Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I swear I'll be correcting historical revisionism on the Electoral College until the day I die. This is not a mystery. We do not have to speculate. The reason for its existence was written down by its creators, and it was no great act of wisdom and foresight to protect against democracy or to represent all of the states. Nor was it because vote counting methods were insufficient.

The Electoral College is the compromise that was created when the position of executive was being defined after the Articles of Confederation failed. The northern states desired a direct popular vote for the executive, and the southern states desired a vote by the Representatives, for the same reason: slavery. The Electoral College is a direct extension of the previous 3/5ths compromise, the only plan that everybody would agree to by sectioning off the vote by state and then having those states EC votes counted. Because slaves were counted for representatives, this worked for the South, and the existence of the popular vote worked for the North.

That's it. It's about slavery. That is the reason. This is not up for interpretation. Go read the letters talking about it yourself if you doubt me.

[hector13]

The method the states use, does not change who is actually holding the reigns.

That makes no sense.

Trump won the EC, while Clinton won the popular vote. I mean... from both sides of the argument (who does the electing and who wins the election) that's nonsense.

[wierd]

I don't doubt it. Its true.

The error is in thinking I feel the framers of the constitution were gods.

Instead, I am pointing out the modern effect the EC has in routing tyrant of the majority by keeping a compromise between represented governance vs pure democratic vote governance, now that slavery is illegal.

Hector:

A govt official drafts you into the military, and orders you to genocide an enemy of the state.

You are the means by which that state has chosen to act. Do you have a choice, if not a duty, to disobey that order?

In comparison, the states of the us have collectively chosen to use the popular vote as the means of carrying out the selection process for president. (Much like a population vests a govt with affairs of state) when the public demands something contrary to the wellbeing of the state, the state can disregard. (Unfaithful electors, cognate to disobedient soldier above) the one holding the power if the moment is the one really choosing.

[redwallzyl]

Except it does not do that!

[PTTG??]

>Republicans want to ban everything not straight, white, and christian.

>E.C. protects against tyrrany of the majority.

[wierd]

One of those things is not like the other.

[Rolan7]

In regards to that very significant edit, Weird, I don't think anyone was talking about faithless electors.  And they certainly haven't shown any worth so far.  Which is pretty surprising considering that they're basically free to vote for whatever, given enough duplicity.  A remarkable security hole.

Individuals, particularly public individuals, are susceptible to blackmail.  I'll grant you that it seemingly hasn't happened yet, but it's not a reliable system.

Really though, faithless electors as a benefit is...  Morally questionable.  The tyranny of the many is very real, but who's to say these individuals aren't ready to enforce a tyranny of the few?  It's akin to throwing dice.  Potentially loaded dice.

[origamiscienceguy]

Electors were recieving every kind of threat you can imagine. There were a few faithless electors this year, and actually more voted against hillary than against trump.

[wierd]

Most soldiers who disobey orders are trigger happy rather than gunshy as well.

Nuremberg nailed a lid on it all the same, as to which is ethical.

[Neonivek]

Sigh

Why is one branch of govt, fundamentally different, in terms of representation, than another?

Answer that, then explain why the presidential election process should be different than state representation in the legislature.

do you seriously not understand one of the founding ideas of the US government system? we have both state based and population based representation as a compromise between population and region based representation. this is US politics 101.

Honestly the problem I have with many of the defenses for the electoral college is that it stinks heavily of apologetics.

It isn't that they are finding genuinely good uses for it, so much that they are inferring that there must be and these are what they are.

---

The odd thing is... That in spite the idea that if your in a small state you essentially get more voting power... It really REALLY doesn't feel that way to, well, the people living there.

So lets look at this... The two swing states where you have the biggest voting power are Maine and Nebraska.

So this must mean that the two presidential candidates must have paid serious close attention to them right? Well... No...

That is the thing about the "Protection from the majority" myth. All it has done is instead shift who the power makers are into the 6 most populated Swing States and 2 of the richest normal states (For funding)... So 8 states control the entire US election and essentially the government that follows.

Mind you I am sure it isn't quite as bad as I am making it seem...

[smjjames]

If slate is representative of dems can we say breitbart is representative of republicans?

yes

Isn't Slate actually pretty conservative? Or maybe more midline moderate.

Re the EC discussion: Part of the reasoning for getting rid of the EC is to get rid of 'flyover country', right? However, Trump did make a very good (and logical, which is unusual for him) point that he would just campaign in the big states. So, what's stopping candidates from primarily campaigning in the top 10 states by population, which make up over half of the US population. In addition to wherever else the candidates feels is strategically needed.

[Loud Whispers]

If slate is conservative I must wonder how far left off the cliff the USA has gone

[smjjames]

If slate is conservative I must wonder how far left off the cliff the USA has gone

Well, in one of 'burst yo echo bubble' articles on The Guardian, it seems to imply that Slate is a conservative news group.

It may just be that there are conservative writers on there. I don't read Slate regularily.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Slate's honestly reached the point of being a controversy rag, I'd have put them as being shitty leftists a year or two ago, but now it's Kotaku-tier baiting.

[Loud Whispers]

Well, in one of 'burst yo echo bubble' articles on The Guardian, it seems to imply that Slate is a conservative news group.

It may just be that there are conservative writers on there. I don't read Slate regularily.

Ahahaha of course it does it's the bloody guardian