{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/28/2016 2:56:00 PM
66
Is the electoral college good?
-
I'm glad Trump won
-
12 RespuestasWatch this you imbeciles.
-
17 RespuestasI'm still trying to figure out why so many people think America is a democracy...
-
2 RespuestasNo... Fűck no. Not when winning 5 states gives you more than half the votes you need to win out of 50 fűcking states. The loser can win more states, but because the winner won those 5 states they win.
-
1 RespuestaIf Hillary had won the election, you know everyone here would be against the Electoral College. We're all a slave to the party we support.
-
2 RespuestasIf not for the electoral college only the major cities would really matter. They would determine who is elected. The way we elect our president is extremely stupid anyway. The 2 party system is really stupid and only complicates things.
-
7 Respuestaswithout it we'd be the united states of california
-
I hear their campus is amazing but their administration sucks.
-
33 RespuestasEditado por U6757109: 12/29/2016 11:05:48 AMAnyone who voted yes is a total moron. The electoral college is anti-democratic. It doesn't need to be "adjusted" or "modified", it needs to be ELIMINATED.
-
Another reason the EC sucks. If you are a Republican in California, your vote never counts for POTUS. Think about it. CA will likely never vote for a Republican ever again, unless someone like Rand Paul wins the nomination. So basically all Republicans in CA are -blam!-ed and might as well not vote. If you eliminate the EC, then Republican votes in California will actually count for the final tally.
-
16 RespuestasHell no. It's job is to protect the White House from tyranny. With trumps election, it failed to do its intended job. The system should be scrapped.
-
-
17 RespuestasOnly people saying yes are redneck trump supporters
-
6 RespuestasCamp 1: Voters should have equal power. Camp 2: States should have equal power. The EC is a compromise of both.
-
-
1 RespuestaIf it was based on proportional votes, it would be a nice change. Say in California, 79% vote Democrat, than the Democrat elect gets 79% of California's electoral votes; so on and so on. It gives reds in Cali or blues in Texas some voting power, but would retain some of the aspects of our current system, which I find to be alright.
-
1 RespuestaAs it's currently setup, no. It isn't good. 1) winner take all states is bullshit. 2) electors can just be removed or forced to recite if they deem the candidate they are pledged to isn't qualified or is a danger. That eliminates one of the college's main purposes.
-
I don't think so, no. Short of it being abolished entirely, I'd at least like for states to have proportional representation of their popular vote counts by their electors, instead of the winter take all system it currently is. It would also be nice if the human aspect was removed from the EC. Faithless electors shouldn't be a thing. Imo, that's a dated concept that has no place in the modern world.
-
To an extent it is fair. The problem is the electoral representatives aren't bound by law to cast their vote based on the popular vote. The college was partly founded to keep it fair between all the states. But the other part was to have a back up plan should a states courier not make it to Washington DC with that states ballots. We are talking in the times of horse and buggy and even trains. Essentially what needs to happen is you keep the part of the college that keeps the equality for all states, meaning the votes for each state based on population, and eliminate the representatives. In this day and age we are connected more than ever and there is no need for representatives. Once polling stations are closed and tallied the winner of the popular vote for that state gets all the electoral votes. No need to have a bunch of representatives meet to cast another set of votes.
-
3 RespuestasIt's not exactly "fair" if 4 states still make up over half of the requirement to begin with. 55 29 29 38
-
6 RespuestasRemove the human factor and the electoral college is perfect. That fact disloyal electors are a thing (there were like 9 this election) is disgusting
-
8 RespuestasI don't know exactly how it works, but am I right in saying that without it a presidential candidate could just get away with rallies in the states with the highest population? Not that simply I know but still.
-
11 RespuestasIt prevents the tyranny of the majority. The tyranny of the majority is when a group of people in a direct popular vote grow to over 50% of the population, which allows them to infringe on the rights of the minority.
-
It's needed, but it also needs a bit of reworking.
-
I think the total votes should be increased. As of now states with lower populations are getting off with their votes meaning much more than states with larger populations. The minimum amount of electoral votes a state can have is 3, but that doesn't take population into effect. Some states have a population below what would give them the 3 votes, yet they need to have them.
-
1 RespuestaEditado por albinomachina: 12/29/2016 10:48:33 PMI say yes, even though it gave Trump the presidency this year. As much as I hate him and every one of you that voted for him, we can't have a country where our elections are decided by who wins the biggest cities. Which is what would happen if we did away with the electoral college.
