Should the Electoral College be abandoned?
in United States

Pogue · December 2017

Nope · December 2017

I think it is not a good system and should be replaced.
This is an old post but it is relevant:
A.) State in which are considered safe states often don't matter. Candidates from both party's won't normally care about safe states. They only care about swing states.
B.) The voting system was designed in a different time. Some of the problems it was made to help don't occurs anymore. Like North vs South in terms of slavery. Slavery is gone now.
C.) People in California have less then 30% of the voice as people in Wyoming do in presidential votes. It is possible for a candidate to get less than 25% of the votes and win.
D.) The Votes of a sate can go agents that of the popular vote. Zero people can vote for a candidate in a sate and that sate can still vote all for that candidate. How does that even make sense?
E.) 49.9999% of the people of a sate can vote for one candidates and there votes don't really count in the final sate votes. That is like 19.5 million people not making a difference in one sate.
F.) This point is a new one. The system makes it hard for any third party to get anywhere. We are stuck with the two party system.
G.) Another new point. In the case of a tie the states vote, one vote each, which really causes a problem when capering Wyoming with a population of around 600,000 with it's one vote and Californian with a population of 40 million and it's still one vote.

Nope · December 2017

Edril Less then 22% of the population can over ride the other 78% of the population.

yolostide · December 2017

No, it provides a fair electoral process in the presidential election, etc.

Pogue · December 2017

However, in the elections of 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000 and 2016 the person who won the popular vote lost the electoral college. Read this http://archive.fairvote.org/e_college/controversial.htm

Fascism · December 2017

It should be replaced. Its idea isn't completely flawed, but the way the idea was implemented isn't working.

Max_Air29 · December 2017

@nope and @Pogue , great arguments!

someone234 · December 2017

I truly believe it should be replaced. Name two presidents who resulted from EC overturning the real vote?

Most recent ones:

George W. Bush (Jr.)
Donald J. Trump

If you honestly cannot see the idiotic choices the EC makes when overturning who the real votes preferred then you are just a die-hard Republican who needs better taste in politicians to be frank.

Edril · December 2017

The electoral college ensures that all states have equal say in the election.
With out the electoral college, candidates would only need to appeal to a few heavily populated areas leaving the less populated areas unrepresented.

The needs of rural folk should not be less important than that of urban folk when it comes to government representation.

Edril · December 2017

To help understand, in this picture, the highlighted counties house half of the country's population. A winning candidate needs to only appeal to these counties in order to win the election, if there were no electoral college. As you can see, that leaves a large percentage of the country lacking representation in the vote.

someone234 · December 2017

@Edril On the contrary, denser populated areas actually do matter more to a country... That's called democracy.

Majority wins.

Edril · December 2017

@someone234

Look at my map again and explain why the opinions of people who live in any of the non-highlighted areas (most of the country) should not matter.

What's good for a city dweller might not be good for a farmer.

You're saying the farmer's opinion should not matter, called that "democracy" but didn't explain why.

Edril · December 2017

@someone234

Keep in mind, the fact that the colonies votes didn't matter is why they revolted to begin with, and this is exactly why the founding fathers created the electoral college.

someone234 · December 2017

George Bush Jr and Donald Trump.

What great overturns.

CYDdharta · December 2017

someone234 said:

@Edril On the contrary, denser populated areas actually do matter more to a country... That's called democracy.

Majority wins.

We are not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic. If people that live in the more densely populated states want their votes to count the same as those who live in less populated states, they are free to move to those states.

someone234 · December 2017

@CYDdharta assuming I'm in USA and your 'we' applies, let's assess what you are advocating. You say you believe in absolute law and that majority shouldn't win unless the unquestionable constitution says they should... Do you not see why Dems view you guys as insane and beyond reason?

CYDdharta · December 2017

someone234 said:

@CYDdharta assuming I'm in USA and your 'we' applies, let's assess what you are advocating. You say you believe in absolute law and that majority shouldn't win unless the unquestionable constitution says they should... Do you not see why Dems view you guys as insane and beyond reason?

Let's assess what you are saying. You don't believe the nation should be moored by any principles. That being the case; no, I don't see why you would view me thusly, aside from your own demonstrable insanity.

someone234 · December 2017

@CYDdharta who exactly makes these principles and why are they so entitled to not be questioned?

CYDdharta · December 2017

someone234 said:

@CYDdharta who exactly makes these principles and why are they so entitled to not be questioned?

The Founding Fathers, you can read all about them in the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Who said you can't question them?? You are free to amend the Bill of Rights, it has been done a number of times before. The procedure for amending it is included in the document.

Nope · December 2017

Edril In the electron college candidates often mostly campaign in swing states. Image result for map of swing states

Swing states hold A LOT less of the population then half. Most candidates focus on this small population. Id rather have them campaign in where their is half of the population then less then half. If we wan't them to campaign equally in all states then are current system is not good. Not to mention a candidate only needs less then 25% of the nations votes to win.

someone234 · December 2017

@CYDdharta who has the right to amend them and why them?

Edril · December 2017

@Nope They campaign in swing states because polls show them that the other states are already decided and spending money on campaigning there would be a waste, not because the votes in other states dont matter.

CYDdharta · December 2017

Nope said:

Edril In the electron college candidates often mostly campaign in swing states.
Swing states hold A LOT less of the population then half. Most candidates focus on this small population. Id rather have them campaign in where their is half of the population then less then half. If we wan't them to campaign equally in all states then are current system is not good. Not to mention a candidate only needs less then 25% of the nations votes to win.

Here's a map of the states in which Trump made campaign stops (the states he visited are in blue);

Image: http://dev1.debateisland.com/uploads/editor/qn/h4ndbr9xaien.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rallies_for_the_Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign,_2016

Looks like he visited a LOT more than just swing states.

Edril · December 2017

@CYDdharta
Well Trump campaigned like a madman... because he's a madman.

CYDdharta · December 2017

Nope said:

Edril Less then 22% of the population can over ride the other 78% of the population.

I could win every Powerball and Mega-Million lottery for a year. Why are we concerned with things that are statistical impossibilities?

BryanMullinsTh1 · December 2017

@Fascism the system isn't flawed, its persuaded.

Edril · December 2017

Nope said:

Edril Less then 22% of the population can over ride the other 78% of the population.

I don't think you understand what "swing state" means. A candidate will lose the election if he only wins the swing states.
These states are important because this is were the undecided voters are. The votes in other states DO matter, but candidates don't campaign there because those states are already certain who they are going to vote for. You don't spend millions of dollars trying to persuade someone who cannot be persuaded.

billpassed · December 2017

No, the electoral college helps make elections for government officials fair.

averyapro · December 2017

I think that it is a poor system but should not be approved because it changes the whole concept of electing the candidate you want and it makes the electoral college do it which kind of puts a whole spin on the voting system. In the 2016 election Hillary Clinton got a whole lot more votes than Donald Trump but because of the electoral college, Trump ended up winning. The electoral college gives the whole Democratic party a disadvantage because there are 15 Democratic States, meaning that there are 34 Republican (Alaska being independent) which gives the whole Democrat party a huge disadvantage. I think that deciding on a candidate should be based on votes and not the electoral college.

Edril · December 2017

@averyapro
The electoral collage is still based on votes.

CYDdharta · December 2017

averyapro said:

I think that it is a poor system but should not be approved because it changes the whole concept of electing the candidate you want and it makes the electoral college do it which kind of puts a whole spin on the voting system. In the 2016 election Hillary Clinton got a whole lot more votes than Donald Trump but because of the electoral college, Trump ended up winning. The electoral college gives the whole Democratic party a disadvantage because there are 15 Democratic States, meaning that there are 34 Republican (Alaska being independent) which gives the whole Democrat party a huge disadvantage. I think that deciding on a candidate should be based on votes and not the electoral college.

The number of votes differs from state to state, so while the GOP may have more safer states, the Dems still have a significant electoral college advantage;

averyapro · December 2017

@Edril

But it's about what political party the state is and they will more than likely get more votes that will go to the electoral college.

