I personally believe the Electoral College is very necessary; leaving the choice of the leader of our country to the people's hands is a scary thought for me. I know this is a democracy, but look around. Lately, nobody knows what they're talking about or are terribly ignorant.
I'd love to hear your feedback. :]
2007-12-07 16:06:43 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
oops sorry, forgot to put "soley into the hands of." of course we still need to have our people vote. just thought i'd mention that heh.
2007-12-07 16:11:29 · update #1
"Uh, the votes from the people is what determines the electoral votes. So your point makes no sense. It's not like the "electoral college" is a group of scholars like Plato and Socrates sitting around deciding who is president. The amount of electoral votes is proportionate to the amount of voters in that state."
Lisa, not necessarily. We do have members in the electoral college, the members of Congress plus representatives for D.C. It's not the votes of the people that make it up, those are the popular votes.
2007-12-07 16:22:32 · update #2
Good point, but at the root of the whole system is the people. But I completely agree that people dont vote with their head. I have seen several people saying they wouldn't vote republican, just because they dont like Bush. That is completely scary to me, because they wont even take the time to listen to the other candidates running next year.
2007-12-07 16:11:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The Electoral College is not some independent group of high-minded individuals who thoughtfully select the best person to be president. They are bound by state law to vote for the candidate they are pledged to -- generally, the winner of their state (except in Maine and Nebraska, where split tickets of electors are possible), at least on the first ballot.
The Electoral College means that the presidential election is 50 statewide elections, instead of one national election, and to win a candidate must win in the right combination of states. But don't kid yourself that this is somehow a better result -- all it does is amplify the power of small states at the expense of the big ones.
2007-12-07 16:37:59 · answer #2 · answered by Unfocused Me 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whoever the majority of the people in a state vote for, that is who the electoral votes from that state go to. So, the people are helping in decide who gets elected. Although the electors don't have to by law cast their vote for the candidate that wins their state, I think it's only happened a few times where electors cast a vote for someone other than what the majority of the people wanted.
With your logic, "leaving the choice of the leader of our country to the people's hands is a scary thought for me." is a slippery slope toward nanny state/big government "we know what's best for you."
2007-12-07 16:12:13 · answer #3 · answered by Adolf Schmichael 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Just what exactly makes you think the electoral college is any smarter. And besides that the electoral college elects all the presidents. Popular vote is not and never has been legally binding.
2007-12-07 16:13:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The American people and the electoral college are both fundamental in electing the President. I do agree with you that it is an important and necessary part of the checks and balance system.
2007-12-07 16:09:15 · answer #5 · answered by Molly Pitcher 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Continental Congress was thinking way ahead of its time and must have suspected there would be yo-yos like we have within our large cities. At least it gives the smaller states some protection from overpowering the political process. Isn't it a good thing that we didn't have the instant communications we have today? Can you imagine the quality of responses the" Fathers " would have had? That would have been scary!!
2007-12-07 16:16:35 · answer #6 · answered by googie 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think that the rights to vote should be left to intellectuals, or those who even follow the news and national affairs. Many people supported going to Iraq, without even noticing that storming Iraq had nothing to do with the taliban. So, anyways, I support Plato's form of government in which a sort of oligarchy made up of intellectuals maintains power of international affairs, but the twist i would like would allow for the people of U.S. to maintain voting rights of national affairs, and also, all people who are at least high school graduates can elect the intellectuals who are made in charge of controlling the government.
2007-12-07 16:13:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think the American people are capable of being informed and making the decision, but I feel they are not as educated as they should be, plus many don't vote. I admit that at this point I couldn't tell you where some candidates stand on major issues.
2007-12-07 16:12:09 · answer #8 · answered by moonman 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
To answer you question;
The electoral college system is not going no where, there is 0 chance of changing the 12th amendment of the Constitution
2007-12-07 16:13:04 · answer #9 · answered by T-Bone 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
leaving it up to the people. You right nobody knows what there talking about. They can't even vote for a president they want. Who ever they vote for a year later they want them out of office
2007-12-07 16:10:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