|
|
Post by Kliquid on Nov 4, 2012 9:45:50 GMT -5
While the national polls are relatively close, Obama holds the lead in several swing states. I could definitely see a situation where Romney wins the popular vote but Obama the electoral college. Can't wait to see the flip-flop from people on the left who hated the electoral college in 2000 and now love it; and people on the right who loved it in 2000 and now hate it. |
|
|
|
Post by robinsonben36 on Nov 4, 2012 10:30:02 GMT -5
I think everyone can agree that the electoral college is a sham regardless of this election's outcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Nov 4, 2012 10:52:12 GMT -5
Coming from outside the USA, I don't believe the Electoral College serves any purpose anymore. It hinders democracy. I see no reason why, for the Presidential vote, they can't just do away with states and just have one person one vote for the whole country, and the winner of the popular vote wins the White House.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 1:00:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2012 11:34:37 GMT -5
Coming from outside the USA, I don't believe the Electoral College serves any purpose anymore. It hinders democracy. I see no reason why, for the Presidential vote, they can't just do away with states and just have one person one vote for the whole country, and the winner of the popular vote wins the White House. You're preaching to the choir, buddy. |
|
|
|
Post by nexusagainstus on Nov 4, 2012 12:28:08 GMT -5
The Electoral College makes no since to me. Why was it even brought into play in the first place?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 4, 2012 13:50:42 GMT -5
Coming from outside the USA, I don't believe the Electoral College serves any purpose anymore. It hinders democracy. I see no reason why, for the Presidential vote, they can't just do away with states and just have one person one vote for the whole country, and the winner of the popular vote wins the White House. I'm not convinced that would really fix the problem though. The problem with the electoral college is that you have states that are solidly for one party or another and candidates never campaign there. The only places where they campaign are the swing states and so you have a handful of states who influence the entire election. If you went to a straight popular vote you'd have a handful of highly populated areas that would influence the election. So you'd have the same problem you have before, only different areas of the country would see candidates. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Nov 4, 2012 14:13:51 GMT -5
The Electoral College makes no since to me. Why was it even brought into play in the first place? The Founding Fathers, in their eternal wisdom[/sarcasm] were afraid of the idea of 'Mobocracy', and so created the Electoral College so that if the people voted for an extremist candidate, the electors could reject their vote and keep the USA 'on the right course'. That's highly unlikely nowadays though. Coming from outside the USA, I don't believe the Electoral College serves any purpose anymore. It hinders democracy. I see no reason why, for the Presidential vote, they can't just do away with states and just have one person one vote for the whole country, and the winner of the popular vote wins the White House. I'm not convinced that would really fix the problem though. The problem with the electoral college is that you have states that are solidly for one party or another and candidates never campaign there. The only places where they campaign are the swing states and so you have a handful of states who influence the entire election. If you went to a straight popular vote you'd have a handful of highly populated areas that would influence the election. So you'd have the same problem you have before, only different areas of the country would see candidates. It doesn't matter if highly populated areas influence the election - they should, as theres more people there. If everyone is 'equal' as the Constitution claims then at least this will make everyone's vote mean more - it doesn't matter if you're a Democrat in Wyoming, as your vote matters just as much as a Democrat in Ohio in deciding the election. This would encourage higher turnout in solid red/blue states and make people feel like they're making the difference a lot more. |
|
The Doctor
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 3, 2002 19:03:52 GMT -5
Posts: 3,446
|
Post by The Doctor on Nov 4, 2012 20:48:50 GMT -5
The College is essential. Without it, our President would be chosen by California, New York and Texas every four years and screw the rest of the country.
