Is electoral college the most retarded idea ever conceived?

Is electoral college the most retarded idea ever conceived?


What was whoever came up with it back then even thinking?

Popular vote is much fairer and makes more sense. Why must the vote of a californian republican amount to literally nothing?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise
twitter.com/AnonBabble

...

More

is she on mdma in this pic?

It's called federalism you nigger.

California Republican here. Will be voting for Jefferson State when it comes down to it.

The Electoral college came about before mass communication came around.

It should have been abolished when the Telegraph came into ubiquity

her name is olivia kenning

you're all welcome

holy lord jesus

>What was whoever came up with it back then even thinking?

That the masses are stupid and democracy only sounds good as an idea, not in practice. In the original constitution we didn't even get to elect senators. The founders did not believe in direct democracy.

Nice tits.

I know what it's called, I'm telling it's fucking retarded.

Will it be put to vote anytime soon?

Explain, please.

>olivia kenning
Thanks senpai!

sauce

That's how the Founding Fathers wanted it. They didn't want the popular vote to be the decision maker. They felt that the general public were uninformed, manipulated, and plain out stupid.

If you're upset about the electoral college because of conservative chances shrinking, you'd realize that popular vote would favor the democrats. The only time in recent times that popular vote was opposite to the electoral vote was in 2000.Gore won the popular vote but lost the electoral college.

Most of the population resides in dense urban areas. This is mostly democratic voters.

If you're a conservative and want popular vote only, you'll have a bad time. If you're democratic, then given the current climate popular vote only would favor you

Way to fuck up my thread

>Explain, please
It was partly developed in order to cut down on wait time during the horse days.

Also, partly

>The government gets to fix your mistaken votes
:^)

Its to ensure each state that joins the union retains its sovereignty. Each state gets a certain number of votes, it is the states that elect the president.

Because we don't live in a Democracy you dumb ape. It's a federal Republic. Yes a Californian vote matters more than a bumfuck Mississippien. Deal with it.

The founding fathers feared mob rule. The founding fathers were rich dudes who sat around reading books all day, and they realized that the common people are retarded. They also realized that if you give retarded people the right to vote, they'll just vote themselves money.

The electoral college was developed with two goals in mind:
1) To prevent mob rule.
2) To give smaller states a little more voting power so they don't just get drowned out by large states.

So the way the electoral college was supposed to work is that the common people elect smart people who go to DC and discuss in a rational and intelligent way who the president should be.
This process was very quickly hijacked by political parties, another convention that the founding fathers warned against, and electors became bound to parties and more or less obligated to vote for the candidate of their party.
Many of the problems with the electoral college stem from the fact that it has been hijacked by political parties.

My thoughts: as a California Republican, the electoral college helps you. It doesn't matter if Democrats win California by 300 votes or 3,000,000 votes, they get the same electoral votes.

With a popular vote, Democrats would go apeshit on the big cities to increase turnout. In LA, NYC, Chicago, etc. they could easily get millions of votes. Due to the spread out nature of Republican votes, it wouldn't be feasible (economically or logistically) for them to campaign for popular votes in the same way.

The electoral college as originally conceived was brilliant: each local area selects some thoughtful and trustworthy familiar person, who doesn't have to take up a career in politics or anything, so you're not limited to people willing to do that.

All of these best men of their area get together and discuss who should be president. When at least 50% (but preferably closer to 100%) agree on a good chief executive, they make it official with a vote.

No need to narrow the presidential candidates down to some tiny number by some advance process which can be gamed into a Kang vs. Kodos choice. The group of men is small enough for them to discuss the matter, so they can organize to sift through any reasonable number of plausible presidents.

The current version is incredibly stupid. It's just a worse version of the popular vote.

>more and more Americans moving to cities
>NYC, LA, DC, Miami eventually decide the President for all US states

How is the electoral college stupid again?

So what you're saying is, The_Cheeto is fucked?

I hear this argument all the time
A republic is a government ruled through vote with a certain set of laws regulating it

It can be democratic or not. The US is a republic that's more democratic than North Korea, which is also a republic. And both of them are less democratic, in varying degrees, than Switzerland, for example

A country can aim to be more democratic and free, and the electoral college gets in that objective's way

There was a time before the Internet and telephones where it was very difficult to compile the popular vote in a timely and accurate fashion.

Now, especially with trustless blockchain technology, we have no damn excuse for this bullshit. Archaic system is archaic.

Think of the time when it was created. Chances were that voters may have never even seen or heard of either of the candidates; Senators weren't elected directly for the same reason. It made sense back then, but it's obsolete now.

It Is Some Bullshit

implying california isn't going red

Finally, someone with common sense

Problem with going to popular vote is that states with low population would get significantly less power and there would be zero reason to campaign anywhere but the coastal states due to that is where there is highest population density. Not only that but states with very few people are actually over-represented in votes while states with the highest population are underrepresented.

We are not a democracy, we are a republic.

>legitimately wanting mob rule

>more democratic and free

and a person can aim to be more female and male. you'd call them retarded.

I like the concept behind it - trying to ensure that each state has some control of their own destiny and won't just be pillaged in favor of the larger populations. It probably worked a lot better when the electoral vote weights were based on the number of land-owning males over a certain age that paid taxes, once you started factoring women, Tyrone, Jose, and all of their illegitimate children into the population that determines electoral votes you just swelled the numbers for areas that will be disproportionately democratic, aka the retards that will vote themselves more money and be unable to comprehend the long-term effects of it.

>Is electoral college the most retarded idea ever conceived?
No, that honor goes to egalitarianism.

Ever heard of the 3/5ths compromise?
It was the way found for the Union to agree on whether southern states could have a more equal balance of power against the North.
Blacks couldn't vote, so the south was automatically weakened. The compromise established that a nig counted as 3/5ths of a person, and, as the electoral college is based on population, the south could have more influence in the country while still having technically less people

It literally serves no purpose today other than weakening a person's vote and goving more power to the already powerful states

ThErie was a time when the electoral college was not directly tied to the popular vote, if the popular vote choose an idiot, the electoral vote could over rule that. Then they passed laws binding the electorate to the popular and we end up with the shit show we have now.

what are you even talking about?

democratic as in a more equitable distribution of power, not in whatever the fuck the Democratic Party says it stands for

understanding politics through memes is really dangerous lad

>3/5ths compromise
bullshit, read more monkey man

>the only possible reason to support an electoral reform is if you think it'll give your preference a near-term advantage
Epic.

jesus christ

Explain

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise

The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise reached between delegates from southern states and those from northern states during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention. The debate was over whether, and if so, how, slaves would be counted when determining a state's total population for legislative representation and taxing purposes. The issue was important, as this population number would then be used to determine the number of seats that the state would have in the United States House of Representatives for the next ten years. The effect was to give the southern states a third more seats in Congress and a third more electoral votes than if slaves had been ignored, but fewer than if slaves and free persons had been counted equally, allowing the slaveholder interests to largely dominate the government of the United States until 1861.

That talk about Blacks being counted as 3/5ths human or whatever is bullshit from the Left.

Surprised you people didn't know this broad

no thumbnail shill if anything it helps god emperor

is she alive? is she a guy?

Last I heard of her she got pregnant and deleted her social media. Must've been 2013 then. Silence since.

No it doesn't matter more, it matters the same, California just has more votes.

No the electoral college is shit because there are 27 states with electors who can decide to vote for the chosen candidate or NOT

You seem to forget where you are.

/thread

>What was whoever came up with it back then even thinking?

Long buggy rides requiring weeks of travel.
That is what they were thinking.

Yes, it's obsolete.

Senators were appointed by State legislatures in order to represent State interest in the Federal government. Members of the House were to represent the People's interest. Repeal 17A.

>the only possible reason
Who are you quoting? Because the post you replied to clearly had a conditional statement, thus you can not be referring to it, right?

>being this eager to shit on a perfectly valid post
Epic.

>Implying the State's interests shouldn't be the same as their peoples' interests.

James Madison was a genius and his conception of the electoral college is flawless, fuck off.

Just want to say I voted almost exactly the same as this user.

Except I said fuck it and voted to legalize weed. I don't generally smoke, but I figured why not try something new here, tax it and squeeze out beaner cartels.

I also voted against regulating condom use in porn because wtf are they even asking for. This is retarded and will likely cost money without any benefit to anyone other than the porn stars I don't give a fuck about.