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

[deviake]

I get what you're saying and you do make good points I just prefer the electoral.

The funny thing to me is some people I know who wanted Hillary to win thought because she won the popular vote deserved to win but most of those people wanted Trudeau to win but not a peep when he lost the popular vote.

Yeah partisanship is a hulluva drug. I find the EC flawed for reasons I've outlined but also the history of it in the US soured me on it more and added more context to the issues with it.

My apologies for assuming you were american and coming at you kind of aggressively.

 

[Rygu]

Yeah partisanship is a hulluva drug. I find the EC flawed for reasons I've outlined but also the history of it in the US soured me on it more and added more context to the issues with it.

My apologies for assuming you were american and coming at you kind of aggressively.

All good man, I do agree the EC has it flaws I definitely don't think it's the perfect way to decide an election.

 

[avenue94]

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.

Yup, they are arbitrary in how they are created. Notice how the borders of most newer states are suspiciously straight and neat. And nope I'm pushing for a popular vote.

Again please tell me, how many states do you think a candidate would need to win the popular vote if you're so worried about a lack of geographical representation.

 

[Jack V Savage]

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

Better question is what basis you have for deciding that people shouldn't be free to choose their leaders. And you were a big Trump cheerleader so you don't really have any standing to complain about stupid voters.

 

[bobgeese]

Better question is what basis you have for deciding that people shouldn't be free to choose their leaders. And you were a big Trump cheerleader so you don't really have any standing to complain about stupid voters.

Because their shitty decisions effect everyone. An epistocracy would inevitably provide better results.



I applauded trump when he did things I agreed with. Post COVID, I was not too kind to him as he handled it poorly. It was no surprise he lost.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Because their shitty decisions effect everyone. An epistocracy would inevitably provide better results.

Well, I would agree that people I think are well-informed being the ones to decide elections would lead to better policies, but I think freedom is a good in itself, and I anticipate quite a bit of difficulty in deciding who the deciders should be. The simpler idea is to vote for people who know what they're doing, but even that seems to be too hard to handle for the right these days.

I applauded trump when he did things I agreed with. Post COVID, I was not too kind to him as he handled it poorly. It was no surprise he lost.

OK, but he was a disaster before COVID, too. Made good Fed appointments, but really didn't do anything else that you could reasonably praise, and he was unprecedentedly corrupt and incompetent.

 

[bobgeese]

OK, but he was a disaster before COVID, too. Made good Fed appointments, but really didn't do anything else that you could reasonably praise, and he was unprecedentedly corrupt and incompetent.

We're gonna have to agree to disagree on that, because I am decidedly middle class, and my families life improved greatly under the Trump presidency.

I'm not sure how it can even be argued that Biden is any better. He's been disrespected by practically every world leader, is already back to bombing Syria, and currently has 15,000 kids locked in cages at the border.

 

[sickc0d3r]

well its up to states to decide...

why would entire state of wyoming be treated like some random district in california?

as a state it only makes sense for them to have more of a say whos the president of united states than some random 3rd district in california.

maybe if those districts feel underrepresented they should petition to become states?

Obviously we’re not going to agree, but why do you keep ignoring their over representation in Congress as if it doesn’t matter? And if the goal is to get presidential candidates to pay attention to them, what do you think about the fact that nobody actually needs to pay attention to them? The fly over states are on nobody’s radar. Tons of votes are useless. And, as someone who’d like to see a viable 3rd party, it suppresses the 3rd party vote. The EC is not only undemocratic, it is just not logical. It’s a mess. We can agree to disagree, though.

 

[grimballer]

When it comes to the President each Citizen should get 1 vote. A citizen is a citizen when it comes to the President. I don't know how that's difficult for you to understand, but then again you just learned what Congress is yesterday and you probably still don't know what function they have in gov't, don't know what federal means, don't know what a Republic is, don't understand how smaller states have higher representation in an EC system, so maybe it'll take you a year or two to understand what I'm saying.

youre the one who thinks states are just some random administrative divisions created by central government and have no weight in decision making...

you literally think a district is same as a state

 

[grimballer]

Obviously we’re not going to agree, but why do you keep ignoring their over representation in Congress as if it doesn’t matter? And if the goal is to get presidential candidates to pay attention to them, what do you think about the fact that nobody actually needs to pay attention to them? The fly over states are on nobody’s radar. Tons of votes are useless. And, as someone who’d like to see a viable 3rd party, it suppresses the 3rd party vote. The EC is not only undemocratic, it is just not logical. It’s a mess. We can agree to disagree, though.

nobody should pay attention to one of the states? thats a weird thing to say...

smaller states have equal representation in senate and are underrepresented in the house. ec is a middle ground between the 2.

they are not equality represented, but also not completely underrepresented

 

[grimballer]

Yup, they are arbitrary in how they are created. Notice how the borders of most newer states are suspiciously straight and neat. And nope I'm pushing for a popular vote.

hows that relevant to them being sovereign jurisdictions and not administrative divisions?

