User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 33

  1. #1
    Anew Leaf
    Guest

    Default Electoral College in the US Pros and Cons for Keeping?

    Ok, I am feeling punchy and bold and here is a thread.

    The Electoral College system is an interesting one, but I often wonder if it should be replaced by the simplicity of population vote.

    My main thoughts have lined up on the fact that it could make the irritation of election ads more evenly distributed since there will no longer be "battleground states" going on. (My main impetus for this thread is because Minnesota is jealous of all the attention Ohio gets.)

    I freely admit that my knowledge of politics is more of a meme such as "Read article on yahoo news. Is now informed voter."

    So to those who have far more knowledge of such things, what are your thoughts?

  2. #2
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saturned View Post
    The Electoral College system is an interesting one, but I often wonder if it should be replaced by the simplicity of population vote.

    My main thoughts have lined up on the fact that it could make the irritation of election ads more evenly distributed since there will no longer be "battleground states" going on. (My main impetus for this thread is because Minnesota is jealous of all the attention Ohio gets.)
    Well, for starters, it will mean there will just be battleground cities. Limited time and money means bombarding higher density populations.... which slant democratic. Those in the rural areas of the country will probably get even less attention than before; currently at least they're obligated to hit you up if just to capture your state if it is worth something or contested, but now your one vote costs a lot more in time and money than votes in populated areas.

    At least, that's the broad conjecture. Is there a reason to waste any money in lower-density areas and get "less bang for your buck and time"?
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  3. #3
    Anew Leaf
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Well, for starters, it will mean there will just be battleground cities. Limited time and money means bombarding higher density populations.... which slant democratic. Those in the rural areas of the country will probably get even less attention than before; currently at least they're obligated to hit you up if just to capture your state if it is worth something or contested, but now your one vote costs a lot more in time and money than votes in populated areas.

    At least, that's the broad conjecture. Is there a reason to waste any money in lower-density areas and get "less bang for your buck and time"?
    Interesting angle. I will think on this. Thanks

  4. #4
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    The founding fathers preferred it because:

    1) It gave small states with low populations higher representation in federal affairs.

    2) It created a buffer between the populace and the seat. They feared a population could be intimidated into voting particularly, but if that were going on, I'd imagine larger troubles at hand.




    Most people who are against it seem to be so because:

    1) It does not directly reflect the popular opinion of the nation as a whole.

    2) The fear that electors who swear their vote to one candidate can instead vote for the other.

    3) It adds that much more bureaucracy about the whole process.




    I personally find the founding fathers infallible, and we should act accordingly.

    /american

  5. #5
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    I support it, for the reason Jennifer listed and because this country is supposed to be federal republic, not a unitary state, and the electoral college (slightly) reinforces that. I wouldn't have been thrilled if Romney had won the popular vote while losing the electoral college, but I would not have viewed it as an illegitimate legal outcome.

    That said, I do think the votes should automatically reflect the state-level (or district-level) results, not left up to a human elector chosen by the winning party. Its extrordinarily rare for an elector to defect, but still....

  6. #6
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    I think there are some major pro's and major con's to getting rid of the electoral college.

    Main pro I usually think of: increased sense that your vote matters, and, as a result, increased turnout.

    Main con I usually think of: there's a benefit from creating a buffer between the voting population and the final result. I could imagine things being much more hostile between supporters of one party and supporters of another if each person knew that every other person who voted for the opposite side was going to have an impact on the election's final outcome. That being said, as someone from California, who, if I vote Republican, my vote is essentially inconsequential, I wish all of California's electoral votes didn't just go to one party. I wish the state were broken up into electoral districts, and that each district gave its individual electoral vote based on its citizens' vote.

  7. #7
    Senior Member swordpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    ISTx
    Posts
    10,552

    Default

    What if we lived in a society where the most productive individuals had the most weight in determining the results of an election.

  8. #8
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swordpath View Post
    What if we lived in a society where the most productive individuals had the most weight in determining the results of an election.
    Dear lord. Define productive.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  9. #9
    Senior Member swordpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    ISTx
    Posts
    10,552

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Dear lord. Define productive.
    Why should I when you can just consult the dictionary for the proper definition?

    I'm not saying my idea is plausible. It's highly idealistic, but still it sounds nice.

    "Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton agreed on little publicly, but they did agree that when the public treasury becomes a public trough and the voters recognize that, they will send to government only those who promise them a bigger piece of the pie."

  10. #10
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,905

    Default

    The problem is that all of the dictionary definitions of productivity are still very vague in this context. You need something very specific to allocate such powers.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

Similar Threads

  1. By the book teaching - Pros and Cons
    By kyuuei in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-12-2014, 11:55 AM
  2. Is ideology the bane of intellectual sophistication in the US?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-13-2009, 01:18 PM
  3. MBTIc votes in the US election
    By Economica in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 10-31-2008, 08:38 PM
  4. Christianity's Fall from Grace (in the US)
    By mippus in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-08-2008, 11:31 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO