Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Abolish the Electoral College
NY Times ^ | August 29, 2004

Posted on 08/28/2004 11:34:36 PM PDT by Former Military Chick

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-297 next last
To: longtermmemmory

Better than that, divide Alaska into two, Texas into five, and California into three.

Coastal California could comprise the the coast from just above SF down to the border in a strip 30 miles wide.

Northern and Southern California can be divided in two.


101 posted on 08/29/2004 1:52:04 AM PDT by Jet Jaguar (Who would the terrorists vote for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
Section 4 The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Exactly! The Fed Gov't does not govern the citizens of the US, it governs the States of the US. This is why we have an Electoral College. Are the NY Times really this dumb or are they acting?!?

102 posted on 08/29/2004 1:54:18 AM PDT by undeniable logic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar
Better than that, divide Alaska into two,

Hell no. Alaska is one of the least populated states. Why should a state with fewer people than the average congressional district get four senators and another congressmen by splitting itself?

103 posted on 08/29/2004 1:56:19 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick

The US should not abolish the Electoral College. There´s no need to, after all, it´s a Republic. BUT, the number of delegates from each state should be proportional to the number of citizens (more than it is today)!


104 posted on 08/29/2004 1:56:28 AM PDT by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Because I think it would be funny!

Alaskans are very conservative. Two more conservative senators and additional conservative congressman would do wonders for the country.


105 posted on 08/29/2004 2:00:51 AM PDT by Jet Jaguar (Who would the terrorists vote for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
BUT, the number of delegates from each state should be proportional to the number of citizens (more than it is today)!

That would be easy. Do away with the electors for each senate seat. That way the electoral vote of each state would be equal to the number of congressional districts. Read my previous post #71 to find out why that is not advisable.

106 posted on 08/29/2004 2:01:04 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick

The Democrats (represented very strongly by the NY Times) want to be able to win elections just by having the high population areas, which are mostly democrat, win the election for them.

There is no other purpose in their continued arguments about the Electoral College.

Since 2/3 of the states would have to radify it after 2/3 of the senate.....it isn't going to happen. (someone correct me if these numbers are wrong).


107 posted on 08/29/2004 2:04:39 AM PDT by TheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick
"Making Every Vote Count," huh? The New York Times wants to take away the advantage enjoyed by voters in flyover country and give it to the vote-rich areas on the coasts, which are overwhelmingly liberal. People see right through the talk of abolishing the Electoral College and the purpose is to give the Left a permanent political advantage in sheer numbers. Just ask conservatives in Canada how it feels to be outvoted by 70% of the electorate in election after election. Sorry, the NYT's perennial hobby horse won't hunt.
108 posted on 08/29/2004 2:08:32 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheLion
Since 2/3 of the states would have to radify it after 2/3 of the senate.....it isn't going to happen. (someone correct me if these numbers are wrong).

It's 3/4'ths not 2/3'rds of the states needed for ratification. It is 2/3'rds of both the House and the Senate which are necessary to propose an amendment. I really doubt the senators from the smallest 1/3 or even 1/2 of the states would vote for such a proposal.

109 posted on 08/29/2004 2:09:57 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

It would be a good start. I almost can see the headlines of the foreign newspapers and magazines a few days after the election if the winner does not get the popular vote...


110 posted on 08/29/2004 2:10:10 AM PDT by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick

"Many people realized then for the first time that we have a system in which the president is chosen not by the voters themselves, but by 538 electors."

-- That's because they don't teach the Constitution in schools anymore.


111 posted on 08/29/2004 2:11:07 AM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I guess the NYT would rather have presidential candidates offer political handouts in America's largest cities and tell everyone in flyover country to go to hell.


112 posted on 08/29/2004 2:12:58 AM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
In the end, candidates would promise - and deliver, the moon to no more than 10 counties nationwide.
I'd have to guess the number would be closer to 5. For the entire nation. If you could win them complete by promising whatever they want, you win.

Imagine that new Jacuzzi you can't afford being granted for medicinal purposes... hard thing for voters to ignore.
113 posted on 08/29/2004 2:13:13 AM PDT by Outlaw76 (Citizens on the Bounce!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick
And what if abolishing the electoral college worked out marginally better for the Republicans? You wouldn't hear a peep from the partisan press and the NY Times.
114 posted on 08/29/2004 2:18:13 AM PDT by dennisw (Allah FUBAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

Exactly. If the EC were abolished, no GOP candidate could ever again be elected President, barring some economic catastrophe like in the Carter years. The campaign would be centered around the national media markets of L.A, Chicago, and NYC. Guess who comes out ahead? Its not about making every vote count, its about making it easier for a liberal Democratic presidential candidate to ignore the rest of the country. And that is why the EC will remain intact as a political institution.


115 posted on 08/29/2004 2:19:22 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Patriot_from_CA

Exactly. This trend is very troublesome and always seems to happen in states that go Republican for president. It's stealthy all right and presented as enhancing democracy. I don't see any "popular" efforts to split the electoral votes in RAT states such as California.


116 posted on 08/29/2004 2:22:28 AM PDT by dennisw (Allah FUBAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
It would be a good start.

You obviously did not read the linked post in my answer. The Electoral College protects against a skewed geographical distribution of support for a candidate even at the expense of sometimes electing the candidate that gets fewer popular votes. It also protects against voter fraud especially from regions where one party is overwhelmingly dominant like New York, Massachusetts, and Illinois. Considering that the USA has the second oldest continuously existing government in the World, it is irrelevant whether foreign journalists understand how it works. The system has worked over 216 years during which time France for example has gone through five republics plus a reinstatement of monarchy.

117 posted on 08/29/2004 2:22:51 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick
The main problem with the Electoral College is that it builds into every election the possibility, which has been a reality three times since the Civil War, that the president will be a candidate who lost the popular vote. This shocks people in other nations who have been taught to look upon the United States as the world's oldest democracy.

I have two words for "people in other nations."

The final word is "'em."

Quit changing the way the United States does business because of what "they" think! We will execute murderers if we want. We will not cripple our industries unilaterally to allow other nations to catch up with us in the name of preventing "global warming." We will prevent homosexuals from marrying if it offends our sensibilities. And all of you outsiders who don't like it are free to stay where you are and not to crawl, skip, or swim across our borders to live here!

118 posted on 08/29/2004 2:24:10 AM PDT by L.N. Smithee (Hey, KERRY! We said it to Saddam, and now to you -- If you have nothing to hide, QUIT HIDING IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
Are the RATS saying that Colorado must split it's electoral college vote this election? I don't think that's the case.
119 posted on 08/29/2004 2:25:16 AM PDT by dennisw (Allah FUBAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

At first: I have read your linked post.
Secondly, I think that abolishing the senatorial votes in the EC would be a good start.


120 posted on 08/29/2004 2:25:45 AM PDT by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick
Isn't this kind of like a baseball team that loses the World Series on a run-scoring walk demanding that walks be banned from the game from now on?

-PJ

121 posted on 08/29/2004 2:25:53 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick

Save for later read.


122 posted on 08/29/2004 2:27:37 AM PDT by freeangel (freeangel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
Secondly, I think that abolishing the senatorial votes in the EC would be a good start.

It would be easier to abolish the states than to do that.


123 posted on 08/29/2004 2:29:55 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: jnarcus

I think they understand very well.


124 posted on 08/29/2004 2:30:39 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick
Abolish the Electoral College

Spoken like a true socialist Democrat...

125 posted on 08/29/2004 2:30:48 AM PDT by sargon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: risk

We do know, without question, that the losing candidate outpolled the winning one in the nation at large. In modern times this was unprecedented, but it had almost happened three times within living memory: in 1960, when J.F.K.'s plurality was barely a hundred thousand votes;


http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:aKZv3w0Rk8EJ:www.newyorker.com/talk/content/%3F011224ta_talk_hertzberg+1960+JFK+lost+the+popular+election,Electoral+College&hl=en


126 posted on 08/29/2004 2:38:25 AM PDT by dennisw (Allah FUBAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
Are the RATS saying that Colorado must split it's electoral college vote this election? I don't think that's the case.

