Is the Electoral College obsolete in American elections?
The popular votes and the electoral votes in the 2016 election differed. What do you think should happen to the electoral college?
Like it or not, the Electoral College promises to affect elections far into the future. Why? It will take a Constitutional amendment to effect a change, an event unlikely to occur anytime soon.
I hope so. The US is a constitutional republic not a pure democracy. Democracies tend to implode because of the self interest of the majority. When popular vote is the means of decision, it is the old adage, of 2 wolves and a lamb voting on what is for dinner. The tyranny of the majority is sometimes a bad thing.
The Electoral College is intended to give states a say in how our republic is run. If we went solely on popular vote, candidates would just go to the most populist cities and campaign, ignoring the suburb and rural areas of the country. States like New Hampshire with 4 Electoral votes and Iowa with 6 got attention from both candidates because their votes count.
This is important because It builds coalitions with differing constituencies. New Hampshire and Iowa have different interests. Candidates went there and listened to those interests. If we went strictly popular vote, candidates would just campaign in the urban areas of California, New York and Texas.
In short, the electoral college insures a broader collection of diverse interests is heard by candidate and makes our country less susceptible to tyrannies of the majority.
The framers of the Constitution didn’t trust direct democracy.
Since electors are determined by how many Congress members there are per state and since the number on Representatives was based on the 3/5 rule then the Electoral College can be thought of as a holdover from slavery.
USC Article II Section 1
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
1787: 3/5, the Three-Fifth Compromise has it's roots in the Continental Congress in 1783;
Article I, Section 2, Clause 3
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
Thirteenth Amendment 1865 rendered the Three-Fifths Compromise obsolete.
1969 when the House of Representatives voted 338-70 to abolish the college and substitute a people's vote. President Nixon endorsed it, and opinion polls suggested that the required three-quarters of the states needed for constitutional amendment would agree. Died in the Senate
Laughing at this :
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-re … l-college/
Alexander Hamilton writes in “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” The point of the Electoral College is to preserve “the sense of the people,” while at the same time ensuring that a president is chosen “by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.”
No, I would actually say the opposite so that the middle of the nation isn't steamrolled by the very different liberal elites on the coasts.
"The popular votes and the electoral votes in the 2016 election differed."
Not exactly true because the election campaigns were both running to get electoral votes, not popular votes. Therefore it is really not an indication of what the popular vote would be if there was no electoral college at all and the winner was only based on the popular vote. So says the Washington Post a publication I assume "Lisavolraith" has no problem with.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the … -election/
So actually to say anyone won the popular vote is meaningless because neither candidate was campaigning for the popular vote nor was the election about the popular vote. The only way to actually know what the popular vote could be would have been to run an election based on the popular vote and not the electoral college and this video explains that the founders so feared such a tyranny of the majority.
I think the Electoral College should stay. It was designed to protect the minority from the majority.
by ptosis 5 years ago
"A constitutional amendment, which requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress (or a Convention under Article V of the Constitution) and ratification in three-fourths of all fifty states, would be required." - https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petiti … e/GZQtFSPVCheck out...
by Faith Reaper 19 months ago
I may be a bit naive on this topic, but I believe that my vote should count. I understand the history and all, but I still think one's vote should count, and the candidate who receives the most votes should win. What are your thoughts. Please help me to understand why the...
by Credence2 5 years ago
excerpt from a recent article"After back-to-back presidential losses, Republicans in key states want to change the rules to make it easier for them to win.From Wisconsin to Pennsylvania, GOP officials who control legislatures in states that supported President Barack Obama are considering...
by Ralph Schwartz 19 months ago
Now that the Electoral College has confirmed Trump, can the nation start to heal and work together?The Electoral College has confirmed Donald Trump as the next President. Faithless Elector counts were 2 from Trump's totals and surprisingly 4 from Clinton's totals. Even arch-rival John...
by ptosis 21 months ago
Do you believe the Presidential Election is rigged? Is the Electoral college system rigged? ‘More people are discovering that the system is all rigged and voting is just pacification,’ three-time presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul argued during an interview with RT America. Paul warned that...
by Mike Russo 21 months ago
People are protesting President Elect Trump? Because Hillary won the popular vote by .3% Trump = 47.4%, Hillary = 47.7%, but she lost the electoral college. That means more people voted for Hillary's platform than for Trump's. The electoral college must go. It is outdated and was for a younger...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|