English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

So then we can have majority wins.

2006-09-14 15:16:27 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

20 answers

The electoral college was created for other reasons also including the fact that transportation and media was hard to come by. It was suppose to give districts short distances to travel to vote. Their representative's job was to stay educated on the issues for them and to represent them.

Over the past few years what we have seen is the republican party manipulating districts based on race in order to get more republicans elected. I am sure that is not what the forefathers had in mind.

With the Internet, television and travel more accessible today, the electoral college is obsolete

2006-09-14 15:50:24 · answer #1 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 0 0

It works in other countries, but here we're stuck with an antiquated way of electing the president that is stuck back in the 18th century. See what happened in 2000? The REAL PRESIDENT - AL GORE - never got to serve because of that stupid damned thing and we got stuck with President Chimp. The electoral college should have been abolished years ago once the need to "even things out" because of the population density lessened. Direct election makes a lot more sense which is probably one reason why we haven't gone to it. Since when do they do anything in Washington that makes sense?

2006-09-14 15:26:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I believe our government still finds us incapable of selecting a person to lead our country.
The electoral college was put in place to prevent the people from really having the final say.
Imagine if the electoral college placed their votes differently than the state actually voted. Which has happened only a few times in history.
I think the other concern is voter fraud.

2006-09-14 15:21:04 · answer #3 · answered by Bluegirl 3 · 0 1

If we get rid of the electoral college would have a full fledge democracy. Heres what the founding fathers a more enlightenment bunched then I would have to say about democracy:

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
-Benjamin Franklin

and James Madison called it "tyranny of the majority."

2006-09-14 15:26:08 · answer #4 · answered by Jason 3 · 0 0

I always wondered why we need the electoral college. Seems weird to vote for a guy who is voting for the guy that you actually wanted to vote for in the first place.
I am paranoid that there is something shady going on with it. I.E. - I vote for the electoral college, but am I voting for his beliefs as well? Kinda like when you vote on a bill that has a fine print attached with it that you were unaware of.

2006-09-14 15:23:34 · answer #5 · answered by hiedistump 1 · 0 0

Because then the most populous states will determine the winner of the elections and that would be quite unfair to approximately 40 or so other states, you think?

Why should California and New York be permitted to represent over 1/6 of the U.S. vote?

2006-09-14 17:02:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Why are you worried about electoral college. Do you think your electoral vote choose the president? You have two choices of the same --------- both are elected to be puppets of someone.

2006-09-14 15:33:17 · answer #7 · answered by armine_aksay 2 · 0 1

With these new Diebold machines it would be much easier to rig the election if we did do away with the electorial college.

Those "old timers" that hooked this system up, put a lot of thought into it. They tried to look at the system from every angle and I think they did a pretty good job.

Seems to me like every time we let these new world order guys, monkey with the voting system, you and I get the short end of the stick.

I say, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

(Christ, I'm starting to talk like my grandfather).

2006-09-14 15:21:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Because then clinton would not have been elected if you want to got by majority. Now, if you want to go by who gets the most votes, then yes, i agree with you. But at the same time it diminishes a smalller states voting power just a little but then again it defies the constitution's first amendment of all men being created equal since, one person's vote is worth than another's right now. It is sort of a predicament, but i side with having the most votes is the winner, unless it is like 35%, to 33% to other scattered votes,
then there should be another election between the top two canidates.

2006-09-14 15:21:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

The electoral college is the best way to do it. I gather you don't know much about it and why we have it. If we did popular voting, California would always choose our prez.

Love, Jack.

2006-09-14 15:26:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers