Is it time to drop the Electoral College?

[Chris]

Except for a few instances, you do realize that for the most part that concept is superfluous, no?

90-some percent of the time the popular vote goes with the electoral vote. It came close this election, but that correlation still maintained.

Having said that, I still don't understand the concept of the facade of "states rights" when at the end of the day votes are paralleling electoral votes. Stating it the other way, I don't see a benefit of having an electoral college - what does it protect elections from (or defend them from)?

But it could. I think Bush v Gore was last example....yes:

Nominee George W. Bush Al Gore
Party Republican Democratic
Home state Texas Tennessee
Running mate Dick Cheney Joe Lieberman
Electoral vote 271 266
States carried 30 20 + DC
Popular vote 50,456,002 50,999,897
Percentage 47.9% 48.4%

@http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000

[Captain Obvious]

But it could. I think Bush v Gore was last example....yes:

Nominee George W. Bush Al Gore
Party Republican Democratic
Home state Texas Tennessee
Running mate Dick Cheney Joe Lieberman
Electoral vote 271 266
States carried 30 20 + DC
Popular vote 50,456,002 50,999,897
Percentage 47.9% 48.4%

@http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000

Could what?

Aside from (assuming your conservatism) your candidate being elected, what did the electoral college accomplish in GvB?

[Chris]

Could what?

Aside from (assuming your conservatism) your candidate being elected, what did the electoral college accomplish in GvB?

Could have resulted in Gore being Prez, imagine where that would have led us! But the elctoral college, and the court, got Bush elected.


I'm not arguing it would be a major step away from state's rights, just another step along the way of eroding those rights.

[Captain Obvious]

Could have resulted in Gore being Prez, imagine where that would have led us! But the elctoral college, and the court, got Bush elected.


I'm not arguing it would be a major step away from state's rights, just another step along the way of eroding those rights.

You didn't answer the question though, taking your party favorite win out of the equation, what did the electoral college accomplish?

How did the electoral college system work that prevented a popularly voted president from losing the election?

Ignore who the actual candidates are, unless you're suggesting that the system is a stop-gap from having liberal POTUS candidates elected.

[Chris]

You didn't answer the question though, taking your party favorite win out of the equation, what did the electoral college accomplish?

How did the electoral college system work that prevented a popularly voted president from losing the election?

Ignore who the actual candidates are, unless you're suggesting that the system is a stop-gap from having liberal POTUS candidates elected.

Thought I did, the electoral college give states a modicum of power over a populist, nationalist vote.

I don't see it as political one way or another. According to this, Electoral College vs. popular vote splits, it has favored Reps over Dems:

1876: Republican Rutherford Hayes defeats Samuel Tilden by 185 to 184 in Electoral College despite a 254,235-popular-vote deficit.
1888: Republican Benjamin Harrison defeats Democrat Grover Cleveland by 233 to 168 in Electoral College despite 90,596-popular-vote deficit.
2000: Republican George W. Bush defeats Democrat Al Gore by 277 to 266 in Electoral College despite 543,895-popular-vote deficit.

Remember, I'm the guy sees no difference between the duopolistic parties.

To me it's simply a matter of where power resides, in the states, a federalist system, as it was designed, or the central government, a federal system, which changing it from electoral to popular wound nudge us toward.

[Captain Obvious]

Thought I did, the electoral college give states a modicum of power over a populist, nationalist vote.

I don't see it as political one way or another. According to this, Electoral College vs. popular vote splits, it has favored Reps over Dems:

Remember, I'm the guy sees no difference between the duopolistic parties.

To me it's simply a matter of where power resides, in the states, a federalist system, as it was designed, or the central government, a federal system, which changing it from electoral to popular wound nudge us toward.

Then it's more of a symbol of states rights than any other effective measure against something unwanted.

I still don't see a rational argument for it.

[Chris]

Then it's more of a symbol of states rights than any other effective measure against something unwanted.

I still don't see a rational argument for it.

What's wanted, by me, of course, is to conserve republican federalism against an encroaching populist, democratic, federal government. (Note not Republican v Democratic but repulican v democratic.)

Best I can explain I guess.

[Peter1469]

Removing the electoral college would have the same effect as the 17th amendment on senate elections, move us away from the modicum of state's rights we have left toward ever more populist, majoritarianism.

Yes.

The EC is just another one of the many checks and balances created with our Constitution. We are not a democracy.

[Peter1469]

Except for a few instances, you do realize that for the most part that concept is superfluous, no?

90-some percent of the time the popular vote goes with the electoral vote. It came close this election, but that correlation still maintained.

Having said that, I still don't understand the concept of the facade of "states rights" when at the end of the day votes are paralleling electoral votes. Stating it the other way, I don't see a benefit of having an electoral college - what does it protect elections from (or defend them from)?

But with no EC, presidential candidates would simply ignore all but the major population centers.

[Captain Obvious]

But with no EC, presidential candidates would simply ignore all but the major population centers.

So?