Welcome to Dannie's blog! I know you are all excited and ready to post some very interesting and thought provoking material, so let's go! The purpose of my blog is to generate a discussion on the Electoral College and to serve as a course practice exercise for EDM 510. I would like your comments to be directed at, but not limited to, whether or not you like the fact we have an Electoral College (a republican system) in a democratic society, or if you believe it is fair or unfair that a candidate can win the popular vote, but lose in the Electoral College. Also, what are some safe alternatives to the Electoral College, if any. This may require a little bit of research to get an understanding of the difference between the terms republic and democratic which will help build a foundation to comment on the Electoral College. Blog away!
What comes to mind with this question is the Bush vs. Gore election of 2000. Whether a person agrees or not with the Electoral College, it was set-up to give states equal representation no matter their size. If we decided elections solely on the basis of popular vote, then large populated areas would always pull rank over others and we may not get a true representation of the Country. I believe in our constitution and the foresight of our county’s founders.
ReplyDeleteI feel that my vote does not count in the Electoral College system. How does every vote count, if the popular vote does not always win an election? I vote in local elections, but have not participated in the last 4 Presidential Elections.
ReplyDeleteI believe that each vote should weigh as one vote and candidates for any election should win by majority vote.
ReplyDeleteI feel that every vote counts but it is unfair as to how things are done. If the majority votes for a person then by right they should get nominated for the position. I never really understood the voting system. Many people don't vote because they feel when they do vote it doesn’t seem to make a difference.
ReplyDeleteEveryone presents good questions and concerns that represent both a republic and democratic society. In a republican society, the power rests in hands of the few, and that is how our country was first established with the United States Constitution in 1788. If you look at the Articles of Confederation (Jefferson was a huge advocate), this constitution at the time granted the federal government basically little to no power. The majority of the power was with the states. Once the United States Constitution was signed, it created federalism. Which is defined as the relationship between the federal government and state governments.
ReplyDeleteSo what I would like everyone to take away from this question, is that as we as a country continue to claim that we are "democracy," when in fact its more of a federal republic. The Electoral College is broken down like this. The voters who are chosen to represent the E.C. from the states are voters are chosen by the state representatives that make up the E.C. each time a presidential election occurs. The guidelines for the E.C. state that a candidate receiving the majority of popular votes for a particular state shall be entitled to the electoral college votes from that state. I want you to pay attention to the phrase entitled to, because that may not always be the case. But it usually works out best for the candidate when they win a state with whom they are the same party with.
I hope this is not too confusing, I just want everyone to be aware of what really goes on when a presidential election takes place. I will continue to post comments in the next day.
Confusing as it may appear on the surface; the question of the EC's legitimacy has been debated for many decades. Because of the relationship established by our founders between the people (the states) and the federal government, it was posited that a more equal representation would be accomplished by the use of the EC to elect a President. That said, American citizens should remember that our system of government uses a republican model for participation; allowing democratic participation by the people to limited extents. Not only would voting democratically on every issue create a numerically cumbersome way of expressing opinions and accomplishing legislation; it could often afford the will of those who reside in urban areas to over-power the will of those in rural or sparsely populated areas. The EC provides a “check-and-balance” between all people, and depending on how each state delegates their EC votes; usually provides a vote consistent with the popular vote anyway. The states win; and more importantly the people win. Most times anyway. Best system for representation I have studied about; and one that seems to be enduring longer than those before it.
ReplyDeleteThanks Tim! Excellent post. I agree too, in that we could not simply allow everything be left to a vote by the people to determine whether a law shall pass. We would seemingly never accomplish anything! The fact that the E.C. has survived this long means that it bends and does not break, even if some elections are sketchier than others. I want to point out the comment by BHannan about the Bush/Gore election. Bush, should have never won to begin with. Voting is a power that is reserved to the states. Bush, committed an illegal move by making the Supreme Court get involved with the vote recount and allowing them to make the final decision. This is completely not allowed by our Constitution, yet no one did anything about it?!
ReplyDeleteI believe that in a true democratic society, each individual vote should count. For a true democracy, the size and population of a state should not factor in for the true number of people who have voted.
ReplyDelete