Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/27/2013 10:06:52 AM   
LookieNoNookie


Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

I voted against Obama but I think tampering with the elctorial college is a bad idea, we would still be recounting the 2000 election if it were done on the popular vote.

How do you figure that? Wasn't Gore ahead by half a million votes?


Hence why your vote means nothing.

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/27/2013 10:14:13 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

An entire political manipulation.
Why do we vote if the Electoral College is in fact, regardless of the vote count, how our Prez gets elected?
Eliminate one or the other and tell the truth as to how our system works.

I think it continues as a compromise to the smaller states who get the same two elector votes for senator as the larger states. So, Wyoming has three electors but only one represents the voters. I think I have that right.
The EC as you know is born of an era when transportation to the Capitol was horseback or horse drawn on rutty, muddy roads. Obviously, that is no longer a need.
What I was trying to address in the OP is the motives and consequences of manipulation of the system by the losing Party. The only way it will be twarted I think is by the ethics of the Governors of those six states. Not sure we can depend on that. The other option is to unseat those Govs in the 2014 election. In which case the people of the states will have a voice in the matter beforehand.


Actually, the first election that a new Governor will be able to effect through re-districting would be 2024, since Districts are mapped only after each census. However, making changes to the way electors are selected could be done before the election.

Actually redistricting can be done at any time. Virginia actually passed a new districting plan last Monday.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/27/2013 12:36:36 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

An entire political manipulation.
Why do we vote if the Electoral College is in fact, regardless of the vote count, how our Prez gets elected?
Eliminate one or the other and tell the truth as to how our system works.

I think it continues as a compromise to the smaller states who get the same two elector votes for senator as the larger states. So, Wyoming has three electors but only one represents the voters. I think I have that right.
The EC as you know is born of an era when transportation to the Capitol was horseback or horse drawn on rutty, muddy roads. Obviously, that is no longer a need.
What I was trying to address in the OP is the motives and consequences of manipulation of the system by the losing Party. The only way it will be twarted I think is by the ethics of the Governors of those six states. Not sure we can depend on that. The other option is to unseat those Govs in the 2014 election. In which case the people of the states will have a voice in the matter beforehand.

Actually, the first election that a new Governor will be able to effect through re-districting would be 2024, since Districts are mapped only after each census. However, making changes to the way electors are selected could be done before the election.

Actually redistricting can be done at any time. Virginia actually passed a new districting plan last Monday.


A quick scan did turn up evidence that State legislatures can re-District when they want, but, it most sites stated that it generally happens after the Census, to adjust for population shifts.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/27/2013 2:24:27 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

A quick scan did turn up evidence that State legislatures can re-District when they want, but, it most sites stated that it generally happens after the Census, to adjust for population shifts.

You make it sound so innocent and routine, DS. But hardly that, is it?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/27/2013 2:30:15 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

A quick scan did turn up evidence that State legislatures can re-District when they want, but, it most sites stated that it generally happens after the Census, to adjust for population shifts.

You make it sound so innocent and routine, DS. But hardly that, is it?


Not sure what you're saying there, Vincent.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/27/2013 2:33:56 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

A quick scan did turn up evidence that State legislatures can re-District when they want, but, it most sites stated that it generally happens after the Census, to adjust for population shifts.

You make it sound so innocent and routine, DS. But hardly that, is it?


Not sure what you're saying there, Vincent.

Saying gerrymandering is often political and benefits the party in power. Ya think?


< Message edited by vincentML -- 1/27/2013 2:34:15 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/27/2013 2:48:47 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

A quick scan did turn up evidence that State legislatures can re-District when they want, but, it most sites stated that it generally happens after the Census, to adjust for population shifts.

You make it sound so innocent and routine, DS. But hardly that, is it?

Not sure what you're saying there, Vincent.

Saying gerrymandering is often political and benefits the party in power. Ya think?


Certainly does, and I think that should not be acceptable. Period. No party affiliation need be given because it is wrong for both parties to do so.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/27/2013 2:55:46 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

A quick scan did turn up evidence that State legislatures can re-District when they want, but, it most sites stated that it generally happens after the Census, to adjust for population shifts.

You make it sound so innocent and routine, DS. But hardly that, is it?

Not sure what you're saying there, Vincent.

Saying gerrymandering is often political and benefits the party in power. Ya think?


Certainly does, and I think that should not be acceptable. Period. No party affiliation need be given because it is wrong for both parties to do so.

