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

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


  • Total voters
    173
you didnt say much at all really....

just made some absurd claims

Sounds like you're talking to yourself now. I guess those ducks have flown away before you could catch them.

1 American Citizen = 1 Vote. It makes the most sense to people that have a functioning brain.
 
Ok, how many urban centers do you need to appeal to and focus on to win a popular vote?

more than the other candidate...

dont know what you're getting at here?

smaller rural areas will be neglected if its popular vote. thats the point.

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.

ppl living in those smaller states have interests....

ppl living in big states with big urban zones are already over represented compared to smaller states that are mostly rural.

as it stands right now it takes 3 districts in california to cancel out the will of the ppl living in wyoming in presidential election. that means ppl in california would still have another 52 ec left as representation.

you act like thats not enough and in reality one district in california should be able to cancel out the entire state of wyoming in presidential elections.
 
Sounds like you're talking to yourself now. I guess those ducks have flown away before you could catch them.

1 American Citizen = 1 Vote. It makes the most sense to people that have a functioning brain.

no, it only males sense to ppl who just keep parroting talking points and have limited knowledge in politics
 
no, it only males sense to ppl who just keep parroting talking points and have limited knowledge in politics

What is "males sense"? You didn't even know what Congress was yesterday. I had to tell you. You are exactly the person who has limited knowledge of politics that parrots talking points. And you keep talking about small states being left out in a popular vote. Guess what dumbass, they get left out in the current EC vote too. Because size doesn't determine where campaigning takes place. We're also not living in the 19th century. Everyone has speedy access to information.

1 Citizen = 1 vote is the best. Everyone gets equal say rural or city, no matter where that is. You're either for equality when choosing President or not.
 
Last edited:
I'm okay with keeping the EC around but it should, at the very least, be reformed a bit. As is I don't think its working well. Maybe increase the number of electoral votes and then divide them proportionally based on the way a state votes because as is Republicans in NYC and Democrats in the Carolinas feel very unmotivated to go vote for POTUS.

I also think we should uncap the House if we're going to keep the EC, the House is supposed to be federal institution that is most democratic but capping it makes it less democratic.
 
I think each country should be a reflection of what the majority of their citizens want.
 
What is "males sense"? You didn't even know what Congress was yesterday. I had to tell you. You are exactly the person who has limited knowledge of politics that parrots talking points. And you keep talking about small states being left out in a popular vote. Guess what dumbass, they get left out int he current EC vote too. Because size doesn't determine where campaigning takes place. We're also not living in the 19th century. Everyone has speedy access to information.

1 Citizen = 1 vote is the best. Everyone gets equal say rural or city, no matter where that is. You're either for equality when choosing President or not.

with ec they have more representation.... why is that so difficult?

again you seem to think us is a unitary state and actual states within us have no power what so ever and are just like some random districts.

again ec is a good balance between proportional representation in house and equal representation in senate.
 
more than the other candidate...

dont know what you're getting at here?

smaller rural areas will be neglected if its popular vote. thats the point.



ppl living in those smaller states have interests....

ppl living in big states with big urban zones are already over represented compared to smaller states that are mostly rural.

as it stands right now it takes 3 districts in california to cancel out the will of the ppl living in wyoming in presidential election. that means ppl in california would still have another 52 ec left as representation.

you act like thats not enough and in reality one district in california should be able to cancel out the entire state of wyoming in presidential elections.
What I'm getting at is your arguments are all cynical and lacking consistency. I think you admitted it in another post, but the main reason you support the EC is because it keeps the GOP artificially competitive given its inability to appeal to most Americans at the ballot box. If that's the case fine, but be honest about it and stop trying to dress partisanship up as fairness or small states vs big states or ahistorical rambling about the Founding Fathers.

It's ether or, there is no balancing the power between big states and small states without someone losing out. Not to mention you keep assuming small states are monolithic and one party votes. Few states are one party states. How are people living in big urban zones over represented? Isn't part of conservative ideology accepting that the world is unfair and somewhat hierarchal?

And is this nonsense about bigger states being over represented? more people in a state, more legislators, ergo more power. That's how democracy and republics are supposed to work at a core level. I can almost guarantee you wouldn't want new states being created if they lean blue, which most would. And what makes Wyoming so special? Why should it be overrepresented at the expense of millions of voters being unrepresented in the winner takes all system. Again, states are artificial constructs. They aren't alive, they don't vote, they don't have interests that need to be represented. Only their residents do.
 
with ec they have more representation.... why is that so difficult?

again you seem to think us is a unitary state and actual states within us have no power what so ever and are just like some random districts.

again ec is a good balance between proportional representation in house and equal representation in senate.

When did I say states within the US have no power? They get to vote for representatives for federal government in numbers that actually give an advantage towards smaller states in both the house and the senate (if you do not know what the house is I can explain that to you, out of my own charity.) If you know how the number of EC votes by state are determined you would also see why this creates a problem with the EC. I have no doubt you don't know that, but you don't know a lot of things.

Why do you want to oppress people that live in more populous states? That's not very nice or equal.

1 Citizen = 1 Vote is the best for President, the President of the UNITED STATES. Not the Some states have more representation than other States.
 
