Quote:
Originally Posted by brianwspencer
Good point, we'd be in Dem control for something close to 20 years now if we hadn't had it!
Three cheers for Doreen!
|
Putting aside for a minute that "in Democratic control" is the opposite of what most of us would call "freedom", I doubt it. We would have had this disaster of a Democratic president sooner, and then the country would have went on a Republican voting spree, like with Carter and Reagan.
In 1984, 49 states went Red for Reagan, so the Electoral College didn't mean anything.
Or, if you're right, the dollar would have already collapsed...then the Dems can take off the masks and be the communists they really are.
For what it's worth I agree with both sides that the Electoral College is an anachronism, but to eliminate it the first thing you'd need is a foolproof way to get the fraud out of the system. No more voting multiple times and/or preventing the authorities from requiring ID.
In the interim, the system would be made better by getting rid of the "winner take all" rules in the states, where, if 49% of people vote for a candidate, their vote is basically ignored in favor of the 51% in terms of electoral votes. That's just ridiculous.
If I had the power to shape the system, I would proportionately award the electoral votes from the House seats based on the popular vote within the state, but would award the two Senate electoral votes to the winner of that state. So if California went 60% Democrat, 40% Republican, the Democrat would get the 2 Senate electoral votes, and 60% of the House electoral votes, (round up for the winner): which is 0.6*53 = 31.8 -> 32. The Republican would get 19.
This would at least be a better approximation to the popular vote, and it still satisfies the Constitution on using an electoral college, since I don't think the Constitution tells any state how to award their votes, and in fact 2 states currently do not use "winner take all".