Something we can all agree on.. LETS GET RID OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE!

[Imac7065]

I hate this system.. I really do.

I'm not sure how many people know this, but we as americans have no "right" to vote for president.. and we never actually have voted for president. Instead we vote to elect delegates (selected by political parties) to go vote on our behalf... it's antiquated.. it's stupid.. and it's the root cause of a lot of corruption in politics....

In the system we have today.. your vote may literally not matter. A republican in California? No need to vote... Democrat in Alabama? No need to vote... it's like this in all but 10-15 states in our country.. and it's wrong. Why should my vote in Florida count more than yours? Why should a guy in Toledo's vote weigh more than a farmer in Cheyenne, Wyoming? Think about it.

We no longer live in a country where it takes days to report to DC about the results of an election... we know within seconds of announcing who one, and by how much. Lets move into the 20th century (we're still far off from the 21st lol) and end this silliness.... something we can all agree on.

[shrewsbury]

I can agree with this, my brother stated he had no reason to vote because he lives in Oklahoma. my wife and i live in Ohio and feel the need to vote.

[AUTaxMan]

If you were to get rid of the electoral college, what would you replace it with to ensure that everyone's vote matters?

[JustAlex]

Well, if we had gotten rid of it before 2000.....we wouldn't have had to suffer through 8 horrible years of the stupidest person to ever become president.

Agreed!

Let's get rid of it!

[AUTaxMan]

I'm sure you already known that the Constitution allows states to sets voting requirements. If we did away with the electoral college, what would prevent a state that wanted more influence in the election from dropping its voting age to 17, 16, 15...?

What would happen to national elections? Candidates would only campaign in the most populous areas, because they can reach the most voters there.

The smaller states would essentially have no say in the elections. It would be about appealing only to the larger states. The EC prevents candidates with only regional appeal from winning. Say someone carries the overwhelming majority of votes in the northeastern US and ends up taking the overall popular vote because of it? How are the people in Alabama and Nevada and Michigan going to feel about a president that they didn't really have much of a say in electing? What if someone takes 75% of Texas and California?

The EC is confusing and seemingly-pointless, but that is only because it is mostly misunderstood.

[Imac7065]

I'm sure you already known that the Constitution allows states to sets voting requirements. If we did away with the electoral college, what would prevent a state that wanted more influence in the election from dropping its voting age to 17, 16, 15...?

What would happen to national elections? Candidates would only campaign in the most populous areas, because they can reach the most voters there.

The smaller states would essentially have no say in the elections. It would be about appealing only to the larger states. The EC prevents candidates with only regional appeal from winning. Say someone carries the overwhelming majority of votes in the northeastern US and ends up taking the overall popular vote because of it? How are the people in Alabama and Nevada and Michigan going to feel about a president that they didn't really have much of a say in electing? What if someone takes 75% of Texas and California?

The EC is confusing and seemingly-pointless, but that is only because it is mostly misunderstood.

The constitution would have to be amended to get rid of the EC... so just add in that amendment a strict definition of how we vote for president. Make it a straight popular vote, meaning EVERYONE's vote matters the same. Small state, big state, purple state, blue state, red state.. you vote because it matters.

[AUTaxMan]

The constitution would have to be amended to get rid of the EC... so just add in that amendment a strict definition of how we vote for president. Make it a straight popular vote, meaning EVERYONE's vote matters the same. Small state, big state, purple state, blue state, red state.. you vote because it matters.

Recipe for disaster IYAM. Pure democracies do not work. That's why our founders made us a representative republic. Pure democracy = mob rule.

[Imac7065]

Recipe for disaster IYAM. Pure democracies do not work. That's why our founders made us a representative republic. Pure democracy = mob rule.

We still have congress, senate, checks and balances... how on earth would a direct vote for president of the United States ruin the republic? haha

[AUTaxMan]

We still have congress, senate, checks and balances... how on earth would a direct vote for president of the United States ruin the republic? haha

I gave some examples above.

[Imac7065]

I gave some examples above.

a "pure democracy" would have us at polling stations every day of the rest of our lives.. instead we have a congress. I again do not get the premise of your point here. Directly voting for one office would cause what exactly....?