Way back in 1876 there was a Presidencial race that has some things in common with the 2000 election between Bush and Gore. There was also another election in 1888 that has some simalarities.
In 1876, Samuel J. Tilden of New York defeated Rutherford Hayes with the popular vote.
In 1888, Incumbent President Grover Cleveland defeated Benjamin Harrison with the popular vote.
In 2000, Vice President Al Gore defeated George W. Bush with the popular vote.
Couple things wrong here!
Al Gore has never been president!
Grover Cleveland was the only president to serve two "non-consecutive" terms. Cleveland did not win the 1888 election!
Samuel J Tilden has never been president!
Three times in history, a presidential candidate has won the plurality of the popular vote without winning the election.
Three times in history, a Republican has been given the election with the Electoral College.
What good is our vote if the Electoral College does not match our vote?
Does anyone else find this strange that three republicans have stolen elections and nobody cares to fix the problem??
Please let me know what you think. Thanks
2007-02-01 09:46:03 · 10 answers · asked by Danno 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I appreciate all replies. This was written to stimulate thoughts. Namecalling is not appreciated though.
2007-02-01 11:04:14 · update #1
Funny that you say namecalling is not appreciated when you claim that Republicans stole elections. One could easily say the same about the election of 1960, with some pretty shady dealing going on in Chicago.
The Electoral College isn't going anywhere, mainly because it will take a Constitutional amendment to get rid of it and the small states are not stupid enough to give up more power to California.
2007-02-01 13:51:18 · answer #1 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Electoral college could be eradicated...confident, the conventional vote could p.c. the President...If it have been that way, Al Gore could have been President in 2000...and Bush never could have been... And the Electoral college is the appropriate clarification why some human beings do no longer even vote...They sense their vote would not even count selection because of the fact in the top, the Electoral votes determine the President, so they think of WHY situation balloting... Votes in Rhode Island could count selection only as much as they do in California or Texas...a million guy or female, a million vote...yet because of the Electoral college, they do no longer...
2016-11-23 21:24:25 · answer #2 · answered by sposato 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Got more votes overall but the system set up from the very begining says the winner of a state gets ALL the state's electoral votes which is what actually makes you president.
So it was not done specifically by the Republicans.
Orginal intent was because (like today) most of the people were idiots and the college was supposed to be made up of learned people who could pick the best president..even if the person was not a candidate (theortically at least).
I used to want to get rid of the Electoral college but after seeing how most people vote for whose ads are the prettiest or whose slogans are the best makes me think most people are not qualified to vote for the leader of the free world
2007-02-01 09:56:14 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hey dumbass they did not steal the election! Thats whats wrong with all you liberals anytime you lose you cry aww the system is wrong so they stole the election, which is crap. They won the election by the guidelines of the system. The electoral college was created cause the founding fathers (not framers all you pc losers) did not want/trust the public with choosing the leader. Back then it was more than a two party system so the electoral college meant something. Now with only two parties it has lost its meaning. I do not neccessarily agree with the electoral college but before you get butt hurt because you lost read the Constitution and a history book and get some knowledge by yourself and not from CNN.
2007-02-01 10:52:16 · answer #4 · answered by Rich C 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is not about stolen elections. This is about the rules and the process for electing the President.
You are making the wrong kind of comparison. Each state has its own set of electors. In most states these days it is winner take all. So your vote counts in your OWN state. The vote total across the entire nation only counts to sore losers.
The LAST thing the framers of the U.S. Constitution wanted was for the people have a DIRECT voice in choosing the President. They wanted a layer of protection to insulate the presidency from the changeable moods of the average voter, and the lies and trickery they knew were inevitable in election campaigns. They were right.
As the failure of our educational system grows worse each year (you can tell by the quality of questions on Yahoo Answers), the importance of the electoral college grows in proportion. One day they may have to muster their courage and vote in the best interest of the nation instead of the will of the average voter.
2007-02-01 10:01:13 · answer #5 · answered by John H 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, in this day and age, I agree we should do away with the electoral college-- it made sense in the early days. But to say those early elections were stolen is a bit reaching. Obviously, the electoral college has that flaw. And the "stolen" election in 2000 wasn't really due to the electoral college. It was all the fighting over chads, over/under votes, ballots, excluding "alleged" felons etc.
2007-02-01 09:54:39 · answer #6 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It seems people would figure out that there is something truly wrong with our election system. I don't understand why the American People sit around and let themselves get screwed time and time again under the guise of patriotism.
In a democracy, the individual is supposed to matter but it seems the only thing that matters in the U.S. is money for big corporations and to heII with the people.
If we believe in democracy, we need to get rid of the electorial college or start advertising ourselves as something other than a democracy.
If the voting system doesn't work here, what makes us think it will work in Iraq? What are we fighting and dying for if it isn't money and oil?
2007-02-01 09:54:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
There are several flaws in your argument.....
1. The number of electorial votes a person gets is based on the popular vote for that state. SO you vote does count. If a candidate wins you state they win your electorial votes.
2. The electorial college does have a purpose....it evens the playing field between the larger states and the small(population wise).....there are more people in one major US city than in my entire state.....and the same goes for many of the states around us. I garentee that a person in NY does not have the same views as far as what important as I do.
3. Another thing it does is force candidtated to compaine in more areas. If was all about popular vote....they woule stick to NY, LA, Miami, etc....smaller cities and states would not get visited. And to me that is very important.....I want to know that a caniditate is willing to make the effort.
I know that the bigger states have more votes and that many of you will say....more electorial votes is the same as more of a popular vote...its not.....at least now...the larger states you know who is going to win in those....usually a Dem in Cali, Reps in Texal...fairly equal.....so that allows the smaller stated to be more important.....In recent years the States with the most electorial votes have split pretty equal.....and smaller states like mine and other like KS, NE....etc become more important...so ....
2007-02-01 09:55:44 · answer #8 · answered by yetti 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Right on! We need to do away with the Electoral College.
2007-02-01 09:51:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
should be done away with.
2007-02-03 18:08:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