Jump to content
IGNORED

Still confused about election process


OneLight

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  40
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  508
  • Content Per Day:  0.14
  • Reputation:   216
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  08/04/2014
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  03/09/1985

I think that instead of winner take all, states should allocate their delegates proportionally to the popular vote within the state. This would mean the electoral collage would be more comparable to the popular vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  29
  • Topic Count:  593
  • Topics Per Day:  0.08
  • Content Count:  55,868
  • Content Per Day:  7.55
  • Reputation:   27,621
  • Days Won:  271
  • Joined:  12/29/2003
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, GoldenEagle said:

interesting. So how is that fair? Is one citizen worth more than another citizen? In the current system one citizen's vote is worth more than another citizen's vote. Where is the parity?

God bless,
GE

it isn't the citizen that counts, it's the state.....    The citizens in my state decide who we want for president and our state carries my vote to Washington for the Electoral College when it meets and votes.....

Individual people do not all have the same power when there is a very large number in one location     as it should be for our government is for all people not just the population centers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  29
  • Topic Count:  593
  • Topics Per Day:  0.08
  • Content Count:  55,868
  • Content Per Day:  7.55
  • Reputation:   27,621
  • Days Won:  271
  • Joined:  12/29/2003
  • Status:  Offline

36 minutes ago, ricky said:

I think that instead of winner take all, states should allocate their delegates proportionally to the popular vote within the state. This would mean the electoral collage would be more comparable to the popular vote.

Main does that....   and other states are free wo pass laws to do that in thier state...   The Federal Government does not demand how you elect your delegates nor how you instruct them to vote.   Here in Oklahoma we fine people who do not faithfully place thier vote......    and we might cause physical pain when they come back home....   It's a $1000 fine to not be faithful and Assault charges are about the same...     We can take turns making the perp miserable for years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  68
  • Topic Count:  185
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  14,204
  • Content Per Day:  3.35
  • Reputation:   16,629
  • Days Won:  30
  • Joined:  08/14/2012
  • Status:  Offline

My dad taught me that the electoral college was designed to give people in the country, small towns and suburbs the same clout as those in the more populous inner cities.   The people in the large cities are more apt to be influenced by those around them and be pressured to vote the beliefs of unions or college professors, and they are more apt to vote as liberals.  Those in the country side are more apt to vote conservatively and to think independently.  As one farmer said it, you can't even get two farmers to agree on the best way to plow a field.      

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  22
  • Topic Count:  1,294
  • Topics Per Day:  0.21
  • Content Count:  31,762
  • Content Per Day:  5.26
  • Reputation:   9,760
  • Days Won:  115
  • Joined:  09/14/2007
  • Status:  Offline

48 minutes ago, Yowm said:

This happens every election cycle. The voters of the losing party question the electoral vote system but are silent on the cycles they win.

In my OP I stated clearly that I voted for Trump, so your analysis of what this thread was about is incorrect.  I am trying to gain a fuller understanding what we still use such an archaic means of voting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  764
  • Topics Per Day:  0.18
  • Content Count:  7,626
  • Content Per Day:  1.82
  • Reputation:   1,559
  • Days Won:  44
  • Joined:  10/03/2012
  • Status:  Offline

58 minutes ago, Yowm said:

This happens every election cycle. The voters of the losing party question the electoral vote system but are silent on the cycles they win.

 

9 minutes ago, OneLight said:

In my OP I stated clearly that I voted for Trump, so your analysis of what this thread was about is incorrect.  I am trying to gain a fuller understanding what we still use such an archaic means of voting.

@Yowm same thing here for me as @OneLight here. I voted for Trump and am trying to understand the resistance to changing the current {flawed} system. I have been concerned about the electoral college since I've started voting. So I had concerns about this during the previous elections I participated in as well regardless of the outcome or winner.

God bless,

GE

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Servant
  • Followers:  25
  • Topic Count:  275
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  5,208
  • Content Per Day:  1.00
  • Reputation:   1,893
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/02/2010
  • Status:  Offline

I think it's important to note that Trump may still have won even if there'd been no electoral college. Campaign strategy for both campaigns was focused on turning out voters in a narrow corridor of states in the midwest and florida, with extra focus on the southwest for Clinton. Had both been running a truly national campaign, it's incredibly likely that we'd have seen a different strategy employed and, even in that event, Trump would've probably won. At this point there's just no point in betting against the guy it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  764
  • Topics Per Day:  0.18
  • Content Count:  7,626
  • Content Per Day:  1.82
  • Reputation:   1,559
  • Days Won:  44
  • Joined:  10/03/2012
  • Status:  Offline

2 hours ago, other one said:

it isn't the citizen that counts, it's the state.....    The citizens in my state decide who we want for president and our state carries my vote to Washington for the Electoral College when it meets and votes.....

Individual people do not all have the same power when there is a very large number in one location     as it should be for our government is for all people not just the population centers.

 

@other one I suppose you are correct that it's the state that counts in a Democratic Republic. We claim to be the leaders of the free world and democracy in the USA but do not have a true democratic election?

Republic: a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.

Democracy: a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

I don't understand this whole hick up over population centers. If every vote counted then it would be just as important for a person in North Dakota to vote as it would be in California or Texas right?

God bless,
GE

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  22
  • Topic Count:  1,294
  • Topics Per Day:  0.21
  • Content Count:  31,762
  • Content Per Day:  5.26
  • Reputation:   9,760
  • Days Won:  115
  • Joined:  09/14/2007
  • Status:  Offline

5 hours ago, ayin jade said:

The electoral college was set up in order to reduce the dominance of heavily populated states. If it went by popular vote, then small states such as yours really would not have any affect on presidential election. The election is based on the states, with each state electing members to the electoral college who vote according to the voters of the state. Your vote does count, in how your state votes for the president. 

Here is the problem.  One person, one vote.  It makes no difference where you are.  The issues derive from the culture of a particular area.  In AZ, you have different reasons to vote a certain way than I do in NH.

Let's look at California, the largest Electoral College body.  Hillary received 5,481,885  votes, and Trump received 2,965,704.  Instead of all 55 going to Hillary, why not split it up according to the real numbers?  Hillary would then receive 36 Electoral College votes and Trump would receive 19.  That would reflect the voters of California better instead of winner take all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  22
  • Topic Count:  1,294
  • Topics Per Day:  0.21
  • Content Count:  31,762
  • Content Per Day:  5.26
  • Reputation:   9,760
  • Days Won:  115
  • Joined:  09/14/2007
  • Status:  Offline

5 hours ago, ayin jade said:

Every vote does count. If it went by popular count only then every vote only counts in certain states while the rest of us might as well do something else on election day. 

That, my friend, is a defeatist mindset.  Let's say Trump won the popular vote but Hillary won the Electoral College vote, all due to the archaic voting methods we hold to.  Would it not be better for the Electoral College vote be divided to the percentage of vote each runner won?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...