Current Events > Explain the Electoral College

(+) Yeah! (+)

So 270 to win.
How to become an elector?
So its the states that vote for potus and not the people? What is the popular vote for?
---

Popular vote is for fun and to troll
---

An outdated system that values land over people

KG536 posted...

So its the states that vote for potus and not the people? What is the popular vote for?

The popular vote determines which slate of electors gets sent to the electoral college.
---

Anteaterking posted...

KG536 posted...

So its the states that vote for potus and not the people? What is the popular vote for?

The popular vote determines which slate of electors gets sent to the electoral college.

Except in the situations where states ignore the popular vote
---

In order to keep the southern states happy, the creators of the constitution crafted this system that afforded them power on the basis of slave populations who could not vote.

That worked, not particularly well, for about 80 years before the southern states left the union anyways.
---

Irony posted...

Except in the situations where states ignore the popular vote

Do you have an example where the state ignored their state's popular vote and sent a different set of electors instead?
---

It's bullshit

---

do we really need another EC topic where the supporters get shit on for the millionth time

totalnerdken posted...

That's... an extreme over simplification. It values all people. It makes it so that just because less people live in your state, doesn't mean your states voice isn't heard. Your state will always have a voice. If it was a popular vote system, then those in less popular states would frequently be ignored.

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/sites/default/files/map-2016-campaign-events-v2-2019-04-14.png

Yeah, look how often those small population states were visited.
---

Land important
People not
---

totalnerdken posted...

That's... an extreme over simplification. It values all people. It makes it so that just because less people live in your state, doesn't mean your states voice isn't heard. Your state will always have a voice. If it was a popular vote system, then those in less popular states would frequently be ignored.

Must be why candidates campaign equally in all 50 states. Oh wait. Must be why as a person who lives in new york, i should vote because it matters. Oh wait.

---

totalnerdken posted...

Petrichoric posted...

An outdated system that values land over people

That's... an extreme over simplification. It values all people. It makes it so that just because less people live in your state, doesn't mean your states voice isn't heard. Your state will always have a voice. If it was a popular vote system, then those in less popular states would frequently be ignored.

But people are voting, not states. Why shouldn't every voice be worth exactly the same when it comes to voting on national level?
---

totalnerdken posted...

Petrichoric posted...

An outdated system that values land over people

That's... an extreme over simplification. It values all people. It makes it so that just because less people live in your state, doesn't mean your states voice isn't heard. Your state will always have a voice. If it was a popular vote system, then those in less popular states would frequently be ignored.

Many states already are ignored. Its a non-argument that shows youre clueless.

Moreover, the Senate is meant to represent the states' interests, not the Presidency. The President represents the nation as one constituency not 50 enclaves that all get treated differently.

And beyond that, a popular vote doesnt give any state more power over another because it would politically stupid to ignore half the country just because they dont live in big cities. Itd be insanely easy for a candidate to snake the election out from under someone pandering to just big cities or populus states.

Not to mention that under current voter trends the ones most likely to vote dont live in these population centers anyway.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

totalnerdken posted...

Petrichoric posted...

An outdated system that values land over people

That's... an extreme over simplification. It values all people. It makes it so that just because less people live in your state, doesn't mean your states voice isn't heard. Your state will always have a voice. If it was a popular vote system, then those in less popular states would frequently be ignored.

But people are voting, not states. Why shouldn't every voice be worth exactly the same when it comes to voting on national level?

"Something something California"

As though Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania voters dont hold far more weight in the Presidential elections than the other 47 states.
---

Anteaterking posted...

Irony posted...

Except in the situations where states ignore the popular vote

Do you have an example where the state ignored their state's popular vote and sent a different set of electors instead?

There's no obligation in Article 2 to even have a popular vote.

totalnerdken posted...

CommonJoe posted...

Many states already are ignored. Its a non-argument that shows youre clueless.

Moreover, the Senate is meant to represent the states' interests, not the Presidency. The President represents the nation as one constituency not 50 enclaves that all get treated differently.

And beyond that, a popular vote doesnt give any state more power over another because it would politically stupid to ignore half the country just because they dont live in big cities. Itd be insanely easy for a candidate to snake the election out from under someone pandering to just big cities or populus states.

Not to mention that under current voter trends the ones most likely to vote dont live in these population centers anyway.

You clearly have no idea what you're saying. You don't seem to realize how many people are concentrated into a few states.

And? One person - one vote wouldn't be states voting. Nothing says people in New York and California HAVE to vote blue. This gives equal voice to every American. You just don't want that to be the case because the majority of Americans are not conservative.

It would actually be rather interesting to see how many red/blue people come out of the woodwork in states where their vote currently doesn't matter.

It's a system where if you're a Republican in California or a Democrat in Kentucky, your vote is completely worthless.
---

It's actually rather interesting how conservatives pretend to want the EC out of some sense of equality. It's basically affirmative action for Republicans, yet they sneer at that when it's for minorities. More double standards.