Popular vote vs electoral college

Why do we use the electoral college?

Would it be better to keep the electoral college for all states but within each state, it's popular vote?

Other urls found in this thread:

docquery.fec.gov/pdf/318/201607159020655318/201607159020655318.pdf#navpanes=0
anyforums.com/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Same reason you're still allowed to carry guns: Your system is over 200 years old and still thinks it's the Wild West out there and the members of the electoral college have to travel by coach through mountain passes full of bandits.

Same with the judicial system. I mean who still has 12 jurors sitting on a bench anywhere in the world? Probably the same countries that still don't measure in meters.

fuck off commie retards

ctr/shareblue fec documents

docquery.fec.gov/pdf/318/201607159020655318/201607159020655318.pdf#navpanes=0

Without it cities have too much influence.

Yeah, having random people as jurors is retarded. We should hire Google to write a program that objectively decides cases to ensure ideal rulings instead.

If we did popular votes that would mean only votes from big cities aka liberals and niggers would be deciding the vote for the entire nation

You mean they would have proportional influence.

This. Besides, America was meant to be an equal union between states, not just New York and LA controlling everything.

We have jurors too, just not so many. Like in a low profile trial, there's two jurors and one judge. Jurors are educated by the judge about the laws that have to do with the particular case.
Major cases have four jurors and three judges I think. But as you can see, their number is smaller and more manageable. Which benefits the selection process and the discussion about conviction and sentencing.

What you described is exactly the way it currently works, dumb ass

Democrats couldve easily won with the electoral college. The outnumber Republicans nearly 2 to 1, with only Independents picking up the slack. How can Dems say they deserve this win when they failed to even get their own people out to vote enough for such an easy win.

Because the population is familiar with different areas and different aspects of the country and must occasionally get the might of the US government to provide solutions in rural but vital parts of the country.

Imagine if the ghetto had say over your lives.

This. Fuck off, retards

Saged

That was never the point of the 2nd Amendment you dumbfuck. The Wild West was almost a hundred years after the founding of the US no less.

As opposed 2 the rural areas that r in power during the election then after everyone forgets they exist

You're just telling me your country is even more retarded. Look up the literal meaning for retarded.

>Why do we use the electoral college?
you were taught this at least twice, why the fuck do you not know this?
lookup "the great compromise," stupid fucking nigger.
the ignorant and oppressive shitskin lovers want to dissolve the chamber of equality leaving only the chamber of bully by the masses.
ignorant damn niggers just gave us further proof that they're not cut out to be part of modern western civilizations.
saged.

That sounds an awfully lot alike hate speech against America to me. I'm gonna have to report you to your government so you can be detained since you aren't allowed this freedom we enjoy.

If a suggestion sounds like hate speech to you, you're a fucking sissy who'd die the first second you leave your basement and get hit by that opposing fresh air outside.
Grow the fuck up.

Yep reported. Have fun in jail Hans.

Because United States is and has always been a federation of states with drastically different economic, political, and social needs and ideals. The Founders understood this, which is why systems like the Electoral College exist.

The EC ensures that the winner of the election isn't simply the person who managed to get the most raw votes, but rather the candidate whose platform appealed to the greatest plurality of different states and (consequently) the greatest variety of different types of voters.


Under a pure popular vote system, a candidate could theoretically lose every other county in the United States 40-60 and still win the vote if they carried the top 20 or 30 most populous cities by a wide enough margin. They would have received the most raw votes, but they'll have won by only appealing to one or two very specific demographics as opposed to the broader general public. That's not good if you want a federation built on broad, balanced representation to survive.

>"equal" confederation of states
By that logic each state should only have 1 EV each. Let each state be equally valuable and the first to 26 win!

Your hypocrisy and inherent contempt for democracy will be instantly laid bare.

No, he means too much. A country is more then just people, and having California and the North East have absolute control would have the other half of the country just get up and leave.

Or worst, increase food prices on the blue states.

>Singapore
>Lecturing others on democracy

I spit my gum at you sir

In other words, to keep us together and miserable "for the children"

What the fuck do you know you polish Muslim cretin?

The electoral college exists to prevent Jew York, Commiefornia, and Niggerville from strong-arming the rest of the country

this, the system is tipped by default in favor of the dems, the only reason they lose is because they try to suffocate people with too much government control so much their own people push back

Shut the fuck up faggot, you faggot krauts are the most cucked homos on Earth

Wouldn't it be better to not have hundreds of millions of people who are nothing alike and have radically different interests governed under the same political union by an incredibly few amount of people who can't possibly serve even a tiny fraction of people's interests?

Yeah. Thats another thing.

the electoral college was set up to give equal (or nearly equal) power to the urban and rural centers within each state.

WITHIN EACH STATE - that is the key.

During the revolutionary period each state had 1 or 2 large cities, a handful of towns and a bunch of farmland. Now, the founders were not idiots - they were europeans, well educated and blessed by white god with aryan brains. They could look at Europe and see what shape the American nation would take as it developed (to some extent) and they knew a few important things (from a representative standpoint.

1: urban and rural areas have conflicting and at times mutually exclusive interests
2: rural areas produce raw goods while urban areas specialize them (when everything is working that is)
3: urban areas produce huge amounts of waste, crime and poverty but also produce innovation
4: rural areas produce raw goods such as food, little waste, little poverty but also little innovation

If you run a purely democratic system (as we done by the ancient Greeks - and the founders were intimately aware of the ancient greeks, several of them had hard ons for the greek culture, as we popular in Europe at the time) the people in the city vote for their interests (of course) and eventually the rural people are taxed or mistreated to such an extent that they also go to the cities, and when there is no-one left to grow the fucking wheat it does not matter how much you tax people, you starve. On the other hand, if you let the farmers make the rules, innovation is stifled - which only matters because you are going through the industrial revolution and you are competing with Europe - Europe who is always having wars with each other and you, and Europe who will use every innovation it has to re-colonize your ass.

That being said I despise representative government. A strong autocracy is needed to (at least transitionally) wipe away the rot in this country.

>A strong autocracy is needed to (at least transitionally) wipe away the rot in this country.
You can go first, boot licker.

you are going to get a communist autocracy or a fascist one. Autocratic ideals are incubated in urban centers and the urban centers in the USA have reached critical mass. Pick a side or get crushed into the mud.

>you are going to get a communist autocracy or a fascist one
Or neither.
People where I live aren't interested.

Autocratic ideals are spread and propagate in urban areas. This is quite natural - consider that the vast majority of men in urban areas are not able to be self sufficient. They must rely on systems created by other people to live. They don't kill their own food, they don't farm, they don't haul water (or install a well or their own plumbing) etc. When men grow up without the ability to be self sufficient it is natural that they will believe politically in systems put in place by large masses of people, that is the reality of their lives. When a man is a mechanic, for instance, and his livelihood is based on trading his specialized non-essential skill for essential products, he will believe in systems because he's in one. There are 2 options for that mindset: 1 everyone is equal and the system should redistribute production. 2 nobody is equal and the worst of the people must be expelled.

This dichotomy does not exist in the rural areas of a nation where men can be to some extent self sufficient. And the electoral college was meant to slow the rot of that autocratic dichotomy - but the cities are too big. Urban areas hold over 50% of the US population now and the trend is increasing, whether or not you want it, you are getting hordes of autocrats from the urban areas. You are the minority.

and in the spirit of rural and urban friendship you had your civil war

Democracy wont serve when people Like you vote.