Recently, I've heard from one of my professors that my vote truly doesn't matter and it's up to the electoral college to choose a president in say, 2016. When Bush was elected president, I've heard that the popular vote was for the other runner-up candidate but the electoral college chose Bush. Is voting simply pushed as an illusion of a free Democratic Republic? Or is the electoral college simply a corrupt system where the general population's vote doesn't mean anything? Or do companies pay the electoral college **** tons of money to choose a particular candidate that benefits their business? Genuinely curious.
Since very few people have a degree from the Electoral College, it really limits who can be President. I heard that from one of my professors. How does one make it to college without knowing what the EC is?
Okay... first off, I don't know your professor is getting his information from, but a lot of it sounds outlandish at the least, wrong for the most. It isn't that the electoral college just 'chooses' the POTUS; the candidate wins the actual electoral votes by claiming the majority of the votes in that particular state. If Dewey gets the majority of the votes in Nebraska than Truman, Dewey wins those electoral votes. The issue with Bush and Gore was that it was indeterminate of who had the majority of the votes in Florida. Ultimately, it was determined that Bush did, and in winning the electoral votes from that state, he had more Electoral votes than Gore did, and won the presidency. As to the question of if our votes matter, they sure as hell do. How long was Al Franken kept out of Congress because his opponent kept claiming foul over votes and demanded recount after recount? Florida's hanging chad issue came down to votes in the low hundreds. That's how close the voting was between Bush and Gore. There statistically is a chance that someone's single vote becomes the tipping point of their state's Electoral votes for POTUS. Voting is our right (15th and 19th Amendment), but we have to exercise that right. If you do not, you don't have the right to complain about how government is or how government runs; you had the chance to have your say about it, and you blew it. Your professor may want to rethink that, or better yet, take a Political Science class at your university himself. BL.
Sometimes it's as simple as a Wikipedia search: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_States)
Sounds like it could lead to a lot of corruption. Who's to say they don't lie and don't go through checks and balances? ---------- I never said it was a college. ---------- Then why don't they just base it strictly off the popular vote instead of using others to cast your vote?
There have been faithless electoral college voters. http://www.fairvote.org/reforms/nat...ith-the-electoral-college/faithless-electors/ Your use of the word professor in the original post suggested that it was college. The framers used this to avoid just the major population centers picking the President. However, now candidates just go after the swing states.
I wrote a long post for this and then damn ios 8 safari crashed! Damn it!!! Ugh. Ill try and make it short. I could be wrong and talking off topic im just trying to think back to 8th grade. Electoral collage is a point system and every state gets so many points based of population. The person who gets most votes in that state gets the points. Person with most points wins. I hope that's right.
I mean my college professor is the one that mentioned it, not that the electoral college was run by professors and is literally a college. That's stupid in itself.
That's correct. You have an illusion of choice and freedom, nothing more. Here's a cute little video, too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vb8Rj5xkDPk
You're in college and you're just hearing about the electoral college? Holy ****, our education system has failed.
I wonder if it is the system or just kids not caring about anything other than what is on their phones. I would hope the educational system is not that bad. And more our kids are just getting dumber in general. Or maybe we just expect too much out of them these days. I didn't have to worry about as much school work when I was growing up.
No the tests they give now are. Do you know how to take this test because we need more funding. We are at a point where they worry more about bad tests scores and less about actually teaching things. I wonder what kind of president we will end up with in 25 years. We might long for the days of W. I don't see much hope for the future generations.
2 reasons. First was to prevent the dopey citizens from directly electing a lunatic or tyrant. The citizen votes could be ignored in such a case. I don't know if this power was ever exercised. Second was to give more equality to the smaller states to elect the President. Smaller population states have more votes per citizen than a big state like New York or Pennsylvania (at the time).
That doesn't work tho when they only campaign at the bigger states to get the votes. A small state with 8 votes doesn't mean as much as a Texas or California.
I've heard of the electoral college before, but it really wasn't talked about much throughout my education, honestly.
It is a major topic in american history. How is it not talked about. By 8th grade you should know what the Electoral College is and how it works.
^ This. Should be campaigning equally through all the states and all states should be given 1 vote if an electoral college must exist. Example: out of 100,000 people in Rhode Island, 55,000 vote for Candidate 1. Out of 3,000,000 people in New York, 1,650,000 vote for Candidate 1. Equal. Swing states = stupid.
In 1824, Andrew Jackson got the most popular votes, carried the most states and got the most electoral votes. John Quincy Adams was the man sworn into the 6th President. Jackson ran again in 1828 and won the presidency. This is the only election ever truly decided by the House of Representatives, although the 1800 election also went to the House. In 1876, Samuel Tilden won the popular vote but lost the election to Rutherford B. Hayes. In 1888 Grover Cleveland won the popular vote but lost the election to Benjamin Harrison. In 2000 Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the election to George Bush. All states except Maine and Nebraska are "winner take all" states for the delegates. However, there can still be something called a "faithless elector." That is where an elector is pledged to vote for one candidate and then votes a different way or not at all. This has happened many times but never enough to sway the election. It is interesting that if an election goes to the House of Representatives, each state delegation only gets ONE vote. Giving states like Montana or Vermont the same voting power as states like California or Texas.
I know it's a major topic, but schools are lacking in teaching it effectively. ---------- Then how'd this happen?
The popular vote should be the only thing that is counted. That would make every vote count. We have candidates spend huge money in the big states and virtually nothing in the smaller ones.
It is not a point system. Each state gets to nominate a certain number of electors. That number is the same as the number of Representatives and Senators that the state has, plus the District of Columbia gets one. All states except Maine and Nebraska are winner take all. But the electors cast their votes on behalf of the state. Electors can and have voted differently than the state wanted them to, this is called a "Faithless Elector." If neither candidate gets 270 votes which can happen, the election for President goes to the House. The election for Vice President goes to the Senate.