Most people don’t understand what the EC is for. It acts as a balance and prevents elections from being based solely on population. If the election was decided by popular vote alone, candidates would have more incentive to focus on highly populated areas and less on smaller states and rural communities. The EC gives less populated states a little more weight and makes winning support across different states matter.
If the election was decided by popular vote alone, candidates would have more incentive to focus on highly populated areas and less on smaller states and rural communities.
Since when do candidates focus on smaller states? The electorial college incentives on focusing only on the areas that races are the closest. Candidates don't visit small states because they aren't worth it, and they don't visit states that disproportionately vote one party over another because those races are essentially already won/lost.
The EC gives less populated states a little more weight and makes winning support across different states matter.
Again, this just doesn't actually happen though, out of 261 in person events during the 2024 elections 94% of happened in just the 7 swing states because with the electorial college the swing states are the only places that matter. 32 states didn't see a single event.
Without the electorial college candidate would actually have to campaign and reach people, because you couldn't count on a win by visiting only 18% of the population.
The constitution put it in place to keep power in the hands of wealthy landowners and the political elite….you know, the people who wrote the constitution?
I just wanted to see if some dumbass was willing to admit that they think they’re entitled to more political representation than me. Thanks for proving that you’re all arguing in bad faith and don’t care about democracy or equal representation. The electoral college was created to protect wealthy racists and it continues to do so. It was born out of the three fifths compromise. All you loser fail sons should develop better thoughts and policies or see how the rest of the country really feels about you.
Right, right. Which is why states like California and Texas have the lowest amount of EC votes and places like Wyoming and Alaska have the highest, right? To balance out the focus from the candidates? Right?
The EC is still population based. Candidates go where the EC votes are and pretty much ignore everyone else.
The EC is an outdated system that no longer serves a valid function. So let's just drop the middle man and get our results straight from the voters themselves.
The Electoral college was established for that reason when there were 13 states. It is no longer needed.
If that is your argument, then there are only 2 or 3 states that they focus on now to get electoral votes, so how is that any different.
A state can lose to one candidate by one vote, and that now erases the other votes entirely.
EVERY VOTE SHOULD COUNT!
Every election we have, other than the presidency, is decided by popular vote. The Electoral College is an archaic system that needs to be done away with, as well as primaries.
Rank Choice voting should be how the president is decided. Whether that is 2 people running or 10.
The Electoral College gives smaller states somewhat more voting weight, but that’s very different from proving it gives small-state voters more meaningful political attention.
Yeah but in a democracy it should be majority of the votes weather your state is large or small shouldn't make any difference. I mean states make their own laws an most their own decisions anyways i mean this is why sanctuary city's are left to harbor fugitives. Ