US inches closer to change in how presidential elections are counted

Taichiliberal said:
Nonsense .... the whole design of the Constitution is to CHANGE, to EVOLVE. That is why we have AMENDMENTS. It can be done, it has been done .... BY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. Our history shows that. What generation will do this is up to debate.
Click to expand...
A lot of commentary on the Constitutional Convention leads the modern citizen to believe the EC was a rush job with little rationality.
 
Hume said:
The EC does that now.
Click to expand...
Explain in detail with an example of how that occurs

edxxw.jpg
 
Hume said:
A lot of commentary on the Constitutional Convention leads the modern citizen to believe the EC was a rush job with little rationality.
Click to expand...
Not for those who pay attention to detail. What I am happy about is that you do have programs like PBS on TV to explain such, as with numerous podcast and "alternative" news channels. Good newspapers like McClatchy News or NEWSDAY in NY. Then there's Pacifica Broadcast Network, or the NPR radio. What's scaring the status quo is that more and more people, young and old are not just buying into the hype of legacy TV and newspapers
 
Taichiliberal said:
Not for those who pay attention to detail. What I am happy about is that you do have programs like PBS on TV to explain such, as with numerous podcast and "alternative" news channels. Good newspapers like McClatchy News or NEWSDAY in NY. Then there's Pacifica Broadcast Network, or the NPR radio. What's scaring the status quo is that more and more people, young and old are not just buying into the hype of legacy TV and newspapers
Click to expand...
I prefer to read the Constitution and framers like Madison. They themselves it was a forced compromise. Not between large and small states, between wanting Congress to appoint the President and a popular election.
 
Hume said:
I prefer to read the Constitution and framers like Madison. They themselves it was a forced compromise. Not between large and small states, between wanting Congress to appoint the President and a popular election.
Click to expand...
What you prefer and what has transpired since then are two different things. Remember, the whole concept of Africans as being equal human beings came about to a CHANGE in the Constitution .... as did the later Amendments, apropos Civil Rights Acts, etc. As I said, IT CAN BE DONE .... IF THE PEOPLE ARE WILLING!
 
Taichiliberal said:
What you prefer and what has transpired since then are two different things. Remember, the whole concept of Africans as being equal human beings came about to a CHANGE in the Constitution .... as did the later Amendments, apropos Civil Rights Acts, etc. As I said, IT CAN BE DONE .... IF THE PEOPLE ARE WILLING!
Click to expand...
Right. Why we need to amend the Constitution to elect the President by the people, a popular election. Get rid of the Electoral College.
 
Hume said:
I prefer to read the Constitution and framers like Madison. They themselves it was a forced compromise. Not between large and small states, between wanting Congress to appoint the President and a popular election.
Click to expand...
And in the end, they gave each state the power to select their electors to the electoral college. Small states with low populations were guaranteed 3 electors (1 for their House member, 2 for their Senators). This gave them a disproportionate number of electors compared to their population and more say in the election. That balanced things to a degree from larger states running roughshod over them.

Initially, some states chose to simply have the legislature and governor select electors with no election for president being done. That didn't last. The current system's only real flaw is "winner-take-all" outcomes.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
And in the end, they gave each state the power to select their electors to the electoral college. Small states with low populations were guaranteed 3 electors (1 for their House member, 2 for their Senators). This gave them a disproportionate number of electors compared to their population and more say in the election. That balanced things to a degree from larger states running roughshod over them.

Initially, some states chose to simply have the legislature and governor select electors with no election for president being done. That didn't last. The current system's only real flaw is "winner-take-all" outcomes.
Click to expand...
Yes, why this system is flawed. No election in the nation is controlled this way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top