The primary first-level political division of the United States is the state. There are 50 states, which are bound together in a union. Each state holds governmental jurisdiction over a defined geographic territory, and shares its sovereignty with the United States federal government. According to numerous decisions of the United States Supreme Court, the 50 individual states and the United States as a whole are each sovereign jurisdictions.[1] The states are not administrative divisions of the country, in that their powers and responsibilities are in no way assigned to them from above by federal legislation or the Constitution; rather they exercise all powers of government not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution.

Again please tell me, how many states do you think a candidate would need to win the popular vote if you're so worried about a lack of geographical representation.

0. popular vote would make states irrelevant

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

Will the winner of this poll be decided on popular votes or electoral votes?

 

[avenue94]

hows that relevant to them being sovereign jurisdictions and not administrative divisions?





0. popular vote would make states irrelevant

Sovereign doesn't mean they aren't arbitrary on some level. States still fight over their borders that were drawn over a century ago. And you're dodging the question. You spent several posts claiming that EC forced candidates to appeal to more states. Do you want to retract that obviously silly statement? If not, feel free to tell me how many states a presidential candidate would need to focus on to tie up the popular vote. And don't give me that "states don't matter" dribble again, states are not insignificant in campaigning in popular elections. Media markets, fundraising, those are all tied to regions and states.

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

Will the winner of this poll be decided on popular votes or electoral votes?

Mods should give sherdogers in smaller states weighed votes. How else can they be protected from the tyranny of the majority!!! I'm surprised those members don't esuicide since they have no representation!!!! Clearly this is the people's socialist republic of sherdog.

 

[grimballer]

You're still incoherent. You haven't explained why everyone's vote would be worthless if there was a popular vote. You made the claim, now back it up.

your argument comes down to how somebody might feel about their vote...

its not a real argument.

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

Mods should give sherdogers in smaller states weighed votes. How else can they be protected from the tyranny of the majority!!! I'm surprised those members don't esuicide since they have no representation!!!! Clearly this is the people's socialist republic of sherdog.

It's crazy that the Street Coliseum users have as many Mods as the heavies..... Platinum Members think only Plats should have the right to vote.

 

[grimballer]

Sovereign doesn't mean they aren't arbitrary on some level. States still fight over their borders that were drawn over a century ago. And you're dodging the question. You spent several posts claiming that EC forced candidates to appeal to more states. Do you want to retract that obviously silly statement? If not, feel free to tell me how many states a presidential candidate would need to focus on to tie up the popular vote. And don't give me that "states don't matter" dribble again, states are not insignificant in campaigning in popular elections. Media markets, fundraising, those are all tied to regions and states.

thats the entire point...

states are not like some random districts, therefore they should have more of a say in decision making than some random district.

and of course popular vote will make states irrelevant. all you gotta do is get more votes than your opponent. so focus will be more on big urban centers instead.

 

[Magooglie]

youre the one who thinks states are just some random administrative divisions created by central government and have no weight in decision making...

I didn't say that.

you literally think a district is same as a state

I didn't say that either.

Get your ducks in a row before you respond to me.

 

[grimballer]

I didn't say that.



I didn't say that either.

Get your ducks in a row before you respond to me.

you didnt say much at all really....

just made some absurd claims

 

[avenue94]

thats the entire point...

states are not like some random districts, therefore they should have more of a say in decision making than some random district.

and of course popular vote will make states irrelevant. all you gotta do is get more votes than your opponent. so focus will be more on big urban centers instead.

Ok, how many urban centers do you need to appeal to and focus on to win a popular vote?

And you're treating states like golems or some mystical creature. State governments have no interests, they aren't alive. Ppl and voters have interests though. And if your state has interests, you probably have a political machine problem.

And you keep acting like there is some middle ground with big vs small States, urban vs rural. The power equation is zero sum. If you boost rural or small state power, you're stripping power from other populations.