Active Now

Danilo_G
Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » Are ya PRO/CON Electoral College? Keep it or get rid of it? Why?
RosieG

Are ya PRO/CON Electoral College? Keep it or get rid of it? Why?

Posted - March 19, 2019
Tags : None

Responses


  • 2706
    The Electoral College was formed around 1787. What you should do is to research the history of the Electoral College to find out why it was established. I am Pro Electoral College and I say keep it. It has served this nation well through the years. :)
      March 19, 2019 7:28 AM MDT
    2

  • 113301
    I wanted the opinion of others ru. I don't need to look it up. I have. I know what I think and why already. But I cannot look up your reply can I? I have to ask the question of you so I can know what your answer is. You are PRO. OK. Thank you for your reply and Happy Tuesday,
      March 19, 2019 7:33 AM MDT
    0

  • 2706
    Point taken and I'm glad to see that you have done your research.  Far too many don't. They research little or not at all, their own system of government before they ask or answer a question. They simply blather on about what they feel, think and believe without knowing what they are actually talking about. :)
      March 19, 2019 11:24 PM MDT
    2

  • 113301
    I'm glad you are glad ru. I just heard Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren say she wants to get rid of the Electoral College too so I am in very good company. Thank you for your reply ru and Happy Wednesday to you! :)
      March 20, 2019 4:25 AM MDT
    0

  • 6023
    I don't know that I would get rid of it ... but I believe it needs adjusting.

    For one, the members should not be members of any political party.  That does nothing but bias the EC towards said party.

    For another, it should not be an "all or nothing" system.  Two states award EC votes by ratio of the popular vote in that state.  I believe that is far more representative than "50.1% popular vote = 100% EC vote".  

    Finally, the Electoral College should be able to go against the popular vote if they believe the candidate is not qualified for the job.  Of course, that would require the EC to have something similar to Congress's power to investigate candidates.
      March 19, 2019 8:04 AM MDT
    2

  • 19937
    I agree with your opinion except I should not be up to the EC to determine the qualification of a candidate.  The bona fides of a candidate should be determined by the parties and the electorate.  
      March 19, 2019 10:27 AM MDT
    1

  • 6023
    Yes ... Of course, it should be determined by the parties.
    However, history shows it is more likely based upon their service to the party or seniority within the party.
    Or corruption within the party (Sanders vs Clinton).

    Of course, I have oft stated my opinion that we should do away with the entire election system ... and just pick people at random from a list of eligible citizens.
      March 19, 2019 10:30 AM MDT
    2

  • 19937
    Picking a random citizen couldn't do us any more harm than having elected Trump.
      March 19, 2019 2:04 PM MDT
    0

  • 6023
    Yep ... and it would be virtually impossible for somebody to serve more than 1 term in any office ... and we wouldn't have to worry about people being afraid of running against the incumbent (which is especially true now with elected Judges).
      March 19, 2019 2:18 PM MDT
    1

  • 19937
    Agreed. :)
      March 19, 2019 2:43 PM MDT
    0

  • 113301

    WHAT? "...just pick people at random from a list of eligible citizens." WHAT? You cannot possibly be serious. Unless you specify what exactly constitutes ELIGIBLE and who decides that and who votes on that? Might as well take a voting register from Podunk, wear a blindfold and finger pick the candidates. So you get a guy with an IQ of 80 who is a child molester or an American Nazi. That's random. It is also "eligible" based on what we have today. Not that Don don molested children but how do we know how far his sexual depravity extends and at what age his deviant behavior began? Not that he is member of the American Nazi party. But they support him. Why would they support anyone who was anti-them? I don't like that idea Walt. Not at all. No disrespect intended here. You have your way and I have mine...usually they coincide. In this case not even close! Thank you for your reply!  :)

     

      March 20, 2019 4:40 AM MDT
    1

  • 6023
    We already specify what makes someone eligible to hold office.
    We can add to it, to disqualify people with psychological problems or criminal backgrounds.

    But a random selection is no different from what we do for jury pools.
    If it's a good enough system to decide life and death matters, it should be good enough to decide legislation. This post was edited by Walt O'Reagun at March 20, 2019 9:15 AM MDT
      March 20, 2019 9:14 AM MDT
    0

  • 34963
    Yes put we have a prosecutor and a defense attorney who can object to any juror. Who would be in charge of that? 
      March 20, 2019 10:49 AM MDT
    0

  • 113301
    Ditto. I just said that to Walt BEFORE I read this response you wrote him L. Once again GREAT MINDS travel in similar paths don't they? I'm just sayin'......
      March 20, 2019 4:32 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    I just heard Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren say SHE wants to get rid of the Electoral College Walt so I am in very good company. Do you like her at all? I totally agree that apportioning things based on ratio is fairer than all or nothing at all But  to go against the popular vote if "they" believe the candidate is not qualified for the job? Why wait for an election? Stop it at the moment it is planned...when the parties choose the candidates. Not at election time on election day.  That makes no sense at all to me. It is the party that chooses who will run, not thee and me. So it is the party that must be convinced to rechoose OR ELSE it will be sued. Thank you for your reply Walt. Your turn.
      March 20, 2019 4:30 AM MDT
    0

  • 46117
    GET RID OF IT NOW.  NOW
      March 19, 2019 10:33 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    Certainly before the next prez election. It sucks bigly and that is how we got stuck with George W and liddle donny dingbat Don don among others. Thank you for your reply Sharon.
      March 20, 2019 4:33 AM MDT
    1

  • You know already that I'm in favor of keeping it. To do away with the protections of the Electoral College is to bring about an end to the American democratic experience. Maintaining a balance and equilibrium among fifty states has insured  this unique republic's survival. Expressing a desire to "throw the baby out with the bath water" as we say here, doesn't bode well for any sort of stable future. We've all had to live with the results of elections that placed us on the losing side. You can't change the system every time you hold an election simply because you didn't agree with the result. I think that most of this concern about free and fair elections is really just a front for the immature "my way or the highway" demands reminiscent of a spoiled child. I do, however find humor in the fact that those who complain the most about our system, are the ones that know the least about it. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at March 20, 2019 10:49 AM MDT
      March 20, 2019 9:40 AM MDT
    1

  • 34963
    We need the electoral college. It forces the candidates to appeal to all the states not just the populus states. States are free to assign their EC votes by their popular vote total or do the winner take all system. I would keep the winner take all...it keeps more importance to the individual state. If goes by popular vote every knows it will split 50/50.

    I do think the law Congress passed limiting the House Reps to 435 should be repealed. It is roughly 700,000/rep now. And of course each state gets 2 Sen. This is what decides how many EC votes a state gets.  Number of Rep + 2 Sen = EC Votes.  DC gets whatever the smallest state gets. (Currently 3)


    I think we should go to 350,000/Rep. This would increase the House to 883. Making the Total EC Votes 987. And of course it would be adjusted after each census.  

      March 20, 2019 9:55 AM MDT
    0