Elections Should the US election be decided by electoral votes or popular votes?

[grimballer]

We're talking about electing the President here, the head of the executive branch of the Federal Government. How is it centralized in Washington DC if the votes come from each American Citizen?

you completely disregard individual states

 

[Magooglie]

you completely disregard individual states

They still have state representation on the federal level through congress. Did you forget that they exist?

 

[grimballer]

They still have state representation on the federal level through congress. Did you forget that they exist?

the same is true for house of representatives... did you forget they exist?

presidency/ec is middle ground between the 2.

 

[Magooglie]

the same is true for house of representatives... did you forget they exist?

presidency/ec is middle ground between the 2.

Congress consists of the House of Representatives and the Senate. They come from specific states. The President isn't the "middle ground" it has its own function and represents all Americans so should be chosen by all Americans. You really don't know anything about the US government do you?

 

[grimballer]

Congress consists of the House of Representatives and the Senate. They come from specific states. The President isn't the "middle ground" it has its own function and represents all Americans so should be chosen by all Americans. You really don't know anything about the US government do you?

president represents all americans regardless of if hes chosen by popular vote or ec.

no president will ever get 100% of vote (unless its a democratic dictatorship like some socialist states), so that argument makes sense.

the reality is us is a federal state and not a unitary states. as such the president should be representation of a federal state. popular vote would just make other smaller states same as some random districts in bigger states like california or new york.

 

[Magooglie]

president represents all americans regardless of if hes chosen by popular vote or ec.

no president will ever get 100% of vote (unless its a democratic dictatorship like some socialist states), so that argument makes sense.

the reality is us is a federal state and not a unitary states. as such the president should be representation of a federal state. popular vote would just make other smaller states same as some random districts in bigger states like california or new york.

I was 99% sure you had no idea what the US gov't is or does, but now I'm 100% sure.

1 American Citizen = 1 Vote for President is the best way.

 

[grimballer]

I was 99% sure you had no idea what the US gov't is or does, but now I'm 100% sure.

1 American Citizen = 1 Vote for President is the best way.

wanting a popular vote for president = not knowing what us is

ec makes sure ppl in smaller states have their say as well

 

[Magooglie]

wanting a popular vote for president = not knowing what us is

ec makes sure ppl in smaller states have their say as well

People in smaller states do have their say. The actually have more of a say in an EC vote. 1 American Citizen = 1 Vote, so everyone can have an equal say.

 

[grimballer]

People in smaller states do have their say. The actually have more of a say in an EC vote. 1 American Citizen = 1 Vote, so everyone can have an equal say.

but then youre acting like individual states don't exist and usa is just one big unitary state and thats not the case.

 

[giusti825]

Oh yes because mob rule always results in the best decisions being made.


<{cruzshake}>

Dictatorship by the minority sounds much more democratic, amirite?

 

[Magooglie]

but then youre acting like individual states don't exist and usa is just one big unitary state and thats not the case.

Yes, the President has that role.

 

[giusti825]

Electoral is the fairest system since it makes sure everyone gets represented. Popular vote would mean big cities decide everything. I don’t won’t a place like San Francisco deciding what’s best for the country when they have a problem with people pooping in the streets.

Big cities have more people. Why should someone in Wyoming's vote be worth 4x a person from California's?
Its inherently undemocratic.

 

[Kaiowas]

wanting a popular vote for president = not knowing what us is

ec makes sure ppl in smaller states have their say as well

The small states still get their two Senators like every big state.

As it stands a Dem in Alabama or wingnut in California has no reason to vote.

 

[bobgeese]

Dictatorship by the minority sounds much more democratic, amirite?

What good is democracy when the majority of people are painfully stupid?

 

[sickc0d3r]

and the house of REPRESENTATIVES serves the purpose of giving each state proportional representation in lawmaking.

ec is the middle ground.

bigger states have more of a say, and smaller states have a say as well. both get to choose the president of all the states, not just the more populated ones.

No law can be made, nor Supreme Court justice confirmed, without Senate approval. And all states have two Senate votes. Plus a minimum of 1 rep. That’s wildly out of proportion.
So I don’t see why they should have more say in who’s president when they are already way over represented in the other branches. And even if that’s your position, why should it be winner take all, rendering nearly half the votes of the population of those states irrelevant? How is that giving the minority a voice?

