TheShape31 said:
Dodece said:
@Electoral College
The United States is a Union. Each state has a right to allocate its votes as it sees fit. Not just to benefit the nation as a whole, but in the way that is most beneficial to the state. When a state casts its votes as a block it is making the case to a national candidate that they have to work hard to win that block of votes. That means doing more for that state. Whereas if a state chooses to parcel its vote based on the popular vote the national candidate is almost sure to put far less effort into appeasing the citizens of that state.
To put it mildly a bigger prize won narrowly carries more weight then a prize where you can get just a sliver more then the other guy. That means that splitting your states vote actually reduces your leverage in a election. Your vote becomes worth less. Even more important then that however is the following. Every person in a given state is valued whether they vote for a candidate or not.
You may dismiss those that refuse to vote out of hand, but that is a choice they are making. Not participating isn't a argument for them being devalued. When you vote in a block vote their voting power is added to your own. So even if they aren't voting. Their welfare is still being safe guarded by you the voter. When you block vote you all speak as one, and that means the national candidate has to pay more attention to you. Whether you are excited, or outright lethargic about the contest.
The Electoral College does its job, and the members take their jobs seriously. It isn't just about being a delivery man. They exist to act as a bulwark against the unanticipated. They ensure that no matter what we will have a continuation of leadership. Thankfully we have never had to rely on that back up, but it is good that we have one in place.
Hey I have nothing against a popular vote system, and I actively encourage you to petition your State government to enact such a system for your state. That said who are you to tell my State how it should, or should not vote. If you want to waste your vote go right ahead, and I will gladly accept the value add that my vote will get in return for that. Leave my State out of your crazy little scheme.
|
I think it's interesting how much people stick up for the electoral college like this. You come off as a politician. The truth of the matter is that the Three-Fifths Compromise counted a slave as 3/5 of a human being. This was agreed upon in 1787. The electoral college was created in order to take power away from certain portions of the population. This was created in 1787. Interesting how it's the same year. The college was created in order to make sure there was an imbalance of power, and that the minorities in the United States would never be fully counted. This is the people's history, the true history. Continue politicking.
|
Um....no. The 3/5 compromise was added to appease the South, who wanted greater representation in the House. The slaves couldn't vote, based on property requirement adopted at the state level, at the time of the ratification of the Constitution. The 3/5 compromise was intended to inflate the population of the South, hence, give them greater power in the House.
The Electoral College had multiple purposes. First, it ensured a federal, rather than a national system. This was an attempt to appease the smaller states, as well as state's rights activists, who feared a national government with too much power. Second, the Founders were elitists and didn't want the masses too control the electoral process, hence, why voters actually vote for delegates, who then cast votes. The delegates did not necessarily have to follow the wishes of the electorate. This made it so that the government would be protected from the "passions of the masses." Now, as we have seen, this elitist attitude has dissipated throughout history, although it hasn't been a linear or quick process. Nevertheless, the expansion of the franchise has occured. The reason the Electoral College is still around is because of Federalism, not because of elitism or an attempt to discount minorities.
