Help me understand this

  • Thread starter TemporaryCircumstances
  • Start date
  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
T

TemporaryCircumstances

Guest
#1
#1
I am trying to understand this for Civics and Law

I don't understand why we need the Electoral College.
If we just did it like we do every other election it would be fine.

Each state would treat it like voting for a Senator and they would all vote and the state would count those up, write down the numbers, and send them to the federal level to whom would count the numbers that the states sent it.

Doing it that way would make sure that the President wins by majority and right now that isn't always happening with the Electoral College.*
And, I just don't see why or how doing it the way would be too difficult
 
Roughsoul1991

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
#2
Sep 17, 2016
8,785
4,455
113
#2
It's our governments way to elect who they want and not the majority of the people. I have always thought lets just have the majority vote or the vote by each individual voter. We defiantly need change I agree.
 
Tommy379

Tommy379

Notorious Member
#3
Jan 12, 2016
7,589
1,152
113
#3
Our nation is a republic. The framers of the constitution knew that any man who occupied the office of President could and would one day consolidate great power. The electoral college was designed to keep the president from being elected by popular vote. Majority rule has always led to the tyranny of the majority. The electoral college is one more layer to protect the rights of individuals. The ideas of democracy and democratic elections didn't appear in our politics until the progressives of the late 19th and early 20th centuries brought it up.
Truely the states could come up with almost any scheme to award their electoral votes, including having the legislature make the decision. Personally, I rather have them do it then hold a popular vote in the states. I would like to see the votes awarded proportionally from each state by district.

Also you mentioned senators. They were chosen completely by the state legislatures as their representatives to congress until the 17th ammendment. I would like to see the 17th repealed also.
 
T

TemporaryCircumstances

Guest
#4
#4
Tommy379 said:
Our nation is a republic. The framers of the constitution knew that any man who occupied the office of President could and would one day consolidate great power. The electoral college was designed to keep the president from being elected by popular vote. Majority rule has always led to the tyranny of the majority. The electoral college is one more layer to protect the rights of individuals. The ideas of democracy and democratic elections didn't appear in our politics until the progressives of the late 19th and early 20th centuries brought it up.
Truely the states could come up with almost any scheme to award their electoral votes, including having the legislature make the decision. Personally, I rather have them do it then hold a popular vote in the states. I would like to see the votes awarded proportionally from each state by district.

Also you mentioned senators. They were chosen completely by the state legislatures as their representatives to congress until the 17th ammendment. I would like to see the 17th repealed also.
Click to expand...
Oy,
I guess I still don't understand how it "protecting the rights of individuals"
And how majority vote or rule leads to something bad
 
resurrection33

resurrection33

Banned
#5
Dec 19, 2009
27,513
128
0
71
#5
TemporaryCircumstances said:
I am trying to understand this for Civics and Law

I don't understand why we need the Electoral College.
If we just did it like we do every other election it would be fine.

Each state would treat it like voting for a Senator and they would all vote and the state would count those up, write down the numbers, and send them to the federal level to whom would count the numbers that the states sent it.

Doing it that way would make sure that the President wins by majority and right now that isn't always happening with the Electoral College.*
And, I just don't see why or how doing it the way would be too difficult
Click to expand...
There is a reason for the Electoral College. When the country was first created, the smaller states would not join the union because they feared the bigger states would always get what they wanted. To correct this, each state got two votes, representing the fact that each state had two senators. Add to that the votes of each state’s representatives, and that is what the Electoral College is. In other words, the purpose of the Electoral College was to give the smaller states more say, so that the smaller states would join the union. Or at least, that is how I remember it.
 
Willie-T

Willie-T

Banned
#6
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
#6
I don't like it at all. And have never understood how it ever got started.
.

 
T

TemporaryCircumstances

Guest
#8
#8
resurrection33 said:
There is a reason for the Electoral College. When the country was first created, the smaller states would not join the union because they feared the bigger states would always get what they wanted. To correct this, each state got two votes, representing the fact that each state had two senators. Add to that the votes of each state’s representatives, and that is what the Electoral College is. In other words, the purpose of the Electoral College was to give the smaller states more say, so that the smaller states would join the union. Or at least, that is how I remember it.
Click to expand...
Yes,
I will use Colorado.
We currently have 7 Representatives in the house, and of course two Senators so we have 9 Electoral votes.

Now, take Texas who currently has.... 34ish (don't quote me on that)
Votes.

So right now; Colorado is still pretty small and unimportant compared to Texas so that just doesn't make sense.

It is not giving smaller states any advantage.
We are still insignificant
 
Huglife

Huglife

Senior Member
#9
Aug 15, 2016
2,543
50
48
#9
I'm still a bit stunned that next Tuesday is THE election day... Yikes
 
Willie-T

Willie-T

Banned
#10
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
#10
TemporaryCircumstances said:
Yes,
I will use Colorado.
We currently have 7 Representatives in the house, and of course two Senators so we have 9 Electoral votes.

Now, take Texas who currently has.... 34ish (don't quote me on that)
Votes.

So right now; Colorado is still pretty small and unimportant compared to Texas so that just doesn't make sense.

It is not giving smaller states any advantage.
We are still insignificant
Click to expand...
Exactly. That makes any attempts at explaining the "fairness" of the system bogus to me.
 
T

TemporaryCircumstances

Guest
#11
#11
Huglife said:
I'm still a bit stunned that next Tuesday is THE election day... Yikes
Click to expand...
Shush sis, I'm actually trying to understand something and NOT talk about the election right now.

Love you xD
 
T

TemporaryCircumstances

Guest
#12
#12
Willie-T said:
Exactly. That make any attempts at explaining the "fairness" of the system bogus to me.
Click to expand...
My point of saying that was to point out that the Electoral College could not have been created to make it more fair or make the smaller states less insignificant because actually looking at the numbers you can see that it actually makes no difference in making the smaller states mean any more than they originally did.
 
Willie-T

Willie-T

Banned
#13
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
#13
It will never make any sense to me that if you convince one person more than half of the people in 7 states out of 50, you win the election.
 
Tommy379

Tommy379

Notorious Member
#14
Jan 12, 2016
7,589
1,152
113
#14
TemporaryCircumstances said:
Oy,
I guess I still don't understand how it "protecting the rights of individuals"
And how majority vote or rule leads to something bad
Click to expand...
Think about it like this.

Lets say all representatives were elected democratically. And the president was elected this way, as he is the man who enforces the law.
I saw the other day a report, true or not, that the majority of Americans don't believe in God. Lets say that this majority wants to outlaw Christianity. Their representatives will do just that, outlaw Christianity. Their representatives want to get reelected every two years. Now the senators who weren't necessarily beholden to the people have to worry about being reelected every 6 years, so they will outlaw Christianity. Now you have the President who has the power to veto this travesty, but he is elected democratically so he wants to get reelected to 4 years. He signs the law and now orders his employees to shut down churches.

This is an extreme what if example, but it could happen in a nation ruled by the majority without regard for the minority.

The way it is now, anyone of these federal office holders could say "to hell with that idea" and probably be alright.
 
Tommy379

Tommy379

Notorious Member
#15
Jan 12, 2016
7,589
1,152
113
#15
TemporaryCircumstances said:
My point of saying that was to point out that the Electoral College could not have been created to make it more fair or make the smaller states less insignificant because actually looking at the numbers you can see that it actually makes no difference in making the smaller states mean any more than they originally did.
Click to expand...
The smaller states are the ones they fight over.
 
T

TemporaryCircumstances

Guest
#16
#16
Tommy379 said:
Think about it like this.

Lets say all representatives were elected democratically. And the president was elected this way, as he is the man who enforces the law.
I saw the other day a report, true or not, that the majority of Americans don't believe in God. Lets say that this majority wants to outlaw Christianity. Their representatives will do just that, outlaw Christianity. Their representatives want to get reelected every two years. Now the senators who weren't necessarily beholden to the people have to worry about being reelected every 6 years, so they will outlaw Christianity. Now you have the President who has the power to veto this travesty, but he is elected democratically so he wants to get reelected to 4 years. He signs the law and now orders his employees to shut down churches.

This is an extreme what if example, but it could happen in a nation ruled by the majority without regard for the minority.

The way it is now, anyone of these federal office holders could say "to hell with that idea" and probably be alright.
Click to expand...
(Bill of Rights and our Constitution limits what the president can do)

And then why can't the Supreme Court step in and rule his actions unconstitutional
 
T

TemporaryCircumstances

Guest
#17
#17
Tommy379 said:
The smaller states are the ones they fight over.
Click to expand...
They fight over the ones with the most electoral votes and the swing states
 
T

TemporaryCircumstances

Guest
#18
#18
TemporaryCircumstances said:
They fight over the ones with the most electoral votes and the swing states
Click to expand...
Unless of course it's a state like Texas who probably won't ever change to Democratic so I'd imagine Democrats don't waste too much energy trying to sway them
 
P

PinkDiamond

Guest
#19
#19
It is true that the electoral college does help to protect the interests of smaller states. If there were no electoral votes to be gained from each state, candidates would tailor their platform to appease those in NY, CA, etc. They could just campaign in the large population centres and get most of their votes from a popular vote. As we saw in the Bush vs Gore election, some elections can come down to winning or losing one state.

I was under the impression though that the electoral college when it was first created served a different purpose than it does now. Initially each state elected " electors" and the number was based on population. These electors in turn voted for the candidate they felt was best suited to run the county and who would be the best for the interest of their state. The first elections were decided by the votes of the electors. George Washington was the only president in US history to receive unanimous votes from the electoral college. I believe it was Alexander Hamilton that cast the famous swing vote to break the tie between Jefferson and Aaron Burr in 1800 giving Jefferson the presidency. The founding fathers weren't actually that much in favor of giving the common man total voting power. The idea was that everyone would vote for a qualified elector to represent them and that elector who ( in theory) knew something about government and politics would cast an educated vote on their behalf.

I think this is not such a bad idea.
 
Last edited:
T

TemporaryCircumstances

Guest
#20
#20
PinkDiamond said:
It is true that the electoral college does help to protect the interests of smaller states. If there were no electoral votes to be gained from each state, candidates would tailor their platform to appease those in NY, CA, etc. They could just campaign in the large population centres and get most of their votes from a popular vote. As we saw in the Bush vs Gore election, some elections can come down to winning or losing one state.

I was under the impression though that the electoral college when it was first created served a different purpose than it does now. Initially each state elected " electors" and the number was based on population. These electors in turn voted for the candidate they felt was best suited to run the county and who would be the best for the interest of their state. The first elections were decided by the votes of the electors. George Washington was the only president in US history to receive unanimous votes from the electoral college. I believe it was Alexander Hamilton that cast the famous swing vote to break the tie between Jefferson and Aaron Burr in 1800 giving Jefferson the presidency. The founding fathers weren't actually that much in favor of giving the common man total voting power. The idea was that the everyone would vote for a qualified elector to represent them and that elector who ( in theory) knew something about government and politics would cast an educated vote on their behalf.

I think this is not such a bad idea.
Click to expand...
They still aim for the large pop. States and have to get a lot less states approval than if they aim for smaller state got small states approval.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.