Should the Electoral College be abolished?

[Kowani]

I sense you’re trying to hide your power level here, since I also sense you’d want the whole constitution put through the shredder.


It’s only a “””grave danger””” to those who don’t like freedom and the ideals of liberty and justice for all since they can’t oppress the masses as effectively as they wish. To be against freedom and to be for tyranny is to be anti-American.


If so then so what? Since we weren’t founded or even intended to be a theocracy I’d say that what happens to the “””immortal souls””” of Americans hardly matters and is only a matter between believers and their particular deity.

One wonders how what I propose is Anti-American when the Founders created a limited franchise in the first place.

Yeah, we’re better than the Founders.

[Skyviolia]

One wonders how what I propose is Anti-American when the Founders created a limited franchise in the first place.

So because the founding fathers were racist, we should keep being racist? Surprising no one, the founding fathers weren't perfect, and there are things we can do to improve upon what they created. We do after all have a lot more knowledge at our disposal than they did.

That's fucked logic. You can't compare slavery to the goddamn electoral college.

[Thermodolia]

So because the founding fathers were racist, we should keep being racist? Surprising no one, the founding fathers weren't perfect, and there are things we can do to improve upon what they created. We do after all have a lot more knowledge at our disposal than they did.

That's fucked logic. You can't compare slavery to the goddamn electoral college.

He’s not. The person he’s quoting wants to remove the vote from women, those under 21, and non-whites.

[Totally Not OEP]

That's fucked logic. You can't compare slavery to the goddamn electoral college.

He’s not. The person he’s quoting wants to remove the vote from women, those under 21, and non-whites.

The 17th Amendment concerns election of Senators while the 19th only concerns women.

[Ifreann]

The Electoral college is the system of electing the president of the United States of America.

In my opinion it is very undemocratic. The electoral college has lead to electing a president 4 times without the majority of the voters.
This site also shows how you can win the elections with 22% of the popular vote.
https://www.squarefree.com/2004/11/01/w ... ular-vote/

In my opinion the electoral college should be abolished and replaced by the popular vote the candidate with the most votes win.

NS , what is your opinion?

The Electoral College being abolished is like counting the votes of the HRE Emperor based on the most populated princes, leaving smaller elector states powerless. We NEED the Electoral College, because we'd otherwise have the same party win every election.

The House of Habsburg ruled the Holy Roman Empire for longer than the United States of America has existed.

[Spirit of Hope]

He’s not. The person he’s quoting wants to remove the vote from women, those under 21, and non-whites.

The 17th Amendment concerns election of Senators while the 19th only concerns women.

One wonders how what I propose is Anti-American when the Founders created a limited franchise in the first place.

No, we should not remove the Electoral College and instead should strengthen it by repealing the 17th and 19th Amendments to the Constitution; extensions of the Franchise have historically undermined the stability and moral foundations of the Union, presenting a grave danger to our well being and indeed the immortal souls of Americans.

The limited franchise of the founding fathers would not have allowed women, minorities, those under 21, or non property owners to vote. I don't think that it is a leap to say that your previous statements suggest you are against women, those under 21, and non whites from voting.

But it is correct to say that this is a thread for discussing the electoral college, and not for discussing removing the franchise from a bunch of people for no reason. So on that note:

The electoral college does not work now as the founding fathers intended. If we aim to keep things like the founding fathers had intended then we should certainly update the system by which the president is elected. If we want to take the last 200+ years of experience we have gained in how to actually run a federal government, we can probably come up with a better system. I would prefer instant run off popular vote.

[Hakons]

He’s not. The person he’s quoting wants to remove the vote from women, those under 21, and non-whites.

The 17th Amendment concerns election of Senators while the 19th only concerns women.

Wanting the 17th gone is understandible, since the entire point of the Senate is to not be influenced by passionate swings in the voting public. The progressives (1900s) wanted more popular democracy, say they made it by direct vote within the state, which was against the design of American government at the time. The Senate was elected by state legislatures beforehand, to make senators more institutional and not pandering to public demands. It's obviously 'undemocratic' to have senators chosen by the state legislature, but that's by design. It's a bit similar to how the UK's new prime minister wasn't chosen by the people, but by the conservative party members.

But why the 19th? Why is it so awful for women to vote?

[San Lumen]

Therefore your views matter more then someone else’s and one is not allowed to disagree with you

And it was ruled unconstitutional via the 14th Amendment

What is your solution then?

Who said anyone couldn't disagree. If you want to sit at your dinner table and rant and rave about how you're not permitted to make innocent people suffer, that's fine. I am more worried with preventing the actual suffering.

How tyrannical.

There are loads of solutions. Implement unequal election laws, gerrymandering, voter suppression, electoral fraud, protests, riots, strikes, vandalism and sabotage, etc. etc.

What suffering are you preventing when that government was elected freely and fairly?

What’s tyrannical about it?

So you admit you want to rig elections and prevent those you disagree with from voting because they might outvote you. How dictatorial of you

Voter fraud is a crime and someone would blow the whistle. As to your other solutions very few would sympathize with you and welcome you being sent to prison

[San Lumen]

He’s not. The person he’s quoting wants to remove the vote from women, those under 21, and non-whites.

The 17th Amendment concerns election of Senators while the 19th only concerns women.

Why shouldn’t women vote?

[Totally Not OEP]

The 17th Amendment concerns election of Senators while the 19th only concerns women.

Wanting the 17th gone is understandible, since the entire point of the Senate is to not be influenced by passionate swings in the voting public. The progressives (1900s) wanted more popular democracy, say they made it by direct vote within the state, which was against the design of American government at the time. The Senate was elected by state legislatures beforehand, to make senators more institutional and not pandering to public demands. It's obviously 'undemocratic' to have senators chosen by the state legislature, but that's by design. It's a bit similar to how the UK's new prime minister wasn't chosen by the people, but by the conservative party members.

But why the 19th? Why is it so awful for women to vote?

The 17th Amendment concerns election of Senators while the 19th only concerns women.

Why shouldn’t women vote?

One, it allows politicians to turn men and women against each other by utilization of gender identity politics, through which they can appeal to one segment of the population and use them against the other. It splits Husband from Wife, allowing the politicians to avoid addressing real issues since they can use dog whistles, like we see today, instead to shift away from doing such. It also, obviously undermines our internal unity. Secondly, the 19th Amendment transformed the nature of voting in of itself, in that before men essentially cast their votes on a family basis. Given this nature, politicians were forced to tailor their legislation and appeals into this context and thus family values, the bedrock of a nation, were paramount. With the 19th Amendment, voting became an affair of the individual, which has allowed all manner of logic that didn't work under the last system to prevail.

[San Lumen]

Wanting the 17th gone is understandible, since the entire point of the Senate is to not be influenced by passionate swings in the voting public. The progressives (1900s) wanted more popular democracy, say they made it by direct vote within the state, which was against the design of American government at the time. The Senate was elected by state legislatures beforehand, to make senators more institutional and not pandering to public demands. It's obviously 'undemocratic' to have senators chosen by the state legislature, but that's by design. It's a bit similar to how the UK's new prime minister wasn't chosen by the people, but by the conservative party members.

But why the 19th? Why is it so awful for women to vote?

Why shouldn’t women vote?

One, it allows politicians to turn men and women against each other by utilization of gender identity politics, through which they can appeal to one segment of the population and use them against the other. It splits Husband from Wife, allowing the politicians to avoid addressing real issues since they can use dog whistles, like we see today, instead to shift away from doing such. It also, obviously undermines our internal unity. Secondly, the 19th Amendment transformed the nature of voting in of itself, in that before men essentially cast their votes on a family basis. Given this nature, politicians were forced to tailor their legislation and appeals into this context and thus family values, the bedrock of a nation, were paramount. With the 19th Amendment, voting became an affair of the individual, which has allowed all manner of logic that didn't work under the last system to prevail.

Women ought to be second class citizens? Should we bar them from elected office too?

[Totally Not OEP]

One, it allows politicians to turn men and women against each other by utilization of gender identity politics, through which they can appeal to one segment of the population and use them against the other. It splits Husband from Wife, allowing the politicians to avoid addressing real issues since they can use dog whistles, like we see today, instead to shift away from doing such. It also, obviously undermines our internal unity. Secondly, the 19th Amendment transformed the nature of voting in of itself, in that before men essentially cast their votes on a family basis. Given this nature, politicians were forced to tailor their legislation and appeals into this context and thus family values, the bedrock of a nation, were paramount. With the 19th Amendment, voting became an affair of the individual, which has allowed all manner of logic that didn't work under the last system to prevail.

Women ought to be second class citizens? Should we bar them from elected office too?

Yes, barred from office and voting.

[San Lumen]

Women ought to be second class citizens? Should we bar them from elected office too?

Yes, barred from office and voting.

Wow ok at least your willing to admit it. What real issues are they not addressing and using as dog whistles?

How is national unity being undermined?

How does a women casting her own ballot undermine family values?

Why shouldnt they be allowed in elected office?

Should we be ban anyone non white or who doesnt own property from voting or holding elected office too?

[Springfeal]

Nah. I am fine with the current system.

[San Lumen]

Nah. I am fine with the current system.

How is someone winning with less votes and giving more value to land area fair? Would it be fair and democratic if we elected statewide officials the same way?

[Springfeal]

Nah. I am fine with the current system.

How is someone winning with less votes and giving more value to land area fair? Would it be fair and democratic if we elected statewide officials the same way?

Trump cares about the people. Clinton did not.

[San Lumen]

How is someone winning with less votes and giving more value to land area fair? Would it be fair and democratic if we elected statewide officials the same way?

Trump cares about the people. Clinton did not.

that doesnt answer the question. He got less votes

[Kombinita Socialisma Demokratio]

Wanting the 17th gone is understandible, since the entire point of the Senate is to not be influenced by passionate swings in the voting public. The progressives (1900s) wanted more popular democracy, say they made it by direct vote within the state, which was against the design of American government at the time. The Senate was elected by state legislatures beforehand, to make senators more institutional and not pandering to public demands. It's obviously 'undemocratic' to have senators chosen by the state legislature, but that's by design. It's a bit similar to how the UK's new prime minister wasn't chosen by the people, but by the conservative party members.

But why the 19th? Why is it so awful for women to vote?

Why shouldn’t women vote?

One, it allows politicians to turn men and women against each other by utilization of gender identity politics, through which they can appeal to one segment of the population and use them against the other. It splits Husband from Wife, allowing the politicians to avoid addressing real issues since they can use dog whistles, like we see today, instead to shift away from doing such. It also, obviously undermines our internal unity. Secondly, the 19th Amendment transformed the nature of voting in of itself, in that before men essentially cast their votes on a family basis. Given this nature, politicians were forced to tailor their legislation and appeals into this context and thus family values, the bedrock of a nation, were paramount. With the 19th Amendment, voting became an affair of the individual, which has allowed all manner of logic that didn't work under the last system to prevail.

I see no reason that your reasons for abolishing suffrage for women cannot apply to abolishing suffrage for men as well. Are you opposed to that, and if not, explain why. If due to sexism, just admit it.

[Big Jim P]

Only when your/my side loses.

[Bread Herbert]

Only when your/my side loses.

Ellaborate

[Big Jim P]

Only when your/my side loses.

Ellaborate

When someone loses, they try to change the rules to their benefit.

[Bread Herbert]

Ellaborate

When someone loses, they try to change the rules to their benefit.

But, Trump lost the popular vote.

[Big Jim P]

When someone loses, they try to change the rules to their benefit.

But, Trump lost the popular vote.

thus the lib/dems want to change the rules.

[Bread Herbert]

But, Trump lost the popular vote.

thus the lib/dems want to change the rules.

Wow. How could they possibly do this?

[Dangine]

Hell yeah it should be abolish.
This should of happened a long time ago but the main reason people want it is gone now is because Trump won, which is kinda of sad tbh. Better late then never I guess.