Home | Community | Message Board

NorthSpore.com BOOMR Bag!
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Original Sensible Seeds USA West Coast Strains   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineBoneMan
Shrimpin ain't easy
Male

Registered: 02/09/05
Posts: 2,032
Loc: new new england
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College?
    #9068246 - 10/12/08 08:53 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

I've been hearing so much on TV and the radio encouraging college students (or anyone 18 and up) to register as a voter and place their vote in November.  The media seems to be scrambling to get every last eligible person to register and to vote, but does it even matter?  As far as I've been told the president is not elected by the popular vote of the people, but the election is decided by the votes from the electoral college.  Its scary because the new president can easily be someone who the majority of the American people didn't vote for.  What happened in 2000?  Al Gore won the popular vote, but George W Bush won the presidency.

Is the popular vote just a meaningless ritual to make us feel like we the people decide who gets to be president?  Or does the popular vote or just popular opinion somehow influence the way the electoral college votes?  Also, can someone please tell me who the electoral college consists of?  One of my professors was talking about this today and she said that the electoral college isnt congressmen, senators or representatives.  She didn't know who they were.  Does anyone know who gets to vote in the electoral college?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePrisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: BoneMan]
    #9068264 - 10/12/08 08:58 PM (15 years, 5 months ago)

it's close to meaningless, if enough people vote against the nor
it can echo in washington, you'll see parties change their
platforms but it wont mean much since it's still the same
politicians in office unless you're voting out the incumbents

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #9069451 - 10/13/08 02:13 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

>Its scary because the new president can easily be someone who the majority of the American people didn't vote for.

Not easily, but it is possible.

You guys should really think about abolishing the electoral college bullshit.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 4 months, 30 days
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: BoneMan]
    #9070003 - 10/13/08 08:14 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Popular vote does matter, but differently than you would expect. While it is not important on a national level, it is what drives the electoral vote within the states.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblepinkfloydms
!!!!!
Male

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 4,470
Loc: City of Dreams
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: Redstorm]
    #9070048 - 10/13/08 08:39 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:


Irrelevancy of national popular vote

In the elections of 1876, 1888, and 2000, the candidate receiving the plurality of the nationwide popular vote did not become President.[40] Opponents of the Electoral College submit that such outcomes do not logically follow the normative concept of how a democratic system should function.

Outcomes of this sort are attributable to the federal nature of the system. As such, argue supporters of the Electoral College, candidates must build a popular base that is geographically broader and more diverse in voter interests.

Scenarios exhibiting this outcome typically result when the winning candidate has won the requisite configuration of states (and thus their votes) by small margins while his opponent captured large voter margins in the remaining states. Given the 2000 allocation of electors, it is possible a candidate could win with only the hair's width support of the 11 largest states. In such an example, the very large margins secured by the losing candidate in the other states would aggregate to well over 50 percent of the ballots cast nationally. Claims that the Electoral College suppresses the "popular will" are therefore open to debate.

A result of the present functionality of the Electoral College is that the national popular vote bears no legal or factual significance on determining the outcome of the election. Since the national popular vote is irrelevant, both voters and candidates are assumed to base their campaign strategies around the existence of the Electoral College; any close race has candidates campaigning to maximize electoral votes by capturing coveted swing states, not to maximize national popular vote totals.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Electoral_College


The popular vote doesn't mean shit in who the electorate chooses, it doesn't say anywhere that the electoral college is suppose to be swayed by popular vote. The only place voting makes a difference is on the local level.


--------------------
Muppet Said:

so yeah:
- 'sex' five times
- once with a man
- once with a cadaver
- and thrice with actual women(all of which were prostitutes)
Best story ever!

www.panicstream.com :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: zouden]
    #9070052 - 10/13/08 08:40 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
>Its scary because the new president can easily be someone who the majority of the American people didn't vote for.

Not easily, but it is possible.

You guys should really think about abolishing the electoral college bullshit.




Impossible.  It would require a Constitutional amendment which must be passed by 3/4ths of the states.  13 states can stop it.  Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, N.&S. Dakota, Hawaii, Delaware, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, Iowa, New Mexico, Utah, I could go on but that's enough.  There is no way smaller states will ever give up their over-representation in the Senate and the EC.
The country wouldn't even exist without that in the Constitution.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblepinkfloydms
!!!!!
Male

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 4,470
Loc: City of Dreams
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: zappaisgod]
    #9070083 - 10/13/08 08:50 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:


National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

    Main article: National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

This proposal, also known as the Amar Plan, calls for an interstate compact whereby individual states agree to allocate their electors to the winner of the national popular vote. The state legislatures of the joining states would then establish a direct election, thereby effectively circumventing the Electoral College, when they collectively have a majority (at least 270) of the electoral votes. The proposal is still 220 electoral votes short of going into effect.

The proposal centers on Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, which gives each state legislature the authority to determine how its state's electors are to be chosen. Many partial versions of this plan have emerged over the years.

While the power of each State to determine how it chooses its electors is clearly plenary, what remains unclear is whether such coordination between the States requires the approval of the Congress, pursuant to the Compact Clause of the Constitution, before this compact can take effect.

Currently, four states have joined the compact. The first was Maryland, where Governor Martin O'Malley signed the bill into law on April 10, 2007.[52] New Jersey joined on January 13, 2008, despite objections from Republicans who criticized the bill as undermining federal elections.[53] Illinois passed the law on April 7, 2008 [54] and was followed by Hawaii on May 1, where the legislature overrode a veto from Governor Linda Lingle.[55]




Hawaii won't stop it, they have already signed on for a direct popular vote.
Also we could have already had a direct popular vote if this would have passed.

Quote:


The Bayh-Celler Amendment

The closest the nation has ever come to abolishing the Electoral College occurred during the 91st Congress.[56] The presidential election of 1968 had ended with Richard Nixon receiving 301 electoral votes to Hubert Humphrey's 191. Yet, Nixon had only received 511,944 more popular votes than Humphrey, equating to less than 1% of the national total. George Wallace received the remaining 46 electoral votes with only 13.5% of the popular vote.[57]

Representative Emanuel Celler, Chairman of the US House of Representative's Judiciary Committee responded to public concerns over the disparity between the popular vote and electoral vote by introducing House Joint Resolution 681, an Amendment to the United States Constitution which would have abolished the Electoral College and replaced it with a system wherein the pair of candidates who won at least 40% of the national popular vote would win the Presidency and Vice Presidency respectively. If no pair received 40% of the popular vote, a runoff election would be held in which the choice of President and Vice President would be made from the two pairs of persons who had received the highest number of votes in the first election. The word "pair" was defined as "two persons who shall have consented to the joining of their names as candidates for the offices of President and Vice President."[58]

On April 29, 1969, the House Judiciary Committee voted favorably, 28–6, to approve the Amendment.[59] Debate on the proposed Amendment before the full House of Representatives ended on September 11, 1969,[60] and was eventually passed with bipartisan support on September 18, 1969, being approved by a vote of 339 to 70.[61]

On September 30, 1969, President Richard Nixon gave his endorsement for adoption of the proposal, encouraging the Senate to pass its version of the Amendment which had been sponsored as Senate Joint Resolution 1, by Senator Birch Bayh.[62]

In its October 8, 1969 edition, the New York Times reported that the legislatures of 30 states were "either certain or likely to approve a constitutional amendment embodying the direct election plan if it passes its final Congressional test in the Senate." Ratification of 38 state legislatures would have been needed for passage. The paper also reported that 6 other states had yet to state a preference, 6 were leaning toward opposition and 8 were solidly opposed.[63]

On August 14, 1970, the Senate Judiciary Committee sent its report advocating passage of the Amendment to the full Senate. The Judiciary Committee had approved the proposal by a vote of 11 to 6. The six members who opposed the plan, Democratic Senators James Eastland of Mississippi, John Little McClellan of Arkansas and Sam Ervin of North Carolina along with Republican Senators Roman Hruska of Nebraska, Hiram Fong of Hawaii and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, all argued that although the present system had potential loopholes, it had worked well throughout the years. Senator Bayh would indicate that supporters of the measure were about a dozen votes shy from the 67 needed for the Amendment to pass the full Senate. He called upon President Nixon to attempt to persuade undecided Republican Senators to support the plan.[64] However, Nixon, while not reneging on his previous endorsement, chose not to make any further personal appeals to back the legislation.[65]

Open debate on the Amendment finally reached the Senate floor on Tuesday, September 8, 1970,[66] but was quickly faced with a filibuster. The lead objectors to the Amendment were mostly Southern Senators and conservatives from small states, both Democrats and Republicans, who argued abolishing the Electoral College would reduce their states' political influence.[65]

On September 17, 1970, a motion for cloture, which would have ended the filibuster, failed to receive the 67 votes, or two-thirds of those Senators voting, necessary to pass.[67] The vote was 54 to 36 in favor of the motion.[68] A second motion for cloture was held on September 29, 1970, this time failing 53 to 34, or five votes short of the required two-thirds. Thereafter, the Senate Majority Leader, Mike Mansfield of Montana, moved to lay the Amendment aside so that the Senate could attend to other business.[69] However, the Amendment was never considered again and died when the 91st Congress officially ended on January 3, 1971.




--------------------
Muppet Said:

so yeah:
- 'sex' five times
- once with a man
- once with a cadaver
- and thrice with actual women(all of which were prostitutes)
Best story ever!

www.panicstream.com :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePrisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: pinkfloydms]
    #9070124 - 10/13/08 09:01 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

given that we now have the availability of 'real time voting'
the electoral college is pretty pointless, the electoral college
is supposed to be representative of the people yet as has been
pointed out it doesnt always hold true to the popular vote and
when presidents are elected against the vote of the people what
questions does that raise about the electoral college

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: zouden]
    #9070211 - 10/13/08 09:23 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

zouden said:
You guys should really think about abolishing the electoral college bullshit.




No thanks, the electoral college plays a key role in keeping powerful states in check.

Perhaps the electoral votes should be weighted, but thats about it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblepinkfloydms
!!!!!
Male

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 4,470
Loc: City of Dreams
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: DieCommie]
    #9070240 - 10/13/08 09:31 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

How does going by popular vote (nation wide) take away power from states? If we went by popular vote it wouldn't matter what state you were from.


--------------------
Muppet Said:

so yeah:
- 'sex' five times
- once with a man
- once with a cadaver
- and thrice with actual women(all of which were prostitutes)
Best story ever!

www.panicstream.com :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 4 months, 30 days
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: pinkfloydms]
    #9070278 - 10/13/08 09:45 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

It would also help with the issue of the disenfranchised voters (aka: Republicans in states like California and Democrats in states like Texas).

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: pinkfloydms]
    #9070292 - 10/13/08 09:49 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinkfloydms said:If we went by popular vote it wouldn't matter what state you were from.




The point is it should matter what state your from, because some states have more power than others.  Otherwise, New York and California decide every election, and the rest of the states, the minority states, are bullied by them.  Thats why we have the senate instead of just the house, so big states cant bully small ones.  Thats also why we have the electoral college.

The best thing, to preserve a political subsidy to minority states and keep every voter franchised, is to have a weighted electoral college where its not winner take all.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: pinkfloydms]
    #9070308 - 10/13/08 09:53 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinkfloydms said:
Quote:


National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

 




Hawaii won't stop it, they have already signed on for a direct popular vote.
Also we could have already had a direct popular vote if this would have passed.






Way to provide links.  National Popular Vote Interstate Compact does not have anything to do with abolishing the electoral college.  It is a pipe dream to think that you can get 3/4ths of the state legislatures to pass it.  Further, The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact changes nothing.  Further, there is this:

Quote:

States join the compact by adopting it as a state law. The compact law[15] requires that:

    * The member state shall hold presidential elections by statewide popular vote.
    * After the election, the state's chief election official (usually the state Secretary of State) shall certify the number of popular votes cast in the state for each candidate and report those results to the other states by a specific deadline.
    * The chief election official shall then determine "national popular vote totals" for each candidate by adding up the vote totals reported by every state and the District of Columbia. (Each state is required to make official reports of vote totals to the federal government in the form of Certificates of Ascertainment.[16])
    * The state's electoral votes shall be awarded to the candidate with the greatest "national popular vote total."




Why should the electors of any state be chosen by voters in other states?  The states have, and have always had, a means at their disposal to dilute the electoral college at any time.  They can distribute their electors by district results in their state.  Currently only two states do this. 

4 States have signed on you say?  And what have they done?  Nothing.  Nor will they ever.  The Constitutionality of this will be hammered for decades


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblepinkfloydms
!!!!!
Male

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 4,470
Loc: City of Dreams
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: DieCommie]
    #9070309 - 10/13/08 09:53 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Dude the electoral college represents the population by state anyway which is why cali, texas, new york, and florida have the most electorates.

A popular vote wouldn't be divided by states any way, why the fuck would it matter what state someone lived in? If someone votes for someone it doesn't matter where they live. Why is that so hard to understand?


