Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 18, 2019, 07:17:20 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: New features added! Click here for more information. Click here to configure new features.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Presidential Election Process (Moderator: muon2)
| | |-+  Is there any plausible argument in favor of the electoral college? (search mode)
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Is there any plausible argument in favor of the electoral college?  (Read 57594 times)
Roemerista
MQuinn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 868
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.39, S: 5.91


View Profile
« on: June 25, 2010, 11:17:23 am »

1. We are not a popular democracy, we are a democratic republic. And I would wish it on none of us to have it any other way. In the great spirit of American checks and balances, we need another layer of protection against the passion of the masses. While I may like Rousseau's idea of the "General Will" being infallible, he admits it can be led astray. When you vote you are not voting for the President, you are voting for someone to represent the leader you will.

2. It gives voices to the States! We are in deed one nation, but lets face it, the worst enemy of a republic is vast territory and many people. I, being from Mass. have little connection with someone living in Oregon or California, but some sense of kinship shared in our imagined community. Yes we are American Citizens, yes we probably live in similar towns & cities, and drive on similar roads, but there is a far different community dynamic. The Electoral college gives proportional representation by geography, ensuring we never elect someone favoring one state or area too heavily.



Logged
Roemerista
MQuinn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 868
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.39, S: 5.91


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 25, 2010, 11:35:14 am »

No, theoretically an elector can ignore the leader chosen. And electors have chosen to vote against their party choice in the past, rare, but it happens. They just face the wrath of their party afterwards. Although States can by law forbid this.

If we had a multi-party system it would be more relevant, e.g. divide the popular vote enough a "fringe" group can take the lead, whereas the electors could so chose to endorse a more "appealing" candidate instead of the one they were sent to do so. Thus if their candidate is behind they could endorse a candidate who is closer to their original vote, in order to try and get someone closer to their position.

Just because it is not necessary now, does not make it irrelevant.

« Last Edit: June 25, 2010, 11:37:36 am by MQuinn »Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines