It is time we got rid of the electoral college

[still_one]

One person one vote

I am tired of a bunch of red-neck states with very little people determining our fate

appologizes to the good people in the red states who aren't voting for *

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. I agree

I also think there should be NO reporting of poll results until all polls are closed, so as to make it fair to the people on the West Coast and to discourage networks like Faux from spreading false rumors.

BTW, I live in AR, voted Kerry/Edwards on Monday (early voting), and I accept your apology. But don't be surprised if AR turns BLUE on election day!

[still_one]

3. AR gave us Clinton, MO gave us Truman

I may sound bias, but I know better

[DemNoir]

2. Bush has a plan

To replace it with a community college

[fugue]

4. I agree

I remember, when such an action was suggested after the 2000 election, someone from a red state disagreed, saying, "I don't want to be ruled by New York and Los Angeles!"

My response: "If there's more of us, then why shouldn't we be doing the ruling? This is democracy, yes? Government by majority?"

I'm all for protecting the rights of those in the minority--dissent loudly, give equal air time, all of that. But in the end, this is government by the majority, and so a majority should be all that is required.

Of course, some Republicans think that presidential elections are really by the grace of the state legislatures alone and that they have the right to disenfranchise their populations whenever they so desire.

[Demeter]

5. Beyond That, True Reform Is Needed

1. Meaningful campaign restrictions: free but limited airtime, no presidential trips on Air Force One, keep the 527s but drain the rest.

2. Uniform voter registration.

3. Real laws to punish campaign fraud, registration fraud, and voting fraud.

4. Real, verifiable uniform voting procedures, ballots, equipment.

5. A truly Free Press--the dismembering of the corporate media syndicates and statutory freedom of the World Wide Web from co-option, suppression, and corruption.

6. The de-GOP/nazification of America.

There's more, but I'm suffering from election fatigue.

[UL_Approved]

6. How about proportional representation?

I have never understood why the founding fathers decided on a winner-take-all approach. They still had to count votes and still had to report results back in the day. Most of those "red-neck states with very little people" would be split up closer to 50/50 than you think. Using proportional electorate numbers might be a first step that people could actually agree upon. After all, no state is 100% Republican.

[fugue]

14. It's about Constitutional history

One of the big problems in getting the Constitution ratified was the the high-population states versus the low-population states on representation issues. The former leaned to proportional representation and the latter to equal representation for the states. The vast majority of the Constitution's provisions regarding elections are the result of a compromise between these two forces. Our two houses of Congress is probably the most famous example, but the struggle went on throughout the drafting of the document.

The electoral system for the president is doubtless yet another one of those compromises. I think it's high time we reconsidered, but that's where the system comes from.

[readmylips]

7. Yes, one person one vote....

the electoral can very easily be bought off and they go to the highest bitter. There's a reason why the republicans inacted the electoral; they can cheat.

[iconoclastic cat]

8. One problem (of many):

Wouldn't that lead to the neglect of less populous areas? Wouldn't cities become the focus for all national/regional campaigns?

[radwriter0555]

9. I agree, I think a massive reform should take place... and lose the EC..

it no longer serves a purpose.

[beyurslf]

10. Can you imagine the recounts if we did this? How many times would the

metropolis centers have to count? How many times would the rural vote be counted? It would be a nightmare and we may never find the winner. Also, look how often the winner does not get a majority. Clinton never did.

This seems like the best reason NOT to get rid of the EC. I know some say that small states would be ignored. Of course, this ignores the fact that right now a majority of states are ignored--just for different reasons. No one is campaigning here in KS or OK (small states). No one campaigns in TX or CA (big states). The EC causes this.

[DavidDvorkin]

11. Rather: It's still time to get rid of the EC

It's been time for a long time.

I first learned about the stupid thing when I was a teenager in the 1950s, and I was appalled.

[Dookus]

12. I'd love to see it go

but it will NEVER happen, and we shouldn't waste time trying. You will never convince the small states to give up their advantage.

[Jeff1965]

13. Won't Happen

It would have to be a constitutional ammendment and now way are small states going to give up their power.

And do you want to see 40% of California votes going to "W"?

[greekspeak]

15. Even my wingnut father agrees with that

He admits that in a fair democracy, one he would like to see, Al Gore should be president. Of course he has to throw in a few extra jabs: the country would be a Taliban stronghold by now. But Al Gore should be president. He WON by 500,000 votes.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.