When did I say states within the US have no power? They get to vote for representatives for federal government in numbers that actually give an advantage towards smaller states in both the house and the senate (if you do not know what the house is I can explain that to you, out of my own charity.) If you know how the number of EC votes by state are determined you would also see why this creates a problem with the EC. I have no doubt you don't know that, but you don't know a lot of things.

Why do you want to oppress people that live in more populous states? That's not very nice or equal.

1 Citizen = 1 Vote is the best for President, the President of the UNITED STATES. Not the Some states have more representation than other States.

forget the house, senate, ec...

you don't know the basic difference between unitary and federal state.

you think that us is a unitary state. thats why you keep talking about 1 citizen = 1 vote as if states are irrelevant.
 
What I'm getting at is your arguments are all cynical and lacking consistency. I think you admitted it in another post, but the main reason you support the EC is because it keeps the GOP artificially competitive given its inability to appeal to most Americans at the ballot box. If that's the case fine, but be honest about it and stop trying to dress partisanship up as fairness or small states vs big states or ahistorical rambling about the Founding Fathers.

It's ether or, there is no balancing the power between big states and small states without someone losing out. Not to mention you keep assuming small states are monolithic and one party votes. Few states are one party states. How are people living in big urban zones over represented? Isn't part of conservative ideology accepting that the world is unfair and somewhat hierarchal?

And is this nonsense about bigger states being over represented? more people in a state, more legislators, ergo more power. That's how democracy and republics are supposed to work at a core level. I can almost guarantee you wouldn't want new states being created if they lean blue, which most would. And what makes Wyoming so special? Why should it be overrepresented at the expense of millions of voters being unrepresented in the winner takes all system. Again, states are artificial constructs. They aren't alive, they don't vote, they don't have interests that need to be represented. Only their residents do.

you cant just ignore the fact that there are states, theyre not some random administrative divisions, and as such it would make no sense for 500k ppl in california to just cancel out the entire state of wyoming in presidential elections.
 
forget the house, senate, ec...

you don't know the basic difference between unitary and federal state.

you think that us is a unitary state. thats why you keep talking about 1 citizen = 1 vote as if states are irrelevant.

I've already explained to you that 1 citizen = 1 vote is how the President should be elected and that the US's federal gov't already accounts for state representation. I mean, you only learned about Congress yesterday so maybe you don't think about them being one of the three branches of the federal government and can easily forget them, but for people who know these things we factor it in.
But you're intellectually dishonest so I know you made no effort to educate yourself on that.
 
I've already explained to you that 1 citizen = 1 vote is how the President should be elected and that the US's federal gov't already accounts for state representation. I mean, you only learned about Congress yesterday so maybe you don't think about them being one of the three branches of the federal government and can easily forget them, but for people who know these things we factor it in.
But you're intellectually dishonest so I know you made no effort to educate yourself on that.

maybe in unitary state (that you keep confusing us for) with centralized government.

in a federal state with more decentralized government thats not the case and each state has more rights and representation.
 
you cant just ignore the fact that there are states, theyre not some random administrative divisions, and as such it would make no sense for 500k ppl in california to just cancel out the entire state of wyoming in presidential elections.
Again, states are arbitrary creations meant to make governing and life easier. There is no reason for states to be "equal" at the expense of voting populations. If the GOP was wining popular votes, I'm sure you wouldn't be this stubborn about the EC.
maybe in unitary state (that you keep confusing us for) with centralized government.

in a federal state with more decentralized government thats not the case and each state has more rights and representation.
OK, so what federal states/democracies use the EC or don't use a popular vote?
 
Again, states are arbitrary creations meant to make governing and life easier. There is no reason for states to be "equal" at the expense of voting populations. If the GOP was wining popular votes, I'm sure you wouldn't be this stubborn about the EC.

not true

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.

so states are not administrative divisions created by central government. theyre sovereign jurisdictions. so its 50 states forming one big state, not other way around.

as such they should have more of a say in decision making than some random district.

OK, so what federal states/democracies use the EC or don't use a popular vote?

you mean states that weren't even democracies 50 years ago or where you dont even vote directly for the president/pm?
 
Last edited:
maybe in unitary state (that you keep confusing us for) with centralized government.

in a federal state with more decentralized government thats not the case and each state has more rights and representation.

States already have rights and representation. They're called their congressional representatives.

Since you're hung up on this, I'll present it to you this way. Every state has a number of votes (kind of like how every state has a number of votes in the EC). However, unlike the EC the number of votes at most is the number of citizens in the state that have the right to vote. It may be less than that if less citizens vote. All those votes get tallied. EXCEPT instead of ONLY the majority votes in a state getting represented in the final total tally, even the minority votes get tallied in the final total. Every state sends their majority and minority votes to the final tally. The majority of all those votes tallied together is what decides the President. That is equal representation for everybody and everyone within a state gets their vote counted. Excellent, yes? YES.
 
Basically grimballer is saying Murka isn't really a country.
 
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.

And pretty much everyone's life has gotten better under Biden's presidency. That's not a meaningful way to evaluate the difference.

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.

Well, your factual claims are both false and irrelevant. But we've already seen a vast improvement in the COVID response, a huge relief package that will halve child poverty, among many other benefits (remember that the only significant legislation passed in four years under Trump was a deficit-financed tax cut for rich people). A lot more coming. They aren't remotely comparable.
 
Back
Top