Lets keep it simple: Which would you prefer?
Lets keep it simple: Which would you prefer?
popular vote.
the electoral college tries to ensure that candidates don't ignore the small states. but it also means they're much more likely to ignore the non-battleground states.
i'd rather a republican candidate campaign in vermont, knowing that the extra 10,000 votes he gains because of it is still important.
How does the electoral College work?
I know it is not a college...
The little I have read does not help...I just don't get it.
I can not understand how the guy with the most votes can lose.
Remember...I am Canadian...here we vote for our member of parliment in our constituant.
The party with the most seats won wins the election.
Electoral college. Have you seen some of the yahoos in the so-called 'little' states? I don't want the "Jerry Springer" crowd electing our President.
LMMFAOBT
"He doesn't need to sell millions of records, he doesn't need to fill arenas, he doesn't need to be popular, he doesn't need your money, AND HE DOESN'T NEED YOU!"
Blackflag on DLR
Down with the Electoral College---->Up with participatory democracy! The popular vote must be the law of the land!
a U.S. president is only elected president if he has more than half of all "electoral votes."Originally posted by WACF
How does the electoral College work?
each of the 51 states (including Washington, D.C.) has an electoral vote total equal to the total number of federal representatives they have. meaning that, if virginia has 11 members of the house and 2 senators, we have 13 electoral votes.
members of the house are apportioned by population. each state has 2 senators, regardless of population. that means that at a minimum, a state has 3 electoral votes. like montana. but populous states, like california and new york have many more electoral votes.
there are 538 total electoral votes. (which equals the 435 U.S. house members + the 100 senators + D.C.'s 3 electoral votes). to win the presidancy, a candidate must have 270 electoral votes or more. (270 being just over 1/2 of all the electoral votes).
technically, the popular vote in each state determines how that state casts its electoral votes. if bush wins virginia, the 13 "electors" will vote for bush.
except for 2 states, all others give all of their electoral votes to the person who won that state, regardless of the margin of victory.
that's why it's possible to win the electoral college, but lose the popular vote. it means you probably just barely won your states, while you probably lost by a much greater margin in your opponents' states.
(and oh yeah, there's something about us stealing and then destroying hockey in there somewhere...
Thanks.
Hockey shall rise again...
Both have their merits.
One ensures the little states have their say and that candidates can't concentrate solely on large urban population centers, particularly in campaign entitlements.
The other ensures a more fair distribution in campaigning in general.
“If bullshit was currency, Joe Biden would be a billionaire.” - George W. Bush
I think I prefer the current system.
i hope so..., but like with election challenges, i'm not holding my breath until we get the results...Originally posted by WACF
Hockey shall rise again...
Don't take this as a personal insult. Because it's really not. But some would say only college educated people should be allowed to vote. Are you college educated Switch?Originally posted by Switch84
LMMFAOBT
God I hope so:confused:Originally posted by WACF
Thanks.
Hockey shall rise again...
With a popular vote, a cannidate could buy the voters in calif, pa, ny, ect and ignore basically everyother state. That is why the made the electorial college with the formation of this government.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote