we vote for 50 electoral colleges and 26 of them were bribed to elect bush twice!
2007-05-15 13:34:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
There are just as many foolish or ignorant people in the United States of America as any where else.
Some of no idea how our government works, even after 12 years of school (some people can't be reached).
When our young country was founded, there were 13 original colonies (now called states). One of the concerns about voting was that the larger states would always dominate all elections being bigger and having more people. The smaller states refused to join if this was the case.
This would leave a lot of usuable area/buildings/resources for England to use against the budding country. Many colonies refused to join (Look at Canada).
Those that did agreed to a compromise. Each state would vote for who they wanted for President. The state would then send a set number of electors chosen by whatever side one (or one of each if there was a close vote) who would then vote for the President.
Each vote counts toward the electors. Each elector gets one vote. Each state is equally represented in the national election, so larger states cannot bulldoze their way over the smaller ones.
The recent upset (similar to the same kind of upset when the same thing happened to Former President Clinton) was caused by people complaining about President Bush getting the electoral vote, but not necessarily getting the popular vote (tracked for political reasons, not for any ability to vote a President into office).
This upset a lot of people.
Interesting, but they had no complaint with the electoral college BEFORE the election.
This is like someone playing bridge, then, after they lose, deciding that it is unfair for hearts to have so much power and that they didn't lose because they disagree with that. Note they were willing to play, and DID know the rules going in.
It's childish and silly, and way too common (common being an operative word).
Does this help? We have this fight EVERY time the popular vote is different from the electoral vote, and it's just as silly then. No one complains before the elections, no one changes it, no one tries to change it. If they did try, the smaller states would scream "foul!" and we would give it up and things would stay the same.
It actually works quite well amongst those of us who understand it and don't whine every time we lose. Even if the whiners got a democracy, they'd be screaming for a dictatorship (theirs).
2007-05-15 20:46:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by mckenziecalhoun 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The President is elected indirectly, through the Electoral College. Each state gets a number of electors equal to the number of house seats the state has, plus 2 for the senators. Whichever candidate gets the most popular votes in a state, receives all the electoral votes for the state. A majority of electors is needed to be elected by the Electoral College. If there is no winner, the election is decided in the House of Representatives.
2007-05-15 20:38:19
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
When we vote for the president we vote for electors pledged to vote for that person. The number of electors equals the total number of senators and house members. So the least number of electors is 3 (2 Senators and 1 House member). After the election in November they meet in January and vote. Sometimes the electoral vote and popular vote are not the same. In 2000, for example, Al Gore won the popular vote but George W. Bush won the electoral vote so he became president. Even a huge state like California with 52 votes can have most of its voters for candidate A but no matter how many of the millions of voters in California vote for Candidate A he only gets 52 votes. Two states one with 30 votes and another with 25 votes can vote for candidate B even though together their populations do not equal California, candidate B would have more electoral votes. The provision was put into the Constitution to appease the small states who felt they would have no chance of making any impact on a presidential election with only a popular vote.
2007-05-15 20:48:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Everyone can vote. But the way the President wins is by getting the most electoral votes, provided by each state. For ex: If 51% in a state vote for Jim and 49% vote for Bob, then Jim wins all of the electoral votes from that state. The larger the state, the more electoral votes a candidate wins from the state. in 2000, Bush had more Electoral Votes but Gore had more individual votes percentage wise, but Bush won because of that.
2007-05-15 20:37:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by But of Course 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
If Americans vote directly for their President, then the President would win by the popular vote. But that is not the case, Americans use the electoral college, so it really is representative.
2007-05-15 20:40:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by windshadow2007 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
ok to start wikipedia is amazingly horrible because pretty much anyone can change the info on there.
and as for your question. don't you have a history book or something to get the answer? sounds like a homework question. but oh well
americans do not vote directly for the president. they vote for the candidates and in most states whichever candidate wins gets all the elector votes from that state. then the electors of each state vote for the president according to which candidate won their state. HOWEVER, electors dont have to vote for whoever won their state. they can vote for anyone they want. so americans kinda vote indirectly but not really and yeah it is pretty horrible.
2007-05-15 20:36:19
·
answer #7
·
answered by fcukriot 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Just one of the Great American Lies. Every vote doesn't really count. The Electoral College chooses the President. Even if the majority of the people in each state vote for a person, the Electoral College of that state doesn't have to vote for them too. They can do whatever they want. That's our "democracy" for you.
2007-05-15 20:34:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
The electoral college helps make it so that it's not just a few environment hating big-city hippie scum space cadets deciding all of our fates.
Without it elections would be decided mostly by people with the moral fiber of Charles Manson.
2007-05-15 20:37:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by wqfahuar 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
we vote for electoral votes and the president with the most wins but they have to get more than 270.
2007-05-15 20:35:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