Edril · December 2017

@averyapro

It's designed to balance the voting power across all regions of the country so that more densely populated urban areas don't have higher voting power than the less dense rural areas.

The number of electoral votes is not based on party affiliation.

someone234 · December 2017

@Edril I again will tell you that this is anti-democratic to do and that having more land-space per person doesn't entitle a region to more voting power AT ALL.

Edril · December 2017

@someone234

You're saying that people who live in MOST of the country should not have a say in the elections.

That's not democracy.

someone234 · December 2017

@Edril Yes it is. If you get more land, you aren't more people and your vote shouldn't be worth more just because you're richer.

Denser populated areas have less land per person but just because they own less land shouldn't reduce their voting power.

Checkmate, come and try again.

CYDdharta · December 2017

averyapro said:

@Edril

But it's about what political party the state is and they will more than likely get more votes that will go to the electoral college.

No, it's about how many electoral college votes a candidate gets. States with higher populations get more votes. A candidate could win the presidency by winning in just 11 states; California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Michigan, and Illinois. The other 39 states could all vote an opposing candidate and it wouldn't matter, that candidate would still lose.

CYDdharta · December 2017

someone234 said:

@Edril I again will tell you that this is anti-democratic to do and that having more land-space per person doesn't entitle a region to more voting power AT ALL.

I'll tell you again, we are not a democracy. Our founding fathers had the foresight to anticipate the problems of mob rule and designed this system to avoid the tyranny of the masses.

someone234 · December 2017

@CYDdharta I don't talk to a brainwashed right-wing extremist about fairness or democracy.

I have given you the chance on other debates and you are not worth my time.

CYDdharta · December 2017

someone234 said:

@CYDdharta I don't talk to a brainwashed right-wing extremist about fairness or democracy.

I have given you the chance on other debates and you are not worth my time.

I accept you concession.

someone234 · December 2017

CYDdharta said:

someone234 said:

@CYDdharta who exactly makes these principles and why are they so entitled to not be questioned?

The Founding Fathers, you can read all about them in the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Who said you can't question them?? You are free to amend the Bill of Rights, it has been done a number of times before. The procedure for amending it is included in the document.

someone234 said:

@CYDdharta who has the right to amend them and why them?

You are yet to reply to that.

Edril · December 2017

@someone234

Here is a map of the popular vote this past election. It looks a lot like my map from earlier showing how half the population lives in a small amount of dense areas. Clinton had more people voting for her, but those people represented a very small portion of the country.With a straight popular vote, people from the rural planes would need to rely on people from the big cities to know what's best for the entire country as a whole, and they simply don't. It's not fair to disregard the majority of the country just because the cities have more people in them.Again, everyone should be represented equally.

someone234 · December 2017

@Edril I have already seen this happen to the dismay of BOTH left-wing AND right-wing extremism. In UK, the party UKIP got totally annihilated due to how the voting system of UK works (In UK the vote is directly the EC method, the count is basically irrelevant and not what the new channels follow). UKIP got (by a huge margin compared to the fourth place party) the third most votes but got 1 seat... that's 1 EC win for UK. The fourth party got about a third of what UKIP got and had around 48 seats... It was the highest example of why this system so undemocratic but I liked it as I hate UKIP and laughed my head off since I don't believe in justice and know that no one will ever overthrow the two-party dominion of any country because they are too smart and cunning to ever outdo.

CYDdharta · December 2017

someone234 said:

CYDdharta said:

someone234 said:

@CYDdharta who exactly makes these principles and why are they so entitled to not be questioned?

The Founding Fathers, you can read all about them in the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Who said you can't question them?? You are free to amend the Bill of Rights, it has been done a number of times before. The procedure for amending it is included in the document.

someone234 said:

@CYDdharta who has the right to amend them and why them?

You are yet to reply to that.

Read the Constitution, maybe you'll learn something.

someone234 · December 2017

@CYDdharta This implies you can't form an argument for yourself. My question is why the founding fathers are any better than you or more worthy than you (or me) at forming values for a society to follow. They simply came before us, that in no way at all entitles them to a shred of respect especially not to the degree whereby we don't question their teachings.

