OlHoss1884
8 years ago
Here's a little history lesson.

When the Constitution was first ratified, states were allowed to count 3/5 of their slaves as population for purposes of representation in congress. In those days, each state got 1 rep for every 40,000 people. This was a compromise to give disproportionate representation to the slave states.

The electoral college was built on representation, not population, so that the 3/5 rule would also help the slave states have a greater say in the presidential election.

To me, maintaining the electoral college (which tends to favor the Democrats for who I usually vote for in presidential elections) is an outdated reminder that the side that won the civil war didn't take the spoils of war...namely dispensing with this ridiculous compromise.

There are other arguments on the issue, to be sure, but since the reason for its inception is no longer valid, I say the whole process isn't valid either.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" --Albert Einstein
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
8 years ago
I would be in favor of he change I have heard talk about going to a straight popular vote since the 70s. It never gets anywhere. There have been 4 times were a President lost the popular vote and still won the Electoral Vote. The most recent time was when Bush defeated Gore in 2000.

There have been other major changes in voting procedures. Once upon a time people did not vote for their US Senators. They voted for their state representatives who in turn voted for the Senators.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
8 years ago
The electoral college was (and is) a way to check the power of the majority.

Everyone remembers from grade school civics class that the "separation of powers" idea was a core part of the Constitution because of the problems that ensue when a particular part of government (state v. federal, legislative v. executive v. judicial) has too disproportionate a share of the power to govern.

What people forget, however, is that the founders also considered "the popular majority" a power that needed to be limited. In general, it is why they went with a republic rather than a pure one-man/one-vote democracy. In specific, it is why they did not want direct election of senators and why they wanted an electoral college determining the President.

They believed in representative government, but they also believed a workable/sustainable representative government had to incorporation multiple modes of representation. They chose a bicameral legislature because they wanted to tension that came with one house determined by the majority of the total population (the House of Representatives) and one where the differences between states were represented without regard to relative population size (the Senate). They needed a popular-vote determined House to check the power of the patricians/elite, but they also needed a non-popular-vote determined Senate and President to check the power of ordinary people/the mob. They saw what was starting to happen in France (and, even more so, with what had happened in Britain with Jacobinism, the Gordon riots, etc).

We as a nation, of course, have spent the last 75 years increasing the possibilities for the "tyranny of the majority" and the rise of unchecked federal power, and now approach our elections and the rest of "we the people" governance. Instead a government designed to limit the power of anyone (or any type of division) getting bigger, we now are all about "empowerment." Instead of looking emphasizing solutions based on how they take away power that a group has or might accumulate, we now emphasize solutions based on how they increase the power of one group over another.

In short, it took us a bit longer, but we now believe and approach governance the way the French peasantry and "ordinary people" did c. 1789, not the way Madison, Jefferson, Washington, and company did c. 1789.

Unfortunately. As a nation, we have forgotten that a 51%/49% outcome means almost half of the population doesn't want what the "winner" offers, regardless of how that winner is chosen; and that means we ought to restrain ourselves in our fervor to pursue and use the power of the majority to impose our will on the minority. Or, to put it another way, there are times when "we, the 50.001% people," ought not to be allowed to get "what we want" vis-a-vis the 49.999% people, any more than the 49.999% ought to be allowed to tramp on the 50.001%.

If either Sanders or Trump is elected, I fully expect those wishing for the popular vote determining the president will finally get their wish. They are both riding the populist wave, and encouraging it (albeit for different reasons). If Clinton is, it is less likely, since she's more an old-fashioned "Senatorial" type.

Ironically, the result will likely be that even as the some of patricians get tossed out or tossed under the guillotine), others (call them the "inside the Beltway" people) will get more power than ever.

And the possibility of a Robispierre and Committee on Public Safety arising in accordance with the populist will gets greater all the time.






And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
8 years ago
Thank you Professor. Even in grade school I always felt the Elite, the Southern Gentry, didn't trust the Boston, Philly and NYC urban dwellers to make an "informed decision" and thus they blocked their ability to elect the President. They might lose 1 or 2 states to the rabble but they would make a stand in more states in the South. 4 of 5 Presidents were from Virginia.

I can't imagine either party wanting to change to popular vote.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
8 years ago
The whole system is flawed. Our representation government doesn't represent the needs of the common people. The government is completely corrupt, purchased, and run by the billionaires. The "electoral college" is very low in priority of our country's problems.
UserPostedImage
OlHoss1884
8 years ago

The whole system is flawed. Our representation government doesn't represent the needs of the common people. The government is completely corrupt, purchased, and run by the billionaires. The "electoral college" is very low in priority of our country's problems.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



I would be the first to agree that gerrymandering is a much worse problem, but because of the electoral college, the practical result is that in many states, a minority vote (Dem in WY, for example) is a waste, because as long as there is no chance for the dems to win that state, it becomes irrelevant, and the entire election is generally decided by a few "battleground" states.

The electoral college being a "check" on the majority has no basis in "check" of powers of the three branches talked about in the constitution. It was a compromise to keep free states from declaring slavery illegal by offering disproportionate representation to the slave states.

