The Electoral College

Posted by Troy on 24th October 2011 in Political, Uncategorized

According to Gallup, over 60% of people want to abolish the Electoral College in favor for a straight popular vote for electing the President.  I believe this is a mistake and is a result of improper education.  The Electoral College system is confusing and appears pointless to many people, but there are reasons why the electoral system is so important: 

1)  A straight popular vote would give certain states undue influence over all others.

2)  If you’re conservative, you should hate the popular vote as the uninformed masses will be given greater control.  Previously close elections will now go directly to the mob mentality.

3)  States of different regions will be subjugated to the will of a minority of states with large populations.  The Northern states may favor radical enviornmentalism which will slaughter the Southern states’ agriculture (and other such examples).

I do think that a majority of Americans should elect the President.  However, I do not favor abolishing the electoral college.  Instead, I think that it should require the majority in both the electoral and popular votes to become President with a run off held if no one receives both of these majorities.  In the end, I would prefer the Electoral College system over the Popular Vote system if I was forced to choose.  Besides, it’s pretty rare that a President gives over 50% of the vote and still loses the electoral college.  Is this really a big deal?  It seems like much ado about nothing.

Long Live the Constitution!

4 Responses to “The Electoral College”

  1. dirtyb Says:

    You may get stuck in infinitive run offs. People are not likely to chain their vote, especially when the 2 parties are getting 98% of the vote combined. There could be a weighted system. Electoral vote wins, so long as the popular vote for that candidate does not drop below a certain percentage, say 40%. If that occurs, then one more runoff. Then all candidates are voided off the ballots, and new candidates will have to be elected, if the winning candidate of the electoral still does not have 40 percent of the popular.

    I myself hate both the popular and electoral.

  2. Troy Troy Says:

    Okay, well, gotta ask here…what else is there?

    Oh, there’d be a one re-do limit between the top two (the way runoffs are done currently), then you could set a parameter like you pointed out.

  3. dirtyb Says:

    No there is only two, they still suck. 1 favors mass idiots joining the popular bandwagon, the other is lame due to the winner takes all the votes, in most states anyways.

    The only other option is some sort of hybrid model.

  4. Troy Troy Says:

    Well, you’re in luck. I think New Hampshire and a few other states allocate their Electoral College votes per district. That is to say, if 60% of the districts go to the Democrat and 40% of the districts go to the Republican, they split their electoral votes 60/40.

    However, they left/popular media will never push for this as it will minimize the big city votes which would undermine their powerbase. Still, it’s probably a fair way to split the vote. That is why we always hear the need to have a “popular vote.”

    As unpopular is it is, I would favor paying in income tax (or history of income tax payments) as a prerequisite for voting. There’s something wrong when the people not paying into the system get to vote themselves payments from the kitty. This would be another argument towards a fair tax or other system.

Leave a Reply