Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Al Gore calls for an end to the Electoral College (just go away Al)
The Hill ^ | 8/31/2012 | Mario Trujillo

Posted on 08/31/2012 7:56:54 PM PDT by Kolath

Former vice president Al Gore is calling for an end to the Electoral College — the system that cost him the presidency in 2000.

Gore said that many voters who live outside the dozen or so battleground states are cheated by the system that allocates delegates from the state level on a winner-take-all basis. He called for presidential elections to be determined by the popular vote.

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: 2000; ec; gore; soreloserman; vote
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 last
To: Kolath

Al here is a hint why it is there.

It is in the Constitution. Kind of a neat document, sorry you have not read it.

Your welcome “Buff”


41 posted on 09/01/2012 3:51:02 AM PDT by hadaclueonce (you are paying 12% more for fuel because of Ethanol. Smile big Corn Lobby,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

My claim might be partial nonsense, but it is certainly not total nonsense.

The EC was intended to be an assembly of eminent men, selected by each State, rather than by the people of the State. These men would in a very real sense decide on who the candidates were and then elect the President and Vice-President. Technically that is what it still is, as the electors are not legally bound to vote for the candidate to which they are pledged. There is not a trace in the Constitution of the notion of national presidential elections, or even that the people as a whole would know who the candidates were prior to the meeting of the EC.

Since the notion of political parties is absent from the Constitition, and in such absense there is no particular reason to expect the EC to consistently achieve a majority for one man, there are scholars who claim the actual original intent was for the EC to nominate three candidates, with the election among them normally defaulting to the House.

Since 1796 the EC has not in a genuine sense elected anybody. It has in practice, with exception of one or two states, become a way of divvying up the popular vote by State and giving all the State’s votes to a single candidate.

You can argue about whether this is a good or bad thing. But you cannot logically argue it is what the Founders intended.

In the original Constitution only the House of Representative was elected by popular vote, which is why it was called that. All other elections were indirect.


42 posted on 09/01/2012 4:15:29 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Kolath

I can think of two republicans off the top of my head who are calling for the same thing.


43 posted on 09/01/2012 4:16:08 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philman_36

England was in practice never an absolute monarchy. Power was originally split between king and nobility in practice. In theory the King was close to absolute, but he couldn’t push too far without causing a revolt, so he had 2nd Amendment type limitation on his power.

As King John found out. Magna Carta started a 400 year struggle between absolutism and constitutionalism. For much of this period the King’s effective power increased, reaching a high point probably under the Tudors, with Henry VIII very nearly absolute.

England did not in theory become a true constitutional monarch till 1688, when the monarch’s power was strictly limited by the Glorious Revolution.


44 posted on 09/01/2012 4:23:01 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Kolath

What ever will get in thier way they want it removed. Will the democratic convention require all attendies to show a photo ID? Like the racist ID’s you need to vote?


45 posted on 09/01/2012 4:49:55 AM PDT by ronnie raygun (bb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kolath
Gore said that many voters who live outside the dozen or so battleground states are cheated by the system that allocates delegates from the state level on a winner-take-all basis. He called for presidential elections to be determined by the popular vote.

There's a lot to be said in favor of making it necessary for a president to have to get wide support across the country, rather than focusing on a few urban areas.

46 posted on 09/01/2012 5:17:32 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 ("They say I don't pray for my enemies. I do.. I pray they go to Hell!" ---Marshall Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

So was I wrong in anything I said?


47 posted on 09/01/2012 8:24:30 AM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: philman_36

Not disagreeing with you, just expanding on it a bit.

The English Civil War was the major clash between absolute and constitutional monarchy. It could easily have gone the other way and the last non-absolutist monarchy in Europe have gone down.

We look back on this war and see the Parliamentary forces as the wave of the future. But that wasn’t the way it was seen at the time. The conventional wisdom was that absolutism was modern and progressive, and representation and limited governments were holdovers from the medieval past.


48 posted on 09/01/2012 8:40:01 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
Not disagreeing with you, just expanding on it a bit.

For my benefit or for the benefit of someone else?

49 posted on 09/01/2012 9:21:33 AM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: philman_36

General interest. Not trying to say you don’t know what you are talking about. No offense intended.


50 posted on 09/01/2012 9:57:30 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd
If Algore wants to get rid of it, it must be a credit to our electorial system.
51 posted on 09/01/2012 10:31:36 AM PDT by ANGGAPO (Layte Gulf Beach Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
General interest.
Understood. I was simply trying to keep my reply as simple as the original reply was, not turn it into a dissertation on feudalism vs monarchical absolutism.
52 posted on 09/01/2012 4:32:25 PM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: ANGGAPO

re: “If Algore wants to get rid of it, it must be a credit to our electorial system.”

You got that right.


53 posted on 09/02/2012 9:24:36 AM PDT by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: thecodont

Great analogy. Thanks.


54 posted on 09/02/2012 2:50:37 PM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson