Should the Electoral College be preserved?

Should the Electoral College be preserved?

  • Total voters
    11
Diogenes

Diogenes

1 account to rule them all
giphy.gif



The Electoral College is an institution established under Article Two of the US Constitution that grants each state a given number of electors in proportion to the size of its congressional delegation. The Electoral College is constitutionally mandated, and abolishing it would require a constitutional amendment.

With 528 Electoral College votes available in total, a majority of 270 is required for a candidate to win the White House.

Senate Democrats now say they want to abolish it.

That would require an amendment to the Constitution, which requires the consent of two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of the states.

If the Electoral College was eliminated, the power to elect the President would rest solely in the hands of a few of the largest states and cities, greatly diminishing the voice of smaller populated states.

The U.S. is not a pure democracy. It is a constitutional republic that protects minority rights from the will of the majority.

Today's Electoral College vote moved President Trump another step toward officially becoming president again.​


President Trump carried all seven key battleground states enroute to a 312 to 226 Electoral College victory over Vice President Harris.
President Trump also won the popular vote, scoring 77,300,739 ballots to 75,014,534 for Vice President Harris.
The electoral votes from the states will be certified on Jan. 6 during a joint session of Congress.

President Trump will be inaugurated two weeks later, on Jan. 20.

Should the Electoral College be preserved?
 
It is antiquated, a State the size of Wyoming, which is smaller than metro Buffalo, gets more of a say in who is President than the citizenry of California which is sixty seven times greater in population than Wyoming

The “if Electoral College was eliminated, the power to elect the President would rest solely in the hands of a few of the largest states and cities,” is hilarious considering the last election like most others was decided by a handful of “swing” States, neither candidate nor their campaigns spent any measurable time in any other States
 
archives said:
It is antiquated, a State the size of Wyoming, which is smaller than metro Buffalo, gets more of a say in who is President than the citizenry of California which is sixty seven times greater in population than Wyoming

The “if Electoral College was eliminated, the power to elect the President would rest solely in the hands of a few of the largest states and cities,” is hilarious considering the last election like most others was decided by a handful of “swing” States, neither candidate nor their campaigns spent any measurable time in any other States
Click to expand...

Did you forget to vote, Anchovies? I won't require any ID, you know, Anchovies.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Yes, it removes some of the incentive for states to cheat as they report ballot counts.
Click to expand...
It would be even better if the electors were proportioned by state rather than "winner take all." Sure, that means the Democrats couldn't win an election ever, but that's not so bad given how far to the Left they've gone...
 
T. A. Gardner said:
It would be even better if the electors were proportioned by state rather than "winner take all." Sure, that means the Democrats couldn't win an election ever, but that's not so bad given how far to the Left they've gone...
Click to expand...
The political parties are realigning even as the WOKE try to criminalize the opposition as for instance the Germans do as the people begin to wake up to our betrayal by the elites who have run things with almost no oversight.....these are tectonic shifts.....I encourage you to not get too caught up in the view from 12/24.
 
leaningright said:
Yes. That is all.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but anyone believing amending the Constitution is a realistic goal in today's toxic political environment is fooling themselves just like Legina fooled so many MAGAts with his catfish account of Diogenes AKA DNC Official AKA the Biden Administration.

9e4ezm.jpg
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Agreed, but anyone believing amending the Constitution is a realistic goal in today's toxic political environment is fooling themselves just like Legina fooled so many MAGAts with his catfish account of Diogenes AKA DNC Official AKA the Biden Administration.

9e4ezm.jpg
Click to expand...
You may have mis-read my post or the poll. My “yes” vote was to preserve the EC and would require no constitutional amendment.

Anyway, I agree that amending the constitution is a no go …
 
leaningright said:
You may have mis-read my post or the poll. My “yes” vote was to preserve the EC and would require no constitutional amendment.

Anyway, I agree that amending the constitution is a no go …
Click to expand...
I uderstood and agreed with you yes vote. My post was to explain why those seeking to change it are dreaming and should focus on something more realistic.
 
If the Constitution was being followed we would not have open borders, as just one example.

We would also not be ruled by a Swamp that ignores us as they pursue their Imperial Empire greed.
 
I voted NO because I believe it should be counted by Congressional districts and NOT winner take all.
As I have pointed out under winner take all some peoples wishes are not being taken into consideration.
Like in states like NY where over half of the states pop. live in a large metro area that controls what the state does and the people that live in the rest of the state may as well not even vote.
That happens a lot in NY and as I said the votes from upstate and western NY don't matter most times.
and for you MAGA morons these are large republican areas.
LETS change it so everybody's votes count.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top