 

[58miles]

California and New York shouldn't get to decide every election.

Electoral.

The whole reason for the electoral college in the first place was because the founding fathers didn't trust a the largely illiterate rubes of 18th century America with the power to directly elect the president It had absolutely nothing to do with being fair to smaller states.

If California and New York shouldn't decide every election then please tell me why do Florida, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin decide every election? Why should the states decide at all, why not just have the people of America decide the Presidential election regardless of state besides Isn't that the way it's done in most countries, the candidate/party with the most votes wins?

 

[My Spot]

"The electoral college is racist!"

 

[avenue94]

again states would be irrelevant in a popular vote contest...

why is that so difficult?

all you would need is have more votes than the other guy to win.

in ec you need 270 so thats at least 12 biggest states.

in popular vote that would mean 10 states.

and that's assuming everybody shows up and votes.

you could literally win in a low turnout race where less than 50% voters shows up and votes.



no, i need to explain to you why thats an irrelevant point.

with ec you gotta focus on those battlegrounds. without ec you coild completely ignore them and just focus on big urban zones.



the problem here is you just made so allegations without any evidence to back it up.

again usa is probably one if the longest functioning democracies in the world.

why would usa try to emulate some country with different history, size, population diversity....

if anit broke, dont fix it, abd so far you didn't make a good enough argument for a change

What is this obsession with states? They're arbitrary units of order meant to make managing populations easier. They don't magically imbue the people who happen to occupy that specific spot on the planet with magical abilities. People are able to express there peculiar needs through the popular vote just fine, if not better than in the EC. And again, what part of math do you not understand? What 10 states win you the popular vote, please tell me.

And low turn out? The U.S. is notorious for low turn out and one party's entire election strategy hinges on driving turn out down. The popular vote wouldn't force it lower, it might even drive it up (it probably just stays the same)

What allegations have I made without evidence? No ranking of democratic health from serious people has the U.S. at the top. High, sure, but definitely flawed and with room for improvement. The EC is one of its flaws, which again, the fact that no other country has ever tried it should be a glaring red flag. Democracies are enough alike that they share comment instruments and features throughout history. It's clearly broken, hence why it was amended within a decade of its creation.

Finally, again, you would need to focus on several more uban areas than there are battleground states right now to win a popular vote. Are done trying to pretend that the EC doesn't incentivize politicians to ignore more of the country than in a popular vote?

 

[grimballer]

What is this obsession with states? They're arbitrary units of order meant to make managing populations easier. They don't magically imbue the people who happen to occupy that specific spot on the planet with magical abilities. People are able to express there peculiar needs through the popular vote just fine, if not better than in the EC. And again, what part of math do you not understand? What 10 states win you the popular vote, please tell me.

And low turn out? The U.S. is notorious for low turn out and one party's entire election strategy hinges on driving turn out down. The popular vote wouldn't force it lower, it might even drive it up (it probably just stays the same)

What allegations have I made without evidence? No ranking of democratic health from serious people has the U.S. at the top. High, sure, but definitely flawed and with room for improvement. The EC is one of its flaws, which again, the fact that no other country has ever tried it should be a glaring red flag. Democracies are enough alike that they share comment instruments and features throughout history. It's clearly broken, hence why it was amended within a decade of its creation.

Finally, again, you would need to focus on several more uban areas than there are battleground states right now to win a popular vote. Are done trying to pretend that the EC doesn't incentivize politicians to ignore more of the country than in a popular vote?

yeah, states are just some arbitrary units that they have high levels of autonomy and can enact their own laws....

this can only mean not knowing or ignoring us history. usa wasnt one giant centralized state that decided to draw some arbitrary lines and created 50 mini states for some administrative purposes. states preceded the union and one of the reasons for joining the union is high levels of autonomy and not having big centralized government making all the decisions.

and thats what youre going for here. you're pushing for a euro style big centralized government with one size fits all approach where whats good for california and new york will also be good for montana and wyoming.

ec is there to prevent or slow down that approach and give more of a voice to smaller states.

 

[Day Drinking]

People in smaller states do have their say. The actually have more of a say in an EC vote. 1 American Citizen = 1 Vote, so everyone can have an equal say.

He doesn't think everyone should have an equal say. That's the point.