Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 24, 2018, 12:03:01 am
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 56841 times)
CitizenX
Full Member
***
Posts: 186
United States


View Profile
« on: June 02, 2011, 08:16:40 pm »

As opposed to election by national popular-vote.

None of the conventional arguments strike me as persuasive. But conventional or unconventional, line 'em up.

Sarah Palin.

If the electoral college worked the way it was intended it would never allow her to be president regardless of the popular vote.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2011, 08:40:19 pm by CitizenX »Logged

I can't stand tattletales on internet forums
CitizenX
Full Member
***
Posts: 186
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2011, 05:17:39 pm »


Sarah Palin.

If the electoral college worked the way it was intended it would never allow her to be president regardless of the popular vote.

What exactly leads you to think that ?

In America we don't vote for the president directly.  We actually vote for a contingent of candidates that are pledged to support one presidential hopeful when the Electoral College meets in DC and casts the actual vote for president.  They are not required by law to vote for the person they pledged to support.  And indeed there are numerous examples in history of people breaking this pledge.  If the people choose someone crazy (ie Palin) then presumably the more level headed representatives in the Electoral College will vote for a more appropriate candidate.
Logged

I can't stand tattletales on internet forums
CitizenX
Full Member
***
Posts: 186
United States


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2011, 11:40:21 pm »

As opposed to election by national popular-vote.

None of the conventional arguments strike me as persuasive. But conventional or unconventional, line 'em up.

Sarah Palin.

If the electoral college worked the way it was intended it would never allow her to be president


So basically your belief is that the higher-ups, should the election results be unfavorable, should block an undesired person to be sworn into office? It should be up to someone besides the governed to decide who governs?

Well thank you for the compliment, but I can't take credit for writing the Constitution.  I was just responding to a question and pointing out where our quirky Electoral College system could actually do some good... if it worked as intended.

That's the thing about you Republicans you wrap yourself in the American flag and go on and on about how glorious the Constitution is, but most of you really have no idea about a lot of it.  In short the glorious founders of our nation were a little snobby.  Shocked?  You do realize a chunk of them owned slaves, right?  Why are you so surprised?  They actually made it a law that people like Palin (women) were not allowed to vote.  I think some of them wanted Congress to pick the president but the Electoral College was the compromise.  That's one story I've heard.  But under no circumstances did Thomas Jefferson and the boys want you the average voter to have unchecked power to select the president.

Hey this will blow your Republicans minds... you also realize we weren't supposed to directly elect Senators right?  In fact for most of our history we didn't vote for them.  That's been going on for less than 100 yrs.

Hhhmmm... maybe now you guys will ask Sarah Palin to get that ridiculous American Constitution off the side of her bus.  You don't see Nick Clegg driving around with a Magna Carta painted on his Jaquar... do you?
« Last Edit: June 03, 2011, 11:42:21 pm by CitizenX »Logged

I can't stand tattletales on internet forums
CitizenX
Full Member
***
Posts: 186
United States


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2011, 11:47:50 pm »

In America we don't vote for the president directly.  We actually vote for a contingent of candidates that are pledged to support one presidential hopeful when the Electoral College meets in DC and casts the actual vote for president.  They are not required by law to vote for the person they pledged to support.  And indeed there are numerous examples in history of people breaking this pledge.  If the people choose someone crazy (ie Palin) then presumably the more level headed representatives in the Electoral College will vote for a more appropriate candidate.

Actually, a number of States have laws that require electors to vote as they pledged under penalty of law. The validity of those laws have never been tested . Besides, since electors are usually hyperloyal party functionaries, so unless a candidate started acting crazy after the popular election but before the electoral college meets I doubt more than one or two electors will ever be faithless and vote contrary to how they pledged in any presidential election.

That's why I said IF the Electoral College worked the way it was supposed to.  Besides political parties are never mentioned in the Constitution so "hyperloyal party functionaries" were never supposed to exist.  Our first president George Washington was not a member of any party and in fact cautioned against them.  If only we had listened.
Logged

I can't stand tattletales on internet forums
CitizenX
Full Member
***
Posts: 186
United States


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2011, 06:12:28 am »


Sarah Palin.

If the electoral college worked the way it was intended it would never allow her to be president regardless of the popular vote.

What exactly leads you to think that ?

In America we don't vote for the president directly.  We actually vote for a contingent of candidates that are pledged to support one presidential hopeful when the Electoral College meets in DC and casts the actual vote for president.  They are not required by law to vote for the person they pledged to support.  And indeed there are numerous examples in history of people breaking this pledge.  If the people choose someone crazy (ie Palin) then presumably the more level headed representatives in the Electoral College will vote for a more appropriate candidate.

That's just ridiculous. EVs will vote for the candidate they were elected for, as has always happened since 1824.

That is not ridiculous.  Please reread my posts my friend.  The OP asked is their a plausible argument in favor of the electoral college.  The answer is Sarah Palin.

I said IF the electoral college functioned the way it was supposed to it would prevent her from ever becoming president.  I said IF.  Unfortunately the electoral college does not function in the manner it is supposed to.  Sometimes government doesn't function in the manner which you intend it to.  It doesn't mean its heart isn't in the right place.
Logged

I can't stand tattletales on internet forums
Pages: [1] Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines