Your vote

sgtdmski · 01-01-2006, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hevusa

It doesn't make a bit of sense when just because you have an opinion different from those of your neighbors your vote doesn't count. This is going to deeply divide the nation as it becomes more and more fragmented.

And how exactly does your vote not count???? One person, one vote. Isn't that the purpose of an election, to determine who is elected by the votes they receive. The only thing that doesn't make a bit of sense is what you just said.

dmk

tyreay · 01-01-2006, 12:21 PM

The way the electoral college is set up each vote does not count equally. If a person recieves the most votes he should be the one elected? Sounds like that is what you are saying here. Thank you for supporting my point, srg.

hevusa · 01-01-2006, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgtdmski

Quote:

Originally Posted by hevusa

It doesn't make a bit of sense when just because you have an opinion different from those of your neighbors your vote doesn't count. This is going to deeply divide the nation as it becomes more and more fragmented.

And how exactly does your vote not count???? One person, one vote. Isn't that the purpose of an election, to determine who is elected by the votes they receive. The only thing that doesn't make a bit of sense is what you just said.

dmk

If you are a democrat living in a red state or vice versa your vote counts for shit. It promotes low turn out numbers at the polls and current power remaining in place (exactly what they want and exactly what the electoral college is still in place after 700 challenges).

If the electoral college was to remain the only fair way to continue would be to divide those electoral votes proportionately to the votes cast.

aMFliberal · 01-01-2006, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hevusa

If the electoral college was to remain the only fair way to continue would be to divide those electoral votes proportionately to the votes cast.

Do you mean that the only fair way would be to divide a state's electoral votes proportionally based on the votes cast? As in, if a state has 10 electoral votes, and one candidate wins 80% of the vote in that state, he or she receives 8 electoral votes from that state?

If that is what you were intending to say, a change like that would be pointless. It would have the same effect as getting rid of the whole thing all together.

I don't understand what the big fuss is about. There have not been that many elections where the loser of the popular vote won the election. The electoral college has an outdated purpose. It is an institution of the electoral process created by elitists who did not trust the American population to vote for the "right" candidates, or in other words, they did not want some Joe who they considered unfit for government to get behind the power of the comman man and win office. We have matured as a country and a population to the point where I think the citizens can elect a President by popular vote of the people. Not to mention, all the conservatives in the blue states and all of the liberals in the red states finally have their vote count for something.

hevusa · 01-01-2006, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aMFliberal

Quote:

Originally Posted by hevusa

If the electoral college was to remain the only fair way to continue would be to divide those electoral votes proportionately to the votes cast.

Do you mean that the only fair way would be to divide a state's electoral votes proportionally based on the votes cast? As in, if a state has 10 electoral votes, and one candidate wins 80% of the vote in that state, he or she receives 8 electoral votes from that state?

If that is what you were intending to say, a change like that would be pointless. It would have the same effect as getting rid of the whole thing all together.

I don't understand what the big fuss is about. There have not been that many elections where the loser of the popular vote won the election. The electoral college has an outdated purpose. It is an institution of the electoral process created by elitists who did not trust the American population to vote for the "right" candidates, or in other words, they did not want some Joe who they considered unfit for government to get behind the power of the comman man and win office. We have matured as a country and a population to the point where I think the citizens can elect a President by popular vote of the people. Not to mention, all the conservatives in the blue states and all of the liberals in the red states finally have their vote count for something.

hear hear