It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Changing the Electoral College?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 04:45 PM
link   
A lot of people are looking to change the Electoral College.

The "winner-take-all" part of the Electoral College vote is the part, I think, people want changed. Where, if one candidate gets the majority of the Popular Vote for a State, then they get 100% of the Electoral Vote for that State. Two States already don't use the "winner-take-all" aspect of the Electoral College. Are those two States violating the Constitution or is it their right? Can any State in the country do this?

The point for this "winner-take-all" part of the vote is supposedly to give each State a more equal footing. The problem I see is that a lot of people don't care if the States have equal footing. Voting is about individuals and not States. But when it really comes down to it, this is the United STATES of America and not the United INDIVIDUALS of America.

Does it matter anymore if the States have equal footing or is it more important for the individual to have equal say?




posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: CryHavoc
It is more important than ever, given sanctuary cities and urban plantations, that States have their say.

Just look at the county map for 2016



edit on 11 28 2016 by stosh64 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 04:53 PM
link   
The argument for removing the EC, is pathetically stupid.

Let's say all the liberal welfare sanctuary city states elected someone who opposed specific agriculture and wildlife policies. Nearly every other State in which that may have profound impact would be without a voice.

It's really that simple.
edit on 28-11-2016 by rexsblues because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: CryHavoc
Two States already don't use the "winner-take-all" aspect of the Electoral College. Are those two States violating the Constitution or is it their right? Can any State in the country do this?


Each state can apportion their Electoral College votes as they outline in their respective state's constitutions.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:02 PM
link   
You are a union of countries, very much like the E.U, except you get to vote for a President, as opposed to a Drunken German being thrust upon the European Parliament.

Next year I predict the E.U project to be a very different animal. Italy may have taken the first steps towards article 50, along with France and The Netherlands.

The Germans will not be left out of the equation and they have their own elections next year.

The E.U is finished.

Edit - As for the Electoral College thingymajig, keep it, checks and balances. The countries have voted for their leader, not the individuals.
edit on 28/11/16 by Cobaltic1978 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   
The EC system formula is the best.

We don't need mob rule from consolidated areas like Southern California or New York City metro etc.

The States elect the President.

Full popular vote nationwide is unbalanced as we can clearly see from this year's elections.



edit on Nov-28-2016 by xuenchen because: email



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CryHavoc
Two States already don't use the "winner-take-all" aspect of the Electoral College. Are those two States violating the Constitution or is it their right? Can any State in the country do this?


Each state can apportion their Electoral College votes as they outline in their respective state's constitutions.


This. If a states wants to change how they deal with their EC votes, they are welcome to do so by deciding it themselves and to their own interest.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CryHavoc
Two States already don't use the "winner-take-all" aspect of the Electoral College. Are those two States violating the Constitution or is it their right? Can any State in the country do this?


Each state can apportion their Electoral College votes as they outline in their respective state's constitutions.


This. If a states wants to change how they deal with their EC votes, they are welcome to do so by deciding it themselves and to their own interest.


How would you actually define that though? What ratio?



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist
This. If a states wants to change how they deal with their EC votes, they are welcome to do so by deciding it themselves and to their own interest.


I would be curious to see how the Electoral votes would have be apportioned this year if it were by Congressional district with the overall popular vote winner for each state getting the two Senate votes.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: CryHavoc
Two States already don't use the "winner-take-all" aspect of the Electoral College. Are those two States violating the Constitution or is it their right? Can any State in the country do this?

It's up to the states, yes.

For the record, it's not a great way to get better representation of the people- as you might think it would be.

Maine splits their EC votes.
Popular vote:
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D) 351,425 47.86%
Gary E. Johnson (L) 37,407 5.09%
Jill Stein (G) 13,905 1.89%
Donald J. Trump (R) 331,555 45.15%

EC vote:
Clinton: 3
Trump: 1


So the state was rather close to an even vote between the two primary candidates, yet 75% of the EC votes still went to clinton.
Better than 100%, I suppose.




posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
How would you actually define that though? What ratio?


The two states that do split their votes award them by giving the Congressional votes to the winners of each Congressional district and then overall top vote getter receives the Senatorial votes.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CryHavoc
Two States already don't use the "winner-take-all" aspect of the Electoral College. Are those two States violating the Constitution or is it their right? Can any State in the country do this?


Each state can apportion their Electoral College votes as they outline in their respective state's constitutions.


This. If a states wants to change how they deal with their EC votes, they are welcome to do so by deciding it themselves and to their own interest.


How would you actually define that though? What ratio?


Well, that would be up to the states I guess. it could be based on percentage or winner take all like most are. I am not saying they should change anything though. Quite frankly, I find this sudden distaste for the EC hilarious. If it was Hillary who got an EC win and lost the popular vote, this talk of blowing up the current system would not be happening.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Typical snowflake mentality: If you don't win, change the rules.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   
An interesting wrinkle this time was provided by none other than.....Jill Stein. In the close states she is now contesting Stein one sixteen times more votes than the number of votes Hillary lost by. Let that sink in for a moment......

Assuming for the moment that most of the Green Party votes would have gone to Hillary had Stein not run (Argue otherwise if you can make a case,) that means that Stein "pulled a Nader" and gave us Trump the same way Nader gave us Bush. And now Stein is putting her name back in the lights to raise money she will not guarantee will go to the recount effort. Even the MSM news broadcasters are calling her a "piece of work" for this.

Thank you, Jill Stein and the Green Party, for making a Trump presidency possible.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The EC needs to remain our method of electing POTUS but it could use a look over, I think.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Is there a common consensus that would see a separation from the winner take all scenario of the EC?

That part of the college always seemed to elude me in fairness of elections.
edit on 28-11-2016 by JinMI because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
The EC needs to remain our method of electing POTUS but it could use a look over, I think.


That is why I am curious to see the Congressional District breakdown for popular vote.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 06:25 PM
link   


Does it matter anymore if the States have equal footing or is it more important for the individual to have equal say?

That right there shows an ignorance of the electoral college , what it is for , and voting
If you knew , you wouldnt have asked that question. The answer is self-evident
1) The individual votes their choice in their State in their district
2) Those votes are counted by district or State
3) Whoever wins the State (due to individual votes) wins the electoral vote of that district or that State (yes , some States do split the vote)
4)The electoral votes go to that candidate who won the individual votes of that State

Get it ?
Got it ?
Good

edit on 11/28/16 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: CryHavoc

In every election the only people that complains about the electoral college is as usual the loser party.

As more and more adult immigrants become citizens with no much understanding of the nature of our system of government the Republic will be in danger, yes is going to take many years in the future, but it could happen.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 09:18 PM
link   
a reply to: CryHavoc

How bout annex Puerto Rico and give every state 1 vote. No reason any state should be more equal than any other state. Winner wins!



new topics




 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join