Do republicans support the electoral college or not?

Question

can i have some details please?

thank you daniel g... by the way Democrats suck!

Answer 1

Yes they do. With good reason:

One of the most troubling aspects of the electoral college system is the possibility that the winner might not be the candidate with the most popular votes. Three presidents—Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876, Benjamin Harrison in 1888, and George W. Bush in 2000—were elected with fewer popular votes than their opponents, and Andrew Jackson lost to John Quincy Adams in the House of Representatives after winning a plurality of the popular and electoral vote in 1824. In 18 elections between 1824 and 2000, presidents were elected without popular majorities—including Abraham Lincoln, who won election in 1860 with under 40 percent of the national vote. During much of the 20th century, however, the effect of the general ticket system was to exaggerate the popular vote, not reverse it. For example, in 1980 Ronald Reagan won just over 50 percent of the popular vote and 91 percent of the electoral vote; in 1988 George Bush received 53 percent of the popular vote and 79 percent of the electoral vote; and in 1992 and 1996 William J. Clinton won 43 and 49 percent of the popular vote, respectively, and 69 and 70 percent of the electoral vote. Third-party candidates with broad national support are generally penalized in the electoral college—as was Ross Perot, who won 19 percent of the popular vote in 1992 and no electoral votes—though candidates with geographically concentrated support—such as Dixiecrat candidate Strom Thurmond, who won 39 electoral votes in 1948 with just over 2 percent of the national vote—are occasionally able to win electoral votes.



Get the full article with a FREE TRIAL
The divergence between popular and electoral votes indicates some of the principal advantages and disadvantages of the electoral college system. Many who favour the system maintain that it provides presidents with a special federative majority and a broad national mandate for governing, unifying the two major parties across the country and requiring broad geographic support to win the presidency. In addition, they argue that the electoral college protects the interests of small states and sparsely populated areas, which they claim would be ignored if the president was directly elected. Opponents, however, argue that the potential for an undemocratic outcome—in which the winner of the popular vote loses the electoral vote—the bias against third parties and independent candidates, the disincentive for voter turnout in states where one of the parties is clearly dominant, and the possibility of a “faithless” elector who votes for a candidate other than the one to whom he is pledged make the electoral college outmoded and undesirable. Many opponents advocate eliminating the electoral college altogether and replacing it with a direct popular vote. Their position has been buttressed by public opinion polls, which regularly show that Americans prefer a popular vote to the electoral college system. Other possible reforms include a district plan, similar to those used in Maine and Nebraska, which would allocate electoral votes by legislative district rather than at the statewide level; and a proportional plan, which would assign electoral votes on the basis of the percentage of popular votes a candidate received. Supporters of the electoral college contend that its longevity has proven its merit and that previous attempts to reform the system have been unsuccessful.





In 2000 George W. Bush's narrow 271–266 electoral college victory over Al Gore, who won the nationwide popular vote by more than 500,000 votes, prompted renewed calls for the abolition of the electoral college. Doing so, however, would require adopting a constitutional amendment by a two-thirds vote of both chambers of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states. Because many smaller states fear that eliminating the electoral college would reduce their electoral influence, adoption of such an amendment is considered difficult and unlikely.

Answer 2

It's not a partisan issue. The people who predominately support the Electoral College are people from smaller states. The EC system gives them a little more leverage than if we went with a straight vote. In the 2000 election between Bush and Gore, it was projected that Bush might win the popular vote yet Gore would still win the EC. As it turned out, we eventually learned that Gore should have won both the popular vote and the EC but by that time it was all too late.

If it weren't for the EC system, we wouldn't see so much emphasis placed on states like Ohio, which has 20 electoral votes (about 4%, 20 out of 538) and has about 4% of the US population (11.3 million out of 300.8 million people). However, it's a winner take all methodology, so if 50.5% of the people in Ohio vote for candidate A, then candidate A gets all 20 EC votes. This gives relatively small states a lot of power, especially in close elections. Hope this helps.

Answer 3

republicans and democrats all happen to be AMERICANS. the electoral college preserves the integrity of the general election by insuring representation.
if it wasn't for the electoral college, only a few major population centers could rule the whole country.
look at a map of how the country voted in the past presidential election. if red represents the area carried by the republican candidate and blue represents the area carried by the democratic candidate, you will see an area of about 95% red and 5% blue, yet the TOTAL popular vote count is much closer than that. this isn't a proper answer as to how the college represents votes in the best interest of the country, but it should serve to illustrate why it is important to have it in place.

Answer 4

They are divided. Should the least populated states have much influence? That's why the Senate has exactly two Senators from each state. The electoral college is similar, but it originated in a time when travel and communication were difficult and it was necessary then. That's no longer the case. But it can work either for or against the republicans It's debatable, but one hesitates to tamper with the Constitution, same-sex marriage and flag burning notwithstanding.

Answer 5

Heck. You'd think Democrats would support it too. That's how their great John F. Kennedy won his Presidency. He won the electoral college but lost the popular.

Answer 6

I support it for sure. It's the best way we know how to protect the rural and suburban areas. Without it, concentrated populations that tend to vote one way (NYC, LA, Chicago) would have a ridiculous amount of power in comparison to some of the less populated states.

Answer 7

To recall history..the only reason why Bush won his first term was due to the electoral college!..They'll support it until its used against them !!

Answer 8

yes they do as otherwise you'd of had president Gore rahther than Bush, it is an antiquated system set up prior to the days of mass communication

Answer 9

Yes.

Answer 10

Hell yea they do. It's the only long term protection they have.