IMHO, it takes away from "One person - one vote." For example, if I'm the only Repubican in a state full of Democrats, all of my state's electoral college votes go to the Democrat candidate - my vote doesn't count. If I want my vote to count, I would have to move to a majority Republican state.
And "why" do we use this system to only elect the prez and v-prez? Is it because they're the only two nationally-elected offices?
It's such an archaic system and, again IMHO, should be disgarded and replaced by election through popular vote. Should it be replaced or retained?
2006-10-24 03:38:28 · 13 answers · asked by et_hates_agame035a 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
Looking at some of the responses makes me wonder. Look how many note that "states" elect the president. I don't think a 'state' should elect anyone - I want the PEOPLE to elect the president. But maybe that's the problem...
2006-10-24 06:57:44 · update #1
exactly how I feel... popular vote should be the only vote because it better represents the people of america (meaning it represents exactly what we want)
2006-10-24 05:01:01 · answer #1 · answered by nate_oddy 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The founding fathers were quite intelligent and knew that by having the electoral college, all of the states would be represented. We are a United States. If only the popular vote was used, then the candidates could ignore the less populated states.
2016-05-22 06:45:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have to agree with you for the exact reason you stated - it takes away the vote of a Republican living in a Democratic-leaning state, and vice versa....
But - if a national election were decided based totally on the popular vote then a candidate could run a campaign based solely on helping the people in a select few states that have very large populations (let's say CA, TX, IL, FL, and NY).... and they could totally ignore the people living the the less populous states.
2006-10-24 06:15:42 · answer #3 · answered by Brooks B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Following your logic, would we then need to have the senate 'weighted' vote based on population ?
We are not a democracy, but a representative republic. We vote for our electors in our state. Some states prorate the electoral votes based on the votes cast for the candidates.
It used to be the senate was elected by the state legislatures. That gave a better representation for the state. Thanks to the 17th amendment, election by popular vote mostly the large population centers elect our senators. E.G. Hillary. As a carpet bagger she would not be a NY senator had There been no 17th amendment.
2006-10-24 06:15:17 · answer #4 · answered by tjc 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Popular vote for the national votes would not be good.
It would give control to highly populated areas, who have different issues than the rest of the country. If you were a farmer, you would not have the same issues that the metro areas face.
The electorial college spreads the votes across the nation, for a more balanced national vote.
You are correct about it being the only nationally elected offices, as the reason for it.
----------
an easier example: Imagine a country the size of texas. Now imagine you have 2 million people in one city, such as houston. And you have 1million 950 thousand people spread around.
If you politically influence houston, you control the entire country. You would not care, or have to care about the other people.
2006-10-24 03:40:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Perhaps it has something to do with the CONSTITUTION.
See Article 2, Section 1 and Amendment 12.
On the practical side, it will be impossible to get the EC eliminated. It would take 38 states to approve a change to the method, and I'd guess that you'd have a hard time getting any of the smaller states (about 30 of them) to approve the change. So, the most you could get is about 20 states to approve.
2006-10-24 04:03:25 · answer #6 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Retained. Electing the president is the single most important election. It would be pretty unfair if only the highly populated states and cities elected the president.
Because of the electoral college, EVERY state has a say.
The popular vote is what influences the electoral college.
2006-10-24 03:42:16 · answer #7 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
At one time the people didn't vote for Senators either.
Electoral College must be the biggest party school in the US, look who they picked the last two times.
2006-10-24 06:36:28 · answer #8 · answered by El Cupacabra 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your making more sense than our elected officials, of course it should be replaced,it's antiquated to say the least,every vote counts,and should be counted.
2006-10-24 03:49:24 · answer #9 · answered by kman1830 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because that is the way the framers of the US Constitution wanted it.
2006-10-24 07:10:49 · answer #10 · answered by cashcobra_99 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