Here's what the DNC should do in the next nomination process

KingRaw!

KingRaw!

I dare you to stop us GL
Now I don't want to confuse you all with my wacky idea so I'll make it as simple as I can. Here we go, you ready? The candidate with the most votes gets the nomination. No pledged delegates, no super delegates, no state points. If you get the most votes then you win. Not how many states you win or how many "big states" you win, but just how many people voted for you. If you win California, you don't get a certain amount of points like in the general election. It gives you momentum, but no huge advantage unless you get a lot more votes than the other person.

Hard isn't it? The peson with the most votes wins. What am I smoking!
 
The only problem with that is the presidency was never intended to be determined solely by popular vote. That is why we have the electoral college. The job of the president hes never been to represent popular will - that is the job of the House of Representatives. The job of the Senate was originally intended to represent the will of the states. (We screwed that up by making Senators elected by popular vote.)

The job of the President is not representational at all. It is an Executive position. It is supported by an executive cabinet. The electoral college was a compromise between those who wished a popularly elected president (who were actually in a minority) those who desired a president chosen by either congress, or by a separate council appointed by state legislators (the majority) and a small minority who desired a constitutional monarchy, with a president chosen from an elite comprised from a few dozen families.

The electoral college was the compromise, which removes the actual selection of the president from the popular vote. There were many reasons for removing the presidency away from direct popular vote, not the least being that popular nation wide vote would put a disparate amount of national control in areas of high population density. Another reason, and a strong factor in the way the college was designed, is to assure a president cannot be chosen by their party controlling one or two regions. A successful presidential candidate needs to win at least some electoral votes from most regions.

The popular vote definitely has a powerful influence, as most times the popular vate and electoral vote choose the same president. But the popular vote BY DESIGN, is not the final factor.
 
Good Luck said:
The only problem with that is the presidency was never intended to be determined solely by popular vote. That is why we have the electoral college. The job of the president hes never been to represent popular will - that is the job of the House of Representatives. The job of the Senate was originally intended to represent the will of the states. (We screwed that up by making Senators elected by popular vote.)

The job of the President is not representational at all. It is an Executive position. It is supported by an executive cabinet. The electoral college was a compromise between those who wished a popularly elected president (who were actually in a minority) those who desired a president chosen by either congress, or by a separate council appointed by state legislators (the majority) and a small minority who desired a constitutional monarchy, with a president chosen from an elite comprised from a few dozen families.

The electoral college was the compromise, which removes the actual selection of the president from the popular vote. There were many reasons for removing the presidency away from direct popular vote, not the least being that popular nation wide vote would put a disparate amount of national control in areas of high population density. Another reason, and a strong factor in the way the college was designed, is to assure a president cannot be chosen by their party controlling one or two regions. A successful presidential candidate needs to win at least some electoral votes from most regions.

The popular vote definitely has a powerful influence, as most times the popular vate and electoral vote choose the same president. But the popular vote BY DESIGN, is not the final factor.
Click to expand...

It's only a party nomination process. Who really cares how a party chooses it's candidate ?
 
Dilloduck said:
It's only a party nomination process. Who really cares how a party chooses it's candidate ?
Click to expand...
A lot of people care - especially those who are in the process of choosing the candidate for their party. It is a very good idea, however, for the people involved to understand the design of the process and the reasons it was designed that way.
 
And I always thought the electorial process was due to poor communication and delays in the early days of the USA.
 
Good Luck said:
A lot of people care - especially those who are in the process of choosing the candidate for their party. It is a very good idea, however, for the people involved to understand the design of the process and the reasons it was designed that way.
Click to expand...

Yet these same people would scream bloody murder if someone decides to run as an independent and essentially nominate himself. The Constitution has very little to say regarding how parties select candidates.
 
uscitizen said:
And I always thought the electorial process was due to poor communication and delays in the early days of the USA.
Click to expand...
An early misconception whose origins are lost. I was taught the same thing in elementary school.

Think about it logically: how is it any more difficult for a delegate to declare the results of the popular vote from their state than declare their vote? The popular vote had to be known or they would not know themselves how to vote.

The popular vote results were tabulated before the electoral college made their vote. That is the reason states are given until December 15 to transmit their Certificate of Vote to NARA. By the time the delegates were sent off with the state Certificate of Vote to elect the president, the popular vote was known.
 
Good Luck said:
An early misconception whose origins are lost. I was taught the same thing in elementary school.

Think about it logically: how is it any more difficult for a delegate to declare the results of the popular vote from their state than declare their vote? The popular vote had to be known or they would not know themselves how to vote.

The popular vote results were tabulated before the electoral college made their vote. That is the reason states are given until December 15 to transmit their Certificate of Vote to NARA. By the time the delegates were sent off with the state Certificate of Vote to elect the president, the popular vote was known.
Click to expand...

How to declare the vote ? The electorial college delegates were the couriers from their areas.
 
Dilloduck said:
Glad you agree--I was hoping you weren't confused between a primary and a general election like so many other here are.
Click to expand...

Not me, the primary is a political party/private organization thingy. Pretty much outside of the govt and constitution. That is why different states do it different ways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top