electoral college
- Thread starter jennythebugg
- Start date
clownfish11
Active Member
OH SNAP! this is exactly what im doing a paper on/researching/learing in my Pres elec class
its really confusing, and if nobody else wants to explain it..I will later or I'll just copy/paste my paper
its really confusing, and if nobody else wants to explain it..I will later or I'll just copy/paste my paper
U
usirchchris
Guest
Originally Posted by jennythebugg
http:///forum/post/2805409
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepol...tcollege_2.htm
why does this even exist??
So radicals like Obama don't get into office, the public doesn't know what is good for it...Just jokes Obama fans...but seriously...
http:///forum/post/2805409
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepol...tcollege_2.htm
why does this even exist??
So radicals like Obama don't get into office, the public doesn't know what is good for it...Just jokes Obama fans...but seriously...
jennythebugg
Active Member
no , really...our individual votes dont even count...how is this legal ? where did the government get the right to take away our voice?
geridoc
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by jennythebugg
http:///forum/post/2805543
no , really...our individual votes dont even count...how is this legal ? where did the government get the right to take away our voice?
Jenny: According to the original constitution, you never had a voice. Only males who held private property were eligible to vote for the electors, who would then actually select the President.
http:///forum/post/2805543
no , really...our individual votes dont even count...how is this legal ? where did the government get the right to take away our voice?
Jenny: According to the original constitution, you never had a voice. Only males who held private property were eligible to vote for the electors, who would then actually select the President.
bionicarm
Active Member
The premise behind the Electoral College was to provide equal representation of the people of this country when voting for the President. The feeling is if you left it to the Popular Vote, then the candidates would only campaign in the most populus states and cities. It would disenfranchise the rural communities, and not allow them to be represented in the vote. Not really sure why that would be the case. There's also the fear of voter fraud, and lawsuits if the vote is too close between the candidates. I think if the vote were less than a 1% difference, it calls for a total recount. Imagine having to recount every vote in all 50 states. Look how long that took in Florida in 2000. The president wouldn't be decided by January 20th, and you'd be swearing in the Speaker of The House (as of today, that would be Nancy Pelosi). I read that there have been four instances in history where the candidate with the Popular Vote didn't win the Electoral Votes, the last being Gore.
MSNBC just had an article on this today...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27283314/
MSNBC just had an article on this today...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27283314/
jennythebugg
Active Member
can we not vote by fingerprint ? that would fill up the print data base and be acurate and so far as representation is concerned there is tv internet radio newspapers and magazines to get the word of the candidates out ...right? i just happen to think its wrong to put it to a vote...(which last time i heard was the person with more votes is the winner), and our votes dont even count
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by jennythebugg
http:///forum/post/2805626
can we not vote by fingerprint ? that would fill up the print data base and be acurate and so far as representation is concerned there is tv internet radio newspapers and magazines to get the word of the candidates out ...right? i just happen to think its wrong to put it to a vote...(which last time i heard was the person with more votes is the winner), and our votes dont even count
IMO the original design was to spread the influence to the smaller states. I'm a fan of it. If you accept the premise that we are a republic instead of a democracy it makes sense.
btw can you imagine the uproar of requiring fingerprints to vote... I can hear it now.
http:///forum/post/2805626
can we not vote by fingerprint ? that would fill up the print data base and be acurate and so far as representation is concerned there is tv internet radio newspapers and magazines to get the word of the candidates out ...right? i just happen to think its wrong to put it to a vote...(which last time i heard was the person with more votes is the winner), and our votes dont even count
IMO the original design was to spread the influence to the smaller states. I'm a fan of it. If you accept the premise that we are a republic instead of a democracy it makes sense.
btw can you imagine the uproar of requiring fingerprints to vote... I can hear it now.
sickboy
Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2805620
the last being Gore.
MSNBC just had an article on this today...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27283314/
should have paid a little more attention before posting
http:///forum/post/2805620
the last being Gore.
MSNBC just had an article on this today...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27283314/
should have paid a little more attention before posting
sickboy
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2805648
If you accept the premise that we are a republic instead of a democracy it makes sense.
If only more people realized this instead of believing the lies...
http:///forum/post/2805648
If you accept the premise that we are a republic instead of a democracy it makes sense.