Edril · December 2017

@someone234

Watch this, please.

someone234 · December 2017

@Edril Anyone who studies the system of most of Europe (especially UK) and Canada already knows everything in that video (sorry to say it but her voice and accent are UNBEARABLE IRRITATING so I had to skip after 1 minute to get glimpses of it).

I know exactly what it is and why it's considered necessary because in the UK system which is the most straightforward to explain, the regions ARE what gets counted on voting day and the voting number is basically negligible, no one pays much attention to it usually.

The issue I have with it is twofold:
1) Exactly like with UKIP in the 2015 election [not 2017], a third party gets trampled on usually (or in this case a fourth party as SNP was the fourth place one that had 48 seats). To get third most votes and only one seat but a party that gets approximately a third of your votes gets 48 seats is just... Well, it shows the system NEEDS REPAIRING BADLY

2) Parties like green party and liberal democrats (sticking to the UK here) get undervoted... In other words the real support for those parties is most likely 300% AT LEAST of what the votes are but because people know their vote LITERALLY will not count if they vote for those parties and even worse it's IMPOSSIBLE to vote for some parties depending on the region you are if they don't bother having a candidate there... Well it's safe to say that parties like them then in turn get totally incapable of competing with the dominant ones as no media outlet or political fundign organisation wants to touch them since they know how worthless the endeavour would be.

So, you can explain all you want about why a region with less people should have equal say to one with literally 8x their population but I will never ever agree to that as it defeats the entire purpose of voting in the first place.

CYDdharta · December 2017

someone234 said:

@CYDdharta This implies you can't form an argument for yourself. My question is why the founding fathers are any better than you or more worthy than you (or me) at forming values for a society to follow. They simply came before us, that in no way at all entitles them to a shred of respect especially not to the degree whereby we don't question their teachings.

No, it implies I don't feel like spoon-feeding someone who is too lazy to look things up for themselves.

The founding fathers, to a man, were brilliant statesmen. They formed a system of government that promotes liberty and freedom and laid the foundations for the most advanced country the world has ever known. I couldn't have done that, and judging from your posts thus far, neither could you nor anyone else on this forum.

someone234 · December 2017

@CYDdharta we all could have given being in the right place at the right time saying something obvious but being the first to officially say it.

CYDdharta · December 2017

someone234 said:

@CYDdharta we all could have given being in the right place at the right time saying something obvious but being the first to officially say it.

No, creating the most prosperous nation in history is not simply a matter of being in the right place at the right time.

Nope · December 2017

Edril I know what swing states are. If you preform the calculations where you count the population that can vote and it's number of votes of the smallest states (Because those states have less population for each electron college vote) then divided it by half and add one vote for each of these states as you only need over half the votes of a state to get all the states votes. You can get a tie in the votes by adding up the votes of New Jersey, Washington, Arizona, Indiana, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Wisconsin, Alabama, Colorado, South Carolina, Kentucky, Louisiana, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Organ, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi, Nevada, Utah, Nebraska, New Mexico, West Virginia, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, Rode island, Alaska, Delaware, District of Colombia, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming. If you wan't to skip the tie you can switch New Jersey with North Carolina (It will still be below 22%). To get the votes you only need a little over half the population and when you add a little over half the voting population of these states you get a little less then 22% of the US population. There for less then 22% of the US population can diced the president and override the other 78% percent.

frame

Howdy, Stranger!

Communities

Anything for Love: Inside the Romance Scam Epidemic | CBS Reports

In this Debate

Should the Electoral College be abandoned?
in United States

Persuaded Arguments

Debra AI Prediction

Arguments

Back To Top

foot

DebateIsland.com

Contact us

Get In Touch

frame

Howdy, Stranger!

Communities

Anything for Love: Inside the Romance Scam Epidemic | CBS Reports

In this Debate

Should the Electoral College be abandoned?in United States

Persuaded Arguments

Debra AI Prediction

Arguments

Back To Top

foot

DebateIsland.com

Contact us

Get In Touch

Should the Electoral College be abandoned?
in United States