|
|
|
|
Post by robinsonben36 on Nov 4, 2012 20:56:33 GMT -5
The College is essential. Without it, our President would be chosen by California, New York and Texas every four years and screw and rest of the country. Has a candidate ever won those three states' Electoral College votes and also lost the election? If not your argument is pretty much defeated. Arguing AGAINST the popular vote is pointless. However the majority is reached, how they vote should determine the President. The fact that six states are going to determine this election (hell, many are saying that Ohio alone will determine this election!) is ridiculous. |
|
The Doctor
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 3, 2002 19:03:52 GMT -5
Posts: 3,446
|
Post by The Doctor on Nov 4, 2012 21:14:05 GMT -5
We'll see come Tuesday.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 4, 2012 22:24:34 GMT -5
The College is essential. Without it, our President would be chosen by California, New York and Texas every four years and screw and rest of the country. Has a candidate ever won those three states' Electoral College votes and also lost the election? If not your argument is pretty much defeated. Last time California voted Republican was 1988. Last time New York voted Republican was 1984. Went back to Reagan and can't find the last time Texas voted Democratic. The last candidate to carry all three of those states was Reagan. Generally New York and California vote Democratic and Texas votes Republican. The states with the most undecided voters will end up deciding the election though in a popular vote election. The states that are solidly in one camp or the other will never see a candidate. Same thing as we have now with the electoral college. |
|
|
|
Post by robinsonben36 on Nov 4, 2012 22:26:12 GMT -5
Sounds like an argument AGAINST the electoral college to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Nov 4, 2012 22:34:35 GMT -5
So I had to laugh at the idiocy my brother threw at me. He said, and I quote:
Being a Democrat "is as bad as murder."
End quote.
How does someone even think that is an okay thing to say? For real. I'd like to see him tell that to Vinnie Paul, who had to watch his brother get savagely murdered on stage. Tell that to the friends and family of John Lennon. Tell that to the family of the 12 year old NJ girl who was murdered. And then let them rip you apart for being an insensitive prick. That's exactly what I told him, and he - like Mitt Romney - flipped and went to a different subject.
He is just like a stereotypical Republican. Logic is not one of his strong points. Just wanted to share the lulz.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 4, 2012 22:36:59 GMT -5
Sounds like an argument AGAINST the electoral college to me. Here's the thing though. The problem with the electoral college is that you have a handful of states that influence the election every year. The rest of the states don't matter. Would we agree that is the main problem? Going to a direct vote doesn't really fix the problem. You have a handful of states with a high population of swing voters. Those states are going to influence the election. No one else is going to see a candidate. So it really doesn't solve the problem. |
|
|
|
Post by cattlemutilation on Nov 4, 2012 23:36:22 GMT -5
Texas was Democrat is 1976, fwiw.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 1:00:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2012 8:18:17 GMT -5
Well tomorrow is the big day guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deep Figure Value on Nov 5, 2012 8:36:47 GMT -5
I just hope that after the dust is settled from tomorrow, all the armchair activists and sudden political analysts can go back into hibernation for a few years. This election has become such a joke to me that I will be writing in candidates true to the nature of the dog and pony show this thing has become.
|
|
|
|
Post by cattlemutilation on Nov 5, 2012 15:56:44 GMT -5
I plan on drinking and watching a typhoon of tears coming from every pundit on Fox News.
|
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Nov 5, 2012 16:03:24 GMT -5
So I had to laugh at the idiocy my brother threw at me. He said, and I quote: Being a Democrat "is as bad as murder." End quote. How does someone even think that is an okay thing to say? For real. I'd like to see him tell that to Vinnie Paul, who had to watch his brother get savagely murdered on stage. Tell that to the friends and family of John Lennon. Tell that to the family of the 12 year old NJ girl who was murdered. And then let them rip you apart for being an insensitive prick. That's exactly what I told him, and he - like Mitt Romney - flipped and went to a different subject. He is just like a stereotypical Republican. Logic is not one of his strong points. Just wanted to share the lulz. I've heard so much nonsense this election. The most amusing one is that "Democrats are all going to hell". |
|
|
|
Post by Tim of thee on Nov 5, 2012 16:06:37 GMT -5
That kind of stupid, uncivil rhetoric comes from both sides.. election seasons bring out the worst of people
|
|
I dont know good luck 
