I like it. I'll be happy when we get rid of that stupid thing. Who would have thought that New Jersey would lead the US into the present? Some day in the future people who look back at the electoral college and laugh.
I don't like the Electoral college for same reason others have stated. Someone can (and has) win th epresidency with a minority of the votes. That makes no sense at all. If we must have that POS, I would say that it should be a law that each state's votes be divided proportionally to the candidates, based on the popular vote. For example, in th elast two elections, I did not vote for Bush, however, I feel I've been disenfranchised from my vote because of the assinine "winner take all" rule the satae of Texas has for it's electoral college votes. Bush gets 50%-55% of the vote, but gets ALL the electoral votes? That sucks.
i think the governor would lose in court on this one. i think the state has options about how to allocate its votes - winner take all or allocate per congressional district or according to the vote % - but i doubt the state can allocate according to what happens outside the state. say, NJ votes 90% in favor of the loser of the national vote. it doesn't make sense to give all of NJ's electoral votes to the other guy. NJ might as well disband its legislature and stop electing other statewide offices, and just merge with the national govt. hook'em
the myth that the Electoral College "protects" small states a President could be elected by taking eleven states (CA, TX, NY, FL, PA, OH, MI, GA, VA, MA, WA, and IL) in theory he could win 51% of the votes in those states and lose 100% of the remaining 39 states in reality, the electoral college screws blue voters in red states and red voters in blue states by making their votes meaningless if it were not actually in the Constitution, it would probably be unconstitutional the electoral college made sense 200 years ago, but does not now just like with Senators, the people should directly elect the President it is not surprising that Republicans would be anti-democratic although maybe Obama can get elected by winning those eleven states and then we can change things
good luck with that 3/4s of the states rule about amending the constitution. i guess it's not enough to just flyover these meaningless states. we should give them the finger and tell them to stop screwing up "our" elections. hook'em
At least the people of NJ won't be bothered with election ads and campaign rallys since they have now made their state insignificant in the election.
I can't believe the stupidity of people on this board who think we're a democracy. Did you take even a 3rd grade-level civics class? Read the Constitution. It's not long. As for the electoral college, it should remain. For the many reasons already espoused in this thread.
I'm still mad to this day that that slimeball Bill Clinton got to sit in the White House for 8 years while never getting anything close to a majority in any election. So, while your pushing for popular elections, please push for the requirement of a majority before one takes office. In other words, if this were to ever get done (shihc it won't), we should definitely require run offs so someone could not take office again with 42% of the vote.
Any of you who want the EC done aeay with and the election based on majority vote does that majority vote extend to ALL areas? Should the majority get to decide on everything? seems fair, right?
I understand the point of the small (in people count) states not being rolled over, but I think they do get that effect by virtue of having extremely disproportionate representation in the Senate __________________________________________________ Do you understand the purpose of the senate and why each state has 2 representatives? i guess a lot on here continue to be bitter about the 2000 election. i hope that someday the people on the coasts will appreciate the food provided by the people in the middle and that their culture deserves a voice as well.