If only more people realized this instead of believing the lies...
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2805666
I could be wrong, but didn't Gore win the popular vote in 2000? And yet we still have an idiot running our country....
lol can you imagine, the guy who claimed that he world would end in ten years because of global warming, running the country?
http:///forum/post/2805666
I could be wrong, but didn't Gore win the popular vote in 2000? And yet we still have an idiot running our country....
lol can you imagine, the guy who claimed that he world would end in ten years because of global warming, running the country?
rotarymagic
Active Member
Wait you're forgetting his Tobacco-lord past! Masking one bringer of death by proclaiming another! "I invented the internet!"
geoj
Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2805666
I could be wrong, but didn't Gore win the popular vote in 2000? And yet we still have an idiot running our country....
I believe you are wrong Gore did not win the popular vote he won the media vote the vote that was not official. When the real vote came in he had lost and the media did not like it. This is when the media started claming Gore had won the popular vote and Gore sued trying to over turn the law. At this time there where other states that had been won by Bush but the count had not been finished when it was done Gore did not win the popular vote.
http:///forum/post/2805666
I could be wrong, but didn't Gore win the popular vote in 2000? And yet we still have an idiot running our country....
I believe you are wrong Gore did not win the popular vote he won the media vote the vote that was not official. When the real vote came in he had lost and the media did not like it. This is when the media started claming Gore had won the popular vote and Gore sued trying to over turn the law. At this time there where other states that had been won by Bush but the count had not been finished when it was done Gore did not win the popular vote.
geoj
Active Member
In most states the law is that you do not have to count all the ballots. You only need to keep counting the ballots if the remaining number of ballots is large enough to change the outcome of the election. So after the election they are still counting the popular vote and does the media report the real popular vote weeks later not if it does not like the result.
oscardeuce
Active Member
Originally Posted by jennythebugg
http:///forum/post/2805409
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepol...tcollege_2.htm
why does this even exist??
If I may ask:
Did you take American History in high school?
I don't mean to sound crude, but the framers of the Constitution were worried that the new gov't would become too powerful. They had just fought a war to rid themselves of a powerful high tax gov't. They also wrote in many layers of checks and balances. One of these is the electoral college. If you remember US Senators were originally chosen by the States to represent them and not by popular vote. That was another check and balance that we screwed up.
Now fast forward 230 some years, we have a huge powerful federal gov't. Exactly the opposite of what the founders intended.
When you vote, you need to understand what principles this country was founded on. If you don't like the Constitution, try to ammend it, or go somewhere you would like to live. There was a good reason you had to own land to vote. You were the one paying the tax. Now almost half pay NO tax, yet they can vote to raise my taxes to "spread the wealth". What happens when the non tax payer reach 51%?
I'd argue almost every Ammendment we've made in the last 150 years has been a step backwards.
http:///forum/post/2805409
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepol...tcollege_2.htm
why does this even exist??
If I may ask:
Did you take American History in high school?
I don't mean to sound crude, but the framers of the Constitution were worried that the new gov't would become too powerful. They had just fought a war to rid themselves of a powerful high tax gov't. They also wrote in many layers of checks and balances. One of these is the electoral college. If you remember US Senators were originally chosen by the States to represent them and not by popular vote. That was another check and balance that we screwed up.
Now fast forward 230 some years, we have a huge powerful federal gov't. Exactly the opposite of what the founders intended.
When you vote, you need to understand what principles this country was founded on. If you don't like the Constitution, try to ammend it, or go somewhere you would like to live. There was a good reason you had to own land to vote. You were the one paying the tax. Now almost half pay NO tax, yet they can vote to raise my taxes to "spread the wealth". What happens when the non tax payer reach 51%?
I'd argue almost every Ammendment we've made in the last 150 years has been a step backwards.
rotarymagic
Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2805948
If I may ask:
Did you take American History in high school?
I don't mean to sound crude, but the framers of the Constitution were worried that the new gov't would become too powerful. They had just fought a war to rid themselves of a powerful high tax gov't. They also wrote in many layers of checks and balances. One of these is the electoral college. If you remember US Senators were originally chosen by the States to represent them and not by popular vote. That was another check and balance that we screwed up.
Now fast forward 230 some years, we have a huge powerful federal gov't. Exactly the opposite of what the founders intended.
When you vote, you need to understand what principles this country was founded on. If you don't like the Constitution, try to ammend it, or go somewhere you would like to live. There was a good reason you had to own land to vote. You were the one paying the tax. Now almost half pay NO tax, yet they can vote to raise my taxes to "spread the wealth". What happens when the non tax payer reach 51%?
I'd argue almost every Ammendment we've made in the last 150 years has been a step backwards.
AHAHAHAHA... like what? 13th amendment, 14th amendment, 15th amendment, all the way to the twenty-fourth?
http:///forum/post/2805948
If I may ask:
Did you take American History in high school?
I don't mean to sound crude, but the framers of the Constitution were worried that the new gov't would become too powerful. They had just fought a war to rid themselves of a powerful high tax gov't. They also wrote in many layers of checks and balances. One of these is the electoral college. If you remember US Senators were originally chosen by the States to represent them and not by popular vote. That was another check and balance that we screwed up.
Now fast forward 230 some years, we have a huge powerful federal gov't. Exactly the opposite of what the founders intended.
When you vote, you need to understand what principles this country was founded on. If you don't like the Constitution, try to ammend it, or go somewhere you would like to live. There was a good reason you had to own land to vote. You were the one paying the tax. Now almost half pay NO tax, yet they can vote to raise my taxes to "spread the wealth". What happens when the non tax payer reach 51%?
I'd argue almost every Ammendment we've made in the last 150 years has been a step backwards.
AHAHAHAHA... like what? 13th amendment, 14th amendment, 15th amendment, all the way to the twenty-fourth?
bionicarm
Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2805948
If I may ask:
Did you take American History in high school?
I don't mean to sound crude, but the framers of the Constitution were worried that the new gov't would become too powerful. They had just fought a war to rid themselves of a powerful high tax gov't. They also wrote in many layers of checks and balances. One of these is the electoral college. If you remember US Senators were originally chosen by the States to represent them and not by popular vote. That was another check and balance that we screwed up.
Now fast forward 230 some years, we have a huge powerful federal gov't. Exactly the opposite of what the founders intended.
When you vote, you need to understand what principles this country was founded on. If you don't like the Constitution, try to ammend it, or go somewhere you would like to live. There was a good reason you had to own land to vote. You were the one paying the tax. Now almost half pay NO tax, yet they can vote to raise my taxes to "spread the wealth". What happens when the non tax payer reach 51%?
I'd argue almost every Ammendment we've made in the last 150 years has been a step backwards.
Here, I'll play journey - Show me the statistics where half the people in this country don't pay ANY taxes. How about Sales Tax, Property Tax, or State Income Tax?
So you think this country is better off not allowing women to vote? Great, take Sarah Palin off the Republican ticket.
"If you don't like the Constitution, try to ammend it, or go somewhere you would like to live." You have to be joking here right? Since you want to live in the Dark Ages, I'll be coming over to your house and take away your plumbing, electricity, and every other modern convenience you own...
http:///forum/post/2805948
If I may ask:
Did you take American History in high school?
I don't mean to sound crude, but the framers of the Constitution were worried that the new gov't would become too powerful. They had just fought a war to rid themselves of a powerful high tax gov't. They also wrote in many layers of checks and balances. One of these is the electoral college. If you remember US Senators were originally chosen by the States to represent them and not by popular vote. That was another check and balance that we screwed up.
Now fast forward 230 some years, we have a huge powerful federal gov't. Exactly the opposite of what the founders intended.
When you vote, you need to understand what principles this country was founded on. If you don't like the Constitution, try to ammend it, or go somewhere you would like to live. There was a good reason you had to own land to vote. You were the one paying the tax. Now almost half pay NO tax, yet they can vote to raise my taxes to "spread the wealth". What happens when the non tax payer reach 51%?
I'd argue almost every Ammendment we've made in the last 150 years has been a step backwards.
Here, I'll play journey - Show me the statistics where half the people in this country don't pay ANY taxes. How about Sales Tax, Property Tax, or State Income Tax?
