Obsolete and outdated USA vote counting method is a DANGER to the world. - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#14841103
Obsolete and outdated USA vote counting method is a DANGER to the world.
DentalFloss(PF) wrote:You realize that the allocation of electoral college votes doesn't require, or even allow, "voters" to have a say, right? As a practical matter, all 50 States have adopted that method, and most, but not all, use the "winner take all" method. But there is nothing that requires that. The State Legislature could decide to use ANY method they chose, the flip of a coin for example, or even only having the Legislature itself vote on the Electors. There is no right for the average person to have a vote at all.

I STILL THINK that the way electoral college votes are totalled and the result transmitted to Washington dc for the determination of whom should be president is more a product of LIMITATION BY DESIGN to the pre-1861 state of available communications technology (i.e. smoke signals, pony express mail service in the era BEFORE telegraph service) and perhaps the infant democracy that the USA was at (blacks and women weren't allowed to vote).

Why else would a state not accede to accurate transmission of data to the benefit of minority interest but either due to TECHNOLOGICAL LIMITATIONS of the contemporary period or else because many states were ruled by BULLIES who would gratuitously (indecently/corruptly) exploit minority interest in favour of their majority rule. I am already being very lenient in blaming technological limitations for the perceivable injustice since to label state leaderships of being rogue BULLIES would be most incriminating. Costs of elections were also a concern so the focus was on state legislature, the vote for president having much lesser concern since USA was more concerned about intra-contentinental issues with few if any global concerns.

Perhaps the fact that state legislatures across all states (to my knowledge) opt for statewide voter participation in presidential elections (rather than flipping a coin as u mentioned) alludes to the fact that contemporary justice supported by modern technological progress, the GROWING AMBIT OF GLOBAL ROLE OF USA PRESIDENT, demand for as widespread voter participation as possible. Both technological availability and voter interest mandate that a national vote BEYOND the election of mere state legislators be conducted.

The 'winner take all' casino like manner of electoral college votes reporting for presidential elections only serves to fuel extremes of citizen emotions, from rabid activism to apathetic absenteeism as 'my vote won't count': which itself adds fuel to creating divisions within a nation/ federation. The current method of USA presidential vote counting remains an anachronism of our time and urgently needs reform if the USA is to remain a leading thought/policy leader in the world, rather than an OBSOLETE /spent force, or a bully which others need to teach discipline to and be put back to its original humble place.
Last edited by BicCherry on 06 Sep 2017 15:28, edited 1 time in total.
#14841110
What people refuse to grasp is the electoral college is totally in line with the original idea of strong states rights, a home is your castle, local communities control education, etc. You totally ignore the thought process behind our country and judge it based upon your current beliefs. The electoral college represents a separation of individuals from the federal government. The state was meant to be our representative to the federal government. They were meant to express our community view, not our individual view.
Trying to interpret the constitution based strictly upon individual rights requires a huge leap in logic from what it originally intended.
#14841113
One Degree wrote:What people refuse to grasp is the electoral college is totally in line with the original idea

Unfortunately, it isn't 230 years ago right now, so that is pretty much irrelevant. That is something else people refuse to grasp.
#14841114
What are you talking about? The electoral college was designed because of technological limitations and the worries the founding fathers had about founding a huge republic. They weren't sure it would work and didn't trust the average voter to make the correct choice. They were very concerned about mob rule.

It was designed deliberately to be able to override the votes of the public if they voted for a crazy person in the eyes of our elite.

Hamilton and the other founders believed that the electors would be able to insure that only a qualified person becomes President. They believed that with the Electoral College no one would be able to manipulate the citizenry. It would act as check on an electorate that might be duped. Hamilton and the other founders did not trust the population to make the right choice.


http://www.historycentral.com/elections ... gewhy.html
#14841115
In any event. I agree with the OP, our voting system is horrible in every way. Not only is FPTP is just not tenable and serves to maintain the status quo of power distribution between two large parties at the expense of what voters actually want, but the very method of voting, divided by state and county, is horribly unregulated. We should have a national system.
#14841128
I would think current events show we need it more than ever to prevent the public from being duped.
I do not want more direct contact between individuals and the federal government. I want much less. I want my community to not only represent me, but be my representative and 'go between' with the federal government. The whole idea of direct contact between the Federal government and individuals is detrimental to the individual and his freedom of choice. An individual can only be a victim to a large federal bureaucracy. Local autonomy is needed for our protection.
#14841195
Hamilton and the other founders believed that the electors would be able to insure that only a qualified person becomes President. They believed that with the Electoral College no one would be able to manipulate the citizenry. It would act as check on an electorate that might be duped. Hamilton and the other founders did not trust the population to make the right choice.

And the system works perfectly as it prevented HRC from getting elected despite she got almost 3 million more popular votes than Trump, who got elected by the Electoral College, did. I'm sure Hamilton and the other founders would have chosen Trump too. :lol:

[quote="blackjack] Neither of the suspects w[…]

Healthcare policy in Singapore is like a headles[…]

Pope Francis and His Lies

I and the Father are one. John 10:30 :) Jesu[…]

US bombers have flown close to North Korea's east […]