--------------------
Muppet Said:

so yeah:
- 'sex' five times
- once with a man
- once with a cadaver
- and thrice with actual women(all of which were prostitutes)
Best story ever!

www.panicstream.com :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 4 months, 30 days
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: DieCommie]
    #9070313 - 10/13/08 09:53 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

It could also be argued that the electoral college give a disproportionate amount of electoral power to certain states (Ohio, Florida).

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: pinkfloydms]
    #9070325 - 10/13/08 09:57 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinkfloydms said:
If someone votes for someone it doesn't matter where they live. Why is that so hard to understand?




Its not hard to understand.  It just not the way it is, nor is it the way it should be.  By living in california a citizen inherently has more power than somebody living in wyoming.  The electoral college subsidized the person in wyoming, so he isnt bullied by the california resident.

Its a simple concept, checks and balances.  The nation was founded on it.  Why is that so hard to understand?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblepinkfloydms
!!!!!
Male

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 4,470
Loc: City of Dreams
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: Redstorm]
    #9070330 - 10/13/08 09:58 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

I still don't see how taking a popular vote would give a disproportionate advantage to certain states. I mean If we got rid of electoral college then the states would no longer be winner take all, so then at least the candidates would keep their true percentages across the country. Instead of taking a whole state.

State lines would make no difference in a true popular vote.


--------------------
Muppet Said:

so yeah:
- 'sex' five times
- once with a man
- once with a cadaver
- and thrice with actual women(all of which were prostitutes)
Best story ever!

www.panicstream.com :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblepinkfloydms
!!!!!
Male

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 4,470
Loc: City of Dreams
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: DieCommie]
    #9070335 - 10/13/08 10:00 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

DieCommie said:
Quote:

pinkfloydms said:
If someone votes for someone it doesn't matter where they live. Why is that so hard to understand?




Its not hard to understand.  It just not the way it is, nor is it the way it should be.  By living in california a citizen inherently has more power than somebody living in wyoming.  The electoral college subsidized the person in wyoming, so he isnt bullied by the california resident.

Its a simple concept, checks and balances.  The nation was founded on it.  Why is that so hard to understand?





How the fuck would 1 vote in California be worth more than 1 vote in Wyoming under a true popular vote?


--------------------
Muppet Said:

so yeah:
- 'sex' five times
- once with a man
- once with a cadaver
- and thrice with actual women(all of which were prostitutes)
Best story ever!

www.panicstream.com :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 4 months, 30 days
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: pinkfloydms]
    #9070353 - 10/13/08 10:04 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

you're correct. In a popular voting system, the states are irrelevant since they're not tied to anything.

One person's vote in one state equals one person's vote anywhere else in the United States.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblepinkfloydms
!!!!!
Male

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 4,470
Loc: City of Dreams
Re: Popular Vote meaningless? Electoral College? [Re: Redstorm]
    #9070357 - 10/13/08 10:06 AM (15 years, 5 months ago)

Exactly.


--------------------
Muppet Said:

so yeah:
- 'sex' five times
- once with a man
- once with a cadaver
- and thrice with actual women(all of which were prostitutes)
Best story ever!

www.panicstream.com :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Original Sensible Seeds USA West Coast Strains   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Passenger List from 9/11...notice anything weird?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
RonoS 10,240 101 08/26/02 04:39 AM
by Rono
* I know he lost the popular vote, but.... luvdemshrooms 1,304 17 02/20/04 03:08 AM
by luvdemshrooms
* Dems political strategy is to demonize Christians
( 1 2 all )
Ellis Dee 5,034 35 02/16/23 11:43 AM
by tyrannicalrex
* '60s Radical Boudin Granted Parole
( 1 2 3 all )
wingnutx 2,186 46 08/24/03 02:43 PM
by d33p
* To Americans here who don't vote:
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 4,060 39 03/14/03 02:32 PM
by Innvertigo
* Why would anyone NOT vote 3rd party??
( 1 2 3 all )
LearyfanS 3,663 57 12/20/02 12:21 PM
by silversoul7
* Has your vote ever made a difference.
( 1 2 all )
Autonomous 1,509 33 09/23/03 07:37 PM
by monoamine
* We're fucked. US computerised vote tallying may be rigged enotake2 1,868 18 01/02/04 01:25 PM
by luvdemshrooms

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
5,454 topic views. 1 members, 7 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 14 queries.