Agreed. But politics is rough and tough and mostly a grab for power. Nothing fair about it.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/27/2013 6:50:12 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Hence why your vote means nothing.

If you don't want to vote, that's fine by me.

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/27/2013 7:04:41 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I voted against Obama but I think tampering with the elctorial college is a bad idea, we would still be recounting the 2000 election if it were done on the popular vote.



yeh we can go to the moon and cannot come up with a tamperproof way to secure our elections.

until elections can be known without doubt to be secure all this is simply pissing up a rope.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/28/2013 5:52:59 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
Agreed. But politics is rough and tough and mostly a grab for power. Nothing fair about it.


Set the rules, and play by the rules. Change the rules when deemed necessary. As long as the rules are set relatively fairly and then followed, politics can be fair.

People will disagree. But, the Federal Government should be all about what is best for the Country as a whole, not for the individuals, or for the three-toed double spotted mid-Western barn mouse (or any other location-specific "thing"). Is it the Federal Government's role to maintain State roads? County Roads? City roads? Would the Nation, from one end to the other, have been benefited had Solyndra been a success? No? Then they get no money. Would the Nation, from one end to the other, see a benefit with BP getting tax breaks for drilling equipment? No? Then they get no tax break. Does the Nation, from one end to the other get a benefit out of offering a tax break to businesses? Yes? Then each business gets that tax break, not just this one, or that one.



_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/28/2013 1:33:20 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

People will disagree. But, the Federal Government should be all about what is best for the Country as a whole,

But, as Speaker Tip O'Neal famously said: "All politics is local."
What's good for the country as a whole depends on whose hole you're standing in.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/28/2013 1:46:03 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		The electoral college is a racist institution, and needs to be thrown out.

It was designed to give the southern states representation without taxation, and to partially vote instead of their slaves.

Popular vote, lets do an amendment.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/28/2013 2:01:30 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
The electoral college is a racist institution, and needs to be thrown out.
It was designed to give the southern states representation without taxation, and to partially vote instead of their slaves.
Popular vote, lets do an amendment.


Simple majority, then. No plurality. You need 50%+1 of all voting age Citizens. Deal?

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/28/2013 2:03:23 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Nope, popular vote, same way any other federal, state or local political office is voted.

A majority of the vote.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 1/28/2013 2:05:25 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/28/2013 2:05:47 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
Nope, popular vote, same way any other federal, state or local political office is voted.
A majority of the vote.


That's not a true majority, then, is it?

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/28/2013 2:12:03 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		You fuckin Sie A it is.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/true?s=t
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/majority

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/28/2013 7:20:15 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
You fuckin Sie A it is.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/true?s=t
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/majority


If only 50% of all voting age Citizens vote, then the most anyone can get is actually 50% of the voting age citizens. 50% is not a majority. 50%+1 of those that cast a ballot may not actually result in a total that eclipses 50% of all those of voting age. And, since that mark wasn't passed, there is no way that the majority of the people elected that person.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/29/2013 4:32:06 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
You fuckin Sie A it is.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/true?s=t
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/majority


If only 50% of all voting age Citizens vote, then the most anyone can get is actually 50% of the voting age citizens. 50% is not a majority. 50%+1 of those that cast a ballot may not actually result in a total that eclipses 50% of all those of voting age. And, since that mark wasn't passed, there is no way that the majority of the people elected that person.

Except for maybe a town of 5 or 6 people there has never been a vote of 100% of the electorate that I know of. Seems your definition of majority is dicking around with a utopian pov. Would you prefer a law that mandates voting as they do in Oz? Somewhere I got the impression that you preferred a republic to a democracy.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules - 1/29/2013 5:49:49 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
You fuckin Sie A it is.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/true?s=t
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/majority

If only 50% of all voting age Citizens vote, then the most anyone can get is actually 50% of the voting age citizens. 50% is not a majority. 50%+1 of those that cast a ballot may not actually result in a total that eclipses 50% of all those of voting age. And, since that mark wasn't passed, there is no way that the majority of the people elected that person.

Except for maybe a town of 5 or 6 people there has never been a vote of 100% of the electorate that I know of. Seems your definition of majority is dicking around with a utopian pov. Would you prefer a law that mandates voting as they do in Oz? Somewhere I got the impression that you preferred a republic to a democracy.


I most certain do prefer a republic to a democracy. Thus, my requirement of a simple majority of voting age Citizens being required for MN's desired shift to a democracy.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Changing The Electoral College Rules Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109