I understand the initial benefits but the system seems outdated because of modern technology. Why is it still used rather than using popular vote?
2007-09-20 18:10:57 · 12 answers · asked by Vinatieri_Lover 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Hmmm...thanks for the answers although in reply I must say that the focus that if you are a democrat living in red state of vice versa you basically lose your vote...and smitty seems like someone with great opinions but no logical reasons to back thoses opinions
2007-09-20 18:28:04 · update #1
None. Popular vote should choose the president. That way every vote is counted and counts. And to the person that is so concerned over how many people don't vote. Who wants those people to vote anyway? If they can't be concerned enough to register and go to the polls, do you really think they are the least bit informed? You have a choice whether you vote or not. But I don't have a choice about my vote counting. I WANT MY VOTE TO COUNT. I don't care who the electoral college is supposed to favor. Voting should favor the individual voter.
2007-09-21 02:13:55 · answer #1 · answered by towanda 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Electoral College would be better if the state divided the vote based on Congressional Districts.
As to Electing the President by a Majority of the Popular Vote, what if none of the candidates has a Majority as happened in 1992, 1996, 2000 or ten other times in USA History?
2007-09-20 20:43:28 · answer #2 · answered by phillipk_1959 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Remember Florida of 2000? If a vote count is ever that close we wont have votes being recounted in every single state rather than just one.
The purpose of the Electoral college had absolutely nothing to do with the technology at the time. It had everything to do with making sure this nation is a Republic and not mob rule.
2007-09-20 22:22:18 · answer #3 · answered by Avatar_defender_of_the_light 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It makes the system more responsive to political minorities. And it gives the States chance to have something of a regional say in the political process. It is in fact better than 50.1% of the popular vote wins all, because it chooses the President based upon the plurality of the States by the choice of the Poeple of those States. OF course intelligent people do disagree on this.
2007-09-20 18:58:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
In 2004, there were over 200 million eligible voters. Only 65% of them were registered to vote. Out of those, less than 60% bothered to vote. Basically, only 40% of the eligible voting population bothered to vote. How do you get a 51% majority when you can't even get 50% of the population to vote at all? 'Popular' vote sounds great for headlines, but when not even half the country bothers to vote, it's not really so 'popular' after all.
So the Electoral College still functions today to prevent a single large state from overwhelming smaller states as it did in earlier history.
2007-09-20 18:33:09 · answer #5 · answered by Marc X 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
People say it values smaller states, which is a ridiculous argument. It values SWING STATES like Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio, not small states. It is an archaic system that needs to end. Candidates don't campaign in small states like Wyoming, Rhode Island, Nebraska and other smaller states. Why shouldn't the candidate that gets the most votes win?
2007-09-20 20:36:04 · answer #6 · answered by aspiring_paranormal_journalist 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The electoral college form of voting is indeed out dated--We should use the popular vote to determine the out come of an election. When I cast my ballot I want to believe it stands and not changed by a special elite group of people. Delete the electoral college, let the popular vote exist.
2007-09-20 18:51:07 · answer #7 · answered by Joan J 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
This is an unfair and undemocratic system to have electoral colleges. The majority did not want Bush. Some cheating by Jeb in Florida got Bush to start world conflicts so the defense industry could sell goods .
2007-09-20 18:27:45 · answer #8 · answered by sam-daddy 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
There are no benefits to the voter. It means that majority voters in your state will count, not the individual vote. It assumes that voters are incapable of making a correct choice, and so selects a more appropriate group to do so. It's ridiculous, and you're right, outdated.
2007-09-20 18:19:37 · answer #9 · answered by smartsassysabrina 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
the electoral college has no reason for existing, it was created because the one who made it felt that the average person was too stupid to be trusted to directly vote for president.
It in no way helps small states, the number of electoral vote each state has is directly proportional to the states population.
2007-09-20 18:20:39 · answer #10 · answered by Zack 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