That's precisely what they want; however there are two problems with that. First the constitution only allows the state legislature to determine the method by which electors are chosen (not referenda). Second, even if referend were allowed, this one is on the date that the electors are chosen. According to federal election law, the method by which a state selects electors must be written in staute at least six days prior to the date the electors are chosen. This referendum could be designed to create even more controversies by creating the potential of Supreme Court decsions affecting how the state allocates its electors.

One article I read indicated that the proponents might decide whether to apply it to the 2004 election depending on whether it helps Kerry or not. Abviously if Kerry carried Colorado, DemocRATS would be shooting themselves in the foot if they applied it this year, and might cause Kerry to lose the Electoral College. If Kerry doesn't carry the state, the DemocRATS would be likely to want the law to apply this year. Of course that would be strange, because if Bush wins, it is unlikely for the referendum to pass.

127 posted on 08/29/2004 2:42:06 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

... It is not my reputation that is crossing Jordan River on Nov 3rd ... Hope, the popular vote goes to the winner!


128 posted on 08/29/2004 2:42:46 AM PDT by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick

See my tagline.


129 posted on 08/29/2004 2:43:14 AM PDT by snopercod (The oldest civil war of all, that between the city and the country, has resumed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick
One very positive aspect of the use of the Electoral College, as compared to the direct, popular election fo the President, is that it "compartmentalizes" vote fraud.

In a direct election, every vote counts the same as every other vote for President. Sounds good on paper, but that also means every fraudulent votes counts as much as every legal vote.

In the Electoral College, because the Electors of the President on selected on a state-by-state basis, if one state has a corrupt election system, the votes in the other states are not affected.

Case in point: California has over 10 million voters. In the 2000 election is has been estimated that more fraudulent votes were cast in California than all of the the votes in several individual states. California does not require any identification or citizneship papers to register to vote - only the registrant's affidavit that they meet the requirments. In fact, an illegal alien case obtain a driver's license and receive a voter registration in the mail. That illegal alien could mail in the registraion and an application for a permanent absentee ballot, cast a vote, and never be confronted by a living human being!

Gore's popular nationwide vote margin in the 2000 election was largely provided by his margin in California.

If you want your vote to be cancelled out by one of possibly over 1 million fraudulent voters in California, then work hard to get rid of the Electoral College.

130 posted on 08/29/2004 2:43:56 AM PDT by capitan_refugio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Our Republic is in serious trouble if the electoral college gets thrown out.


131 posted on 08/29/2004 2:44:18 AM PDT by tame (Are you willing to do for the truth what leftists are willing to do for a lie?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jnarcus
At least you get it. Thanks.
132 posted on 08/29/2004 2:45:49 AM PDT by snopercod (The oldest civil war of all, that between the city and the country, has resumed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Thanks much. What's annoying is how the Democrats can conceivably nullify a lot of Republican states by 2008, the next Presidential election. They are relentlessly into rabid dog politics since they consider themselves the party of government.

GOP pols are more laid back and don't look at politics and government jobs as careers. Not the way the Dems do.


133 posted on 08/29/2004 2:48:25 AM PDT by dennisw (Allah FUBAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: tame
Our Republic is in serious trouble if the electoral college gets thrown out.

You and I are agreeing more and more.

It's making me nervous.

134 posted on 08/29/2004 2:49:22 AM PDT by Howlin (John Kerry & John Edwards: Political Malpractice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus

I don't buy the notion that Gore necessarily actually won the "popular vote". He carried some states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsisn due to vote fraud. There were precints in Philadelphia in which over 130% turnout. Gore's campaign manager was the son of the formere mayor of Chicago and the brother of the curent one. Chicago is known to have some of the most crooked elections in the US. The Electoral College is deliberately designed to thwart vote fraud.


135 posted on 08/29/2004 2:49:45 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick

The electoral college is one of the last vestiges of the old republic. You can see why Hillary and the NYT want to get rid of it. Think Rome, bread and circuses.


136 posted on 08/29/2004 2:50:19 AM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dila813

The only way we should change the system, if at all, is to have an ever MORE federalist electoral college:

Instead of winner-take-all states, how about the following:

A victory in a single congressional district = 1 EV.

A victory statewide = 2 EV.

This would open up areas within states to political competition. For example, in California there is a large number of conservatives, but the state they're slightly outmnumbered by libs. Same goes for upstate NY, southern illinois, North Florida, Western Pennsylvania, and many other places.