So you think this country is better off not allowing women to vote? Great, take Sarah Palin off the Republican ticket.
"If you don't like the Constitution, try to ammend it, or go somewhere you would like to live." You have to be joking here right? Since you want to live in the Dark Ages, I'll be coming over to your house and take away your plumbing, electricity, and every other modern convenience you own...
oscardeuce
Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2806024
Here, I'll play journey - Show me the statistics where half the people in this country don't pay ANY taxes. How about Sales Tax, Property Tax, or State Income Tax?
So you think this country is better off not allowing women to vote? Great, take Sarah Palin off the Republican ticket.
"If you don't like the Constitution, try to ammend it, or go somewhere you would like to live." You have to be joking here right? Since you want to live in the Dark Ages, I'll be coming over to your house and take away your plumbing, electricity, and every other modern convenience you own...
Why is it the "dark ages" to believe in the Constitution? No you advocate B+E and stealing to make your point.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/1410.html
Ok, so it's 41% now for federal income tax, but my point is still, what will happen when that number reaches 51%? Will the consumers be even more bold?
http:///forum/post/2806024
Here, I'll play journey - Show me the statistics where half the people in this country don't pay ANY taxes. How about Sales Tax, Property Tax, or State Income Tax?
So you think this country is better off not allowing women to vote? Great, take Sarah Palin off the Republican ticket.
"If you don't like the Constitution, try to ammend it, or go somewhere you would like to live." You have to be joking here right? Since you want to live in the Dark Ages, I'll be coming over to your house and take away your plumbing, electricity, and every other modern convenience you own...
Why is it the "dark ages" to believe in the Constitution? No you advocate B+E and stealing to make your point.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/1410.html
Ok, so it's 41% now for federal income tax, but my point is still, what will happen when that number reaches 51%? Will the consumers be even more bold?
bionicarm
Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2806596
Why is it the "dark ages" to believe in the Constitution? No you advocate B+E and stealing to make your point.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/1410.html
Ok, so it's 41% now for federal income tax, but my point is still, what will happen when that number reaches 51%? Will the consumers be even more bold?
Now that I read it again, your previous comment makes no sense. You say you believe in the Constitution, but in the next breath you say that every amendment made in the last 150 years is a step backwards. Which means:
You believe it was wrong to abolish slavery, and grant the slaves the same rights as other American citizens
You think it was stupid to create the Income Tax and Electoral College (I'll give you these two)
You didn't want to repeal the 18th Amendment (Prohibition - hope you don't drink beer while watching football on Sundays)
Don't want women to vote (already stated that one)
Don't want Washington D.C. to have any electoral vote (another one I'll give you)
Don't want blacks to vote.
Don't care who succeeds the President if he/she is unable to hold office (If McCain gets in, I'll go for this one. We could bypass Sarah and go straight to Nancy!)
Think people under the age of 18 should vote (another one I'll give ya)
So all in all, I would tend to agree with you. However, I think the beer drinkers, women, an African American members of this forum may disagree with you a little.
http:///forum/post/2806596
Why is it the "dark ages" to believe in the Constitution? No you advocate B+E and stealing to make your point.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/1410.html
Ok, so it's 41% now for federal income tax, but my point is still, what will happen when that number reaches 51%? Will the consumers be even more bold?
Now that I read it again, your previous comment makes no sense. You say you believe in the Constitution, but in the next breath you say that every amendment made in the last 150 years is a step backwards. Which means:
You believe it was wrong to abolish slavery, and grant the slaves the same rights as other American citizens
You think it was stupid to create the Income Tax and Electoral College (I'll give you these two)
You didn't want to repeal the 18th Amendment (Prohibition - hope you don't drink beer while watching football on Sundays)
Don't want women to vote (already stated that one)
Don't want Washington D.C. to have any electoral vote (another one I'll give you)
Don't want blacks to vote.
Don't care who succeeds the President if he/she is unable to hold office (If McCain gets in, I'll go for this one. We could bypass Sarah and go straight to Nancy!)
Think people under the age of 18 should vote (another one I'll give ya)
So all in all, I would tend to agree with you. However, I think the beer drinkers, women, an African American members of this forum may disagree with you a little.