The Constitution itself is a check against the majority...it protects the rights of individuals despite attempts by the majority to crush those rights.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" --Albert Einstein
PackFanWithTwins
8 years ago
I don't think the electoral college itself is bad, but I do believe it needs to change. States should not be able to give 100% of their electorals to the person who wins the state. Each candidate should be awarded electoral's off the percentage of the vote they receive. with the odd remainder going to the winner overall. there are states republicans barely campaign in because they know the state will go democrat, and the same goes the otherway. I believe this would get candidates campaigning in areas they avoid today because they would have a chance to get votes they never would have before. Republicans would not avoid CA if they could walk away with 25 or so of those electorals.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Porforis
8 years ago

I would be the first to agree that gerrymandering is a much worse problem, but because of the electoral college, the practical result is that in many states, a minority vote (Dem in WY, for example) is a waste, because as long as there is no chance for the dems to win that state, it becomes irrelevant, and the entire election is generally decided by a few "battleground" states.

Originally Posted by: OlHoss1884 



It's also a huge factor behind maintaining our two-party system, and everything bad (and good) that comes with it. Given the disapproval rating in all branches of our government, how many people do you think would vote third party if one vote for a third party was worth the same as one vote for a democrat/republican, instead of nothing?
Porforis
8 years ago

I don't think the electoral college itself is bad, but I do believe it needs to change. States should not be able to give 100% of their electorals to the person who wins the state. Each candidate should be awarded electoral's off the percentage of the vote they receive. with the odd remainder going to the winner overall. there are states republicans barely campaign in because they know the state will go democrat, and the same goes the otherway. I believe this would get candidates campaigning in areas they avoid today because they would have a chance to get votes they never would have before. Republicans would not avoid CA if they could walk away with 25 or so of those electorals.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



Very well could be missing something, but how would this be functionally different than a straight up popular vote, if the number of electoral votes are based on population? The difference should be negligible at best.
Zero2Cool
8 years ago

Very well could be missing something, but how would this be functionally different than a straight up popular vote, if the number of electoral votes are based on population? The difference should be negligible at best.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



Negligible or not, in 2000 Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the election to George Bush.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Will there be a tracker on the ball or something?
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : uh oh
Martha Careful (1-Apr) : Too bad camera's can't spot the ball as well.
Mucky Tundra (1-Apr) : So will the chain gang be gone completely or will they still be around as a backup or whatever?
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : The method for measuring first downs in the NFL will switch from chain gangs to camera-based technology in 2025, the league announced.
Martha Careful (1-Apr) : A big step in the right direction. Just put in the college system is very very good.
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : NFL has passed a rule that allows both teams to possess the ball in OT during the regular season
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : Touchbacks on kickoffs will now bring the ball to the 35-yard line.
beast (31-Mar) : It might of gotten more popular recently, but braiding hair (even men) in certain cultures goes back for centuries.
Martha Careful (30-Mar) : Is men braiding their hair a new style thing? Watching the NCAA men's tournament many players have done
Zero2Cool (29-Mar) : Ha. Well, it'd be nice for folks to reset their own password. Via validated email 😏
beast (29-Mar) : Monopoly was supposed to be an educational game, that show how evil capitalism was and how we should avoid it
beast (29-Mar) : Lol, I was thinking username would be better, as then I wouldn't have to keep an email up to date lol 😂
beast (29-Mar) : Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : I was thinking email because I think it'll make folks keep it up todate lol
wpr (29-Mar) : sure is
Zero2Cool (29-Mar) : Monopoly is a rip off of The Landlord's Game
wpr (27-Mar) : 28 days until the draft
earthquake (27-Mar) : Which seemed strange to my 9 year old self, that you could be a fan for a team other than the one you play for
earthquake (27-Mar) : Nothing eventful happened, other than it being clear that he was a bengals fan
earthquake (27-Mar) : And we went and hung out with him one afternoon, I must have been 9 or so
earthquake (27-Mar) : That’s wild, when I was a kid my friend lived in the same apartment complex in De Pere
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : Only career highspot was a 200 yard rushing game while playing for the Cardinals
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : He is a former Packer. Drafted out of Northern Illinois. Didn't do much in GB.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Despicable
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Former NFL. I think Packers too
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : NFL RB Leshon Johnson has been charged in a massive dog fighting operation, with the FBI seizing over 190 Pit Bulls
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Some real irony of a QB as short as Wilson playing for the Giants
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Giants country, let's be the tall beings of lore!
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Russell Wilson signs with the Giants.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : I was thinking email because I think it'll make folks keep it up todate lol
wpr (25-Mar) : I don't think there is a significant difference. I use a user name for many. Others email.
Martha Careful (25-Mar) : email
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : would it be better to use EMAIL or USERNAME to log into a site?
wpr (25-Mar) : Thanks Zero
Zero2Cool (24-Mar) : New forum has the ability to Thank a post now.
beast (24-Mar) : And the only time they have won the Championship in an even year, was the first time they did, in 2006.
beast (24-Mar) : Since 2007, there have been 10 odd numbered years, Wisconsin Women have won the Championship in 7 of those 10 odd numbered years.
buckeyepackfan (24-Mar) : Congratulations Lady Badger Hockey Team. NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
Zero2Cool (23-Mar) : I don't think it's completed yet. it was just announced last month, right?
dhazer (23-Mar) : did netflix ever release the Packers documentary
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : And it is glorious!
beast (21-Mar) : Unsigned FA QB Rodgers is supposedly in the Steelers building
Martha Careful (19-Mar) : But I don't own a car! So can I still use it in my apartment?
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : btw, new site auto updates
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : Woohoo!
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Mar / Random Babble / wpr

28-Mar / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / dfosterf

28-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

26-Mar / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

25-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

24-Mar / Random Babble / packerfanoutwest

24-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

21-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.