology.

The other legitimate function of the EC is to prevent presidential candidates from completely ignoring the interests of low-population-density areas. I think we still need SOME mechanism to encourage consideration of the political interests of low-population areas, but we can probably think of something BETTER than the EC.

I haven't read all this yet, but I  just want to thank you for all this, being I am not even a right-winger and all. 

Thank you, OS. I am reading this now.....

Okay, I read this. 

Do you think horse and buggy time is now over?  Yes. I do as well. I am so very sick of people wanting to uphold old values as IF we are betraying some Biblical Message if we change up such things as outmoded, established rule. 

So, tell me, Old School.  If the EC was established to give horse and buggy riders time to get their vote in?  How come they cannot wait a minute for us to tabulate the rest of Hillary's votes?  Kind of contradicting their original intended purpose, NO?

@Sharonna -- As I understand it, the uncounted votes mostly come from states where it does not matter if they break 100% Hillary/0% Trump.

HRC won California by 3 million votes+. If she wins California by 5 million votes+, she still only gets 55 electoral votes. The uncounted votes don't change the election. All they do is embarrass the GOP by highlighting how little mandate Der Trumpenfuhrer has...;-D...

Old, this just gets more fair and more fair the more you explain it.  NOT. 

We are living in the most illogical of worlds.   Alice in Wonderland is sane compared to what we are expected to just accept as sane and correct. 

@Sharonna -- That's because you've largely lived in a world where "one person, one vote" is accepted as a fundamental principle of democracy. Almost all changes to our elections in our lifetimes have been in pursuit of that principle.

But the EC is from a different time, when the need/desire to temper the passions of the uneducated rabble was considered a natural function of governmental structures. Our constitutional system was built with that "Those who know what's best for us...must rise and save us from ourselves" ethic deeply embedded in it. Over time, we've purged many of those mechanisms, but eliminating the last few (principally the EC and apportioning Senators two per state) would require amending the constitution. Constitutional amendments require a level of supermajority almost impossible to achieve in our currently very polarized polity.

I responded to Oz in this same manner.  That is what I was seeing from your explanation.  Yep, I see what you mean. 

My understanding it wasn't so much the time factor in horse and buggy days but that the ordinary folk would not know those standing for election well enough to make a choice

Oh, Oz, I just bet this was a prime factor.  Old, don't you think that Politicians always had it in for the "less well educated regarding politics" common man of the rural life?  They have always been pawns in the Political game.  The salt of the earth always gets it in the backside.  What they don't know WILL hurt them, but they won't know. 

I wonder at them being pawns ... Right now those of a more conservative less educated attitude appear to be waving the rest of the dog ... This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at November 25, 2016 2:59 PM MST

Yus. And that's still the same. 

Is this the first time you've thought about this?

About what, Thrifty, I am totally lost.  It is definitely the first time I learned all the machinations of the electoral joke of a college. 

I cannot believe how unbalanced and illogical the whole system is and why it ever is allowed to continue in this day and age totally baffles me.  It baffles me also that it does not baffle you.  It is outmoded.  It is antediluvian.    Yeah, that's it!

We had these discussions in high school civics.  That's why I asked if you've ever thought about the process before.  

@TM -- I submit it's HIGHLY unlikely your high school civics class had a discussion of the Electoral College to anywhere near this depth.

Yes, I'm sure they mentioned it, and they may have even mentioned that it could, in theory, subvert the wishes of the populace. But the last time it happened until the 2000/2016 debacles was 1888, a time when women and ethnic minorities (esp. African-Americans) did not broadly have the franchise, Senators were still chosen by state legislatures, and only about 20% of the population voted in elections (as opposed to about 40% in recent years).  The EC was relatively low on the list of anti-democratic issues built into our constitutional system the last time it failed to follow the popular vote (prior to 2000).

Yeah, I just made that up...................


Seems you would have realized my post was directed to Sharonna.   Never mind, that falls under both common sense and manners; what was I thinking.

This post was edited by Thriftymaid at November 25, 2016 10:16 PM MST

@Thriftymaid -- Yes, I believe you DID make that up. I took high school civics. We didn't have time to go into in-depth discussions about the implications of it and just how much it bends democratic processes. If your high school took that time and made its students think about it on that level, good for you. But the broader evidence of reality suggests either:

A) You had an HIGHLY unusual civics class in high school

or, more likelly

B) Your civics class in high school was just as rudimentary as most Americans, and any greater depth you remember is you engaging in Presentism (i.e. you know what you know NOW, and can't remember ever NOT knowing it).

As for your cracks about stupidity and manners, I'll let your F***ING HYPOCRISY speak for itself...;-D...

6 members of the college have already said they are not voting for trump come December   ..I don't think the fat lady has sung yet :)

It will take more than six. The gap is huge and it won't happen unless a new movement starts that will split GOP into two parts. Unfortunately. I would love to hope for this to happen, but I don't really do think it will happen before the college has elected TRUMP for president. Even darker years ahead of us all. Bless all our hearts.

To go all Yoda like.. The fiercest torrent starts with the first rain drop ... often unnoticed ... :)

Okay. .. hint taken. .. Yoda re write coming up :)
The first drop is the raging torrent start., unnoticed it is.

Better miss?