I've heard a lot of conservatives propose this idea, and the common counterargument is a growth in gerrymandering. My response: so what!

If congressional district lines were more important, wouldn't that make who controls the state legislature more important? And if that were the case, wouldn't that in effect devolve power away from the Federal Government and back to the states???

It would bring us back closer to the days when control of the state legislature was more important than federal seats! That was before the 17th Amendment, when senators were appointed by the legislatures.

If this happened in the last election, Bush would have won by by more votes.

30 states voted for Bush, which would give him 60 EV from state-wide races (senatorial representation). Al Gore would have gotten 40 EV. If everybody voted according to their congressional district, Bush would have 228 EV from the Congressional EVs.

That's 288 EV for Bush, 250 EV for Gore. If democrats wanted to increase their electoral prospects, they would have to strengthen their appeal at the LOCAL level. No longer can a presidential candidate put a slick gloss on a campaign, bite their lip, promise to "feel their pain", and ride on positive media coverage. Support would have to be built from the ground up. The executive branch would be weak, like the constitution intended. States would have more power as well.

Thoughts???


137 posted on 08/29/2004 2:51:07 AM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
The electoral college is one of the last vestiges of the old republic.

There are still the states. If you really want to eradicate the "old republic," you might as well do away with states entirely and have just one humongous national government over everyone.

-PJ

138 posted on 08/29/2004 2:52:12 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar

Awesome map. Where'd you get that from???


139 posted on 08/29/2004 2:53:35 AM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick

I imagine the logical next step is Hillary and the NY Slimes calling to abolish the entire U.S. Constition.


140 posted on 08/29/2004 2:54:08 AM PDT by Cincinna (GREETINGS from the home of the REPUBLICAN CONVENTION)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis
BUMP!
141 posted on 08/29/2004 2:54:28 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

You know the details. Many west Florida (Panhandle) voters are in another time zone. They did a u-turn away from polling places when they heard the media beating the drum how Gore had taken Florida. Panhandle is Republican. GWBush probably lost 5-10 thousand votes that way. Florida should never have been decided in the courts......blame the mass media.


142 posted on 08/29/2004 2:55:08 AM PDT by dennisw (Allah FUBAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

"Let's see now. kerry wins 49 states by 50,000 votes each. Pres Bush wins Texas by 3,000,000 votes. BUSH WINS!"

-- No. Kerry wins CA by 5,000,000 votes.


143 posted on 08/29/2004 2:57:49 AM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

I hope it will be as informative in the light of day as it is during the darkness.

There is a lot to be said about the EC. Of course, I really doubt we will have enough folks to agree on this, which helps. Of course, don't bet the farm on that observation.

BTW, good night /good morning


144 posted on 08/29/2004 2:58:38 AM PDT by Former Military Chick (I previously posted under Military Chick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis
http://www.rakkav.com/homeworlds/funnybones/images/vote_map.jpg

I have found several sites for it but had bookmarked none.

I did a google search in images of 2000 election by county.
145 posted on 08/29/2004 2:59:35 AM PDT by Jet Jaguar (Who would the terrorists vote for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: TeleStraightShooter

1962.


146 posted on 08/29/2004 2:59:38 AM PDT by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
You and I are agreeing more and more. It's making me nervous.

ROTFLMAO! Don't worry, I'm sure we'll find enough issues to bash each with :o)

147 posted on 08/29/2004 3:01:16 AM PDT by tame (Are you willing to do for the truth what leftists are willing to do for a lie?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick
If it isn't broken... But since they are open to changes, how about: every tax dollar paid by an individual during the year preceding election = 1 vote? Since most legislative business is about taxation and money, he who pays the most should by right have the most say. And whoso feels to be disenfranchised and underrepresented would be easily capable of remedying the situation by paying more taxes and buying himself greater electoral weight. It also could help with the deficits.
148 posted on 08/29/2004 3:01:53 AM PDT by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

And don't forget the more than 40,000 who voted in both New York and Florida. I doubt many of those votes were for Bush.


149 posted on 08/29/2004 3:08:03 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
That article found that 68% of them were registered Democrat.

-PJ

150 posted on 08/29/2004 3:10:24 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-297 next 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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