Electoral college, why vote if our votes don't matter?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Okay thanks.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Good thing the internet doesn't forget then. Anything I may have forgotten is still all there for me to learn again.
I was a good student but I had to look it up because that partcular class was held in 1972 or so and my head has had to keep up with a lot of life since then. I don't consider it a short coming to forget but to not re-educate yourself when the opportunity availes itself is ignorant. So I look things up. Sometimes my memory isn't what I'd like it to be.
Vetting information on the internet is another thing entirely.

PS I know what civics means. I was only saying that in my school anyway it was all covered by social studies. We didn't have a civics class. Like the home economics classes I took are now called family science classes.

a reply to: Mryhh

Okaaaaaay

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

LOL You Masonic shill!

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You want to learn something? Read this thread by Schuyler who explains the necessity of the Electoral College quite well.

The electoral college is a flawed creation.

At any given time only a handful of states determine our elections.

And that is hardly 'representative' when power is concentrated in to the hands of just a few.

a reply to: Mryhh

i would rather them abolish it and have a direct vote. It is very outdated in my opinion because the internet can give even uneducated people the resources to make a choice. It kinda insults the average citizen's intellect; voter participation would reach an all time high.

a reply to: CosmicSmack

A direct vote is just as dangerous.

The EC was created with the best intentions.

But that is always paved the road to hell.

a reply to: neo96

Solution being?

a reply to: Kali74

Something like giving each state, and EQUAL number of electoral votes.


www.archives.gov...

That's crap.

The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the President. Your state’s entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in its Congressional delegation: one for each member in the House of Representatives plus two for your Senators. Read more about the allocation of electoral votes.

www.archives.gov...

Every state in the union should have EQUAL representation.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Good thing the internet doesn't forget then. Anything I may have forgotten is still all there for me to learn again.

Which is why I do not understand the premise of the thread. The Original Poster could have looked up the information quite easily. If this were a thread dealing the merits or usefulness of the Electoral College it would have made more sense.

PS I know what civics means. I was only saying that in my school anyway it was all covered by social studies. We didn't have a civics class. Like the home economics classes I took are now called family science classes.

I am not calling into question whether you know what it means or not, I am pointing out that the term is still widely used and covers the same general topics.

originally posted by: Kali74
LOL You Masonic shill!

Gotta earn that paycheck mama, you have expensive tastes.

originally posted by: neo96
At any given time only a handful of states determine our elections.

It actually prevents it from being determined by a few states. A direct democracy is no better than anarchy.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

All I said was Tesla's are badass...

I have always said this. Our votes do not matter. They are a "will this cause a riot" meter for government.

They ultimately will risk a riot for some things, so its not even a good metric.

We need direct democracy on a state level to submit 1 vote per state for candidates.

50 total states, so you need 2/3rds of those votes. End of story, 33.33 votes from all states

My system would work.

a reply to: tadaman

The system we have, works.

a reply to: Kali74

it does, but not in the interest of our people. It serves an upper echelon of owners. We have too many problems electing terrible leaders to say it works. It does, just not for the people it supposedly represents.

EDIT TO ADD:

An average person with a great disposition, formidable mind, and moderate resources from hard work, CAN NOT be president.

That means a drab person, with a weak mind, and incredible resources (or the lust for such) can easily become president. And they do.

We dont have a king, but we have made an entire class of kings. Thats worse IMO, but certainly just as bad to most.

We arent illiterate farmers from the 17'00s. We want direct democracy on some level.

a reply to: tadaman

The candidates put forth are entirely up to the people, us, the voters... we are just incredibly lazy and let the DNC and RNC do it for us. It's an entirely separate issue than from whether our election process is valid or not.

a reply to: Kali74

I cant say so. I work as a petitioner, and seeing how much cash and influence is needed just to play in a rigged system I can 100% tell you....no one can run for president unless they are billionaires. No one can have a chance once being a billionaire without access to power and playing ball with the big boys. Its kind of why I dont trust Trump. There is no way he got this far and stayed clean. NO WAY. An average person, NO SHOT IN HELL. NONE: ZERO.

You would not get on more than your state ballot, and thats a huge maybe. HUGE.

We are lazy though. We want democracy to be a spectator sport.

originally posted by: tadaman
I cant say so. I work as a petitioner, and seeing how much cash and influence is needed just to play in a rigged system I can 100% tell you....no one can run for president unless they are billionaires.

That has zero to do with how the Electoral College functions and everything to do with our pay to play political system.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

It's easier to believe it's all rigged.