5 ms·

The Electoral College Is Hated by Many. So Why Does It Endure?

6 points by blondie9x 10y ago

Spooky23 10y ago
Everyone complains but many problems are solved by having 50 state elections vs one big one. All of the problems like voter suppression, fraud and pandering get amplified by a straight popular vote. It's good for the country that the racist conduct of elections in places like Alabama and the widespread fraud in places like souther Texas and Chicago are firewalled behind the electoral college. National popular elections also require harmonized rules, which are subject to the whims of the Congress. You're better off letting States conduct the elections.
jessaustin 10y ago
It's funny that this tiny little insignificant pimple on the giant hairy quivering ass of State, is the thing that really bothers everybody (on the losing side), because 0.1% of the votes "didn't count". The USA government itself is detrimental to humanity. The nation ought to broken into smaller pieces so its leaders will have less power to ruin the world. Good news! On current trends, and because of far more consequential inherent problems than the electoral college, the USA government will certainly collapse before hell freezes over and some special constitutional amendment is passed to make 48% of the electorate feel better once every couple of decades.
- relics443 10y ago
  Taking a wild guess here, but I think most governments will collapse before hell freezes over.
  - jessaustin 10y ago
    They'll be installing ski lifts and hockey rinks in hell before a constitutional amendment passes to fix a "problem" that has: 1. occurred four times in history 2. the effect of increasing the influence of less populous states, which states also have an outsize influence on whether amendments are approved.
sweezyjeezy 10y ago
One problematic thing about looking at the popular vote is that voter turnout is lower in non-swing states : here's a graph I just threw together for the results vs voter turnout - http://imgur.com/a/i42cY http://imgur.com/a/i42cY . There is a clear trend that the swing states had higher turnout. This makes it basically impossible to tell what the real overall feeling of the country was - you don't know how many people choose not to vote because they think their vote counts for less.
- blondie9x 10y ago
  You could argue that turnout would be lower though because voters in non swing states feel their voice doesn't matter. Look at alternative case.
  - blondie9x 10y ago
    You could also say that because there was no compaigning in there state they feel less involved in election. When you get down to it no matter what the current electoral college system is isolating and is not representative of true democracy.
    - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
      >...current electoral college system is... not representative of true democracy. True. But America is not a Democracy. It is a Republic. There is a reason why The Founding Fathers created the Electoral College system. Under a Popular Votes system, if one state has more than 51% of the population, it will decide the whole election, and ALL the other states won't even get a say (because they all only add up to 49% or less), which is unfair to these smaller states. This is why the Electoral College was created. It's there protect the smaller states, to make sure that they also have a say in the election.
      - blondie9x 10y ago
        That assumes that all 51% vote the same way. Obviously that would never occur. Especially if you have more than two candidates.
Nadya 10y ago
In defense of the Electoral College [0]. >She was unequivocal. “I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people,” Hillary Clinton said, “and to me that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president.” The electoral college is by design meant to avoid this tyranny of the majority of a pure democratic system selected by popular votes. >“If we really subscribe to the notion that ‘majority rules,’ then why do we deny the majority their chosen candidate?” said Jennifer M. Granholm, a former governor of Michigan. But we don't subscribe to the notion that 'majority rules'. We are a Republic not a Democracy. [0] http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2004/11/the-electoral-college-enlightened-democracy http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2004/11/the-elector...
- DefaultUserHN 10y ago
  Exactly. The Electoral College is there to protect the smaller states, to make sure that they also have a say in the elections. For example, under a Popular Votes system, if one state has more than 51% of the population, it will decide the whole election, and ALL the other states won't even get a say (because they all only add up to 49% or less), which is unfair to these smaller states.

6 points by blondie9x 10y ago

Everyone complains but many problems are solved by having 50 state elections vs one big one. All of the problems like voter suppression, fraud and pandering get amplified by a straight popular vote. It's good for the country that the racist conduct of elections in places like Alabama and the widespread fraud in places like souther Texas and Chicago are firewalled behind the electoral college. National popular elections also require harmonized rules, which are subject to the whims of the Congress. You're better off letting States conduct the elections.

jessaustin 10y ago

It's funny that this tiny little insignificant pimple on the giant hairy quivering ass of State, is the thing that really bothers everybody (on the losing side), because 0.1% of the votes "didn't count". The USA government itself is detrimental to humanity. The nation ought to broken into smaller pieces so its leaders will have less power to ruin the world. Good news! On current trends, and because of far more consequential inherent problems than the electoral college, the USA government will certainly collapse before hell freezes over and some special constitutional amendment is passed to make 48% of the electorate feel better once every couple of decades.

relics443 10y ago
Taking a wild guess here, but I think most governments will collapse before hell freezes over.
- jessaustin 10y ago
  They'll be installing ski lifts and hockey rinks in hell before a constitutional amendment passes to fix a "problem" that has: 1. occurred four times in history 2. the effect of increasing the influence of less populous states, which states also have an outsize influence on whether amendments are approved.

sweezyjeezy 10y ago

One problematic thing about looking at the popular vote is that voter turnout is lower in non-swing states : here's a graph I just threw together for the results vs voter turnout - http://imgur.com/a/i42cY http://imgur.com/a/i42cY . There is a clear trend that the swing states had higher turnout. This makes it basically impossible to tell what the real overall feeling of the country was - you don't know how many people choose not to vote because they think their vote counts for less.

blondie9x 10y ago
You could argue that turnout would be lower though because voters in non swing states feel their voice doesn't matter. Look at alternative case.
- blondie9x 10y ago
  You could also say that because there was no compaigning in there state they feel less involved in election. When you get down to it no matter what the current electoral college system is isolating and is not representative of true democracy.
  - DefaultUserHN 10y ago
    >...current electoral college system is... not representative of true democracy. True. But America is not a Democracy. It is a Republic. There is a reason why The Founding Fathers created the Electoral College system. Under a Popular Votes system, if one state has more than 51% of the population, it will decide the whole election, and ALL the other states won't even get a say (because they all only add up to 49% or less), which is unfair to these smaller states. This is why the Electoral College was created. It's there protect the smaller states, to make sure that they also have a say in the election.
    - blondie9x 10y ago
      That assumes that all 51% vote the same way. Obviously that would never occur. Especially if you have more than two candidates.

Nadya 10y ago

In defense of the Electoral College [0]. >She was unequivocal. “I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people,” Hillary Clinton said, “and to me that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president.” The electoral college is by design meant to avoid this tyranny of the majority of a pure democratic system selected by popular votes. >“If we really subscribe to the notion that ‘majority rules,’ then why do we deny the majority their chosen candidate?” said Jennifer M. Granholm, a former governor of Michigan. But we don't subscribe to the notion that 'majority rules'. We are a Republic not a Democracy. [0] http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2004/11/the-electoral-college-enlightened-democracy http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2004/11/the-elector...

DefaultUserHN 10y ago
Exactly. The Electoral College is there to protect the smaller states, to make sure that they also have a say in the elections. For example, under a Popular Votes system, if one state has more than 51% of the population, it will decide the whole election, and ALL the other states won't even get a say (because they all only add up to 49% or less), which is unfair to these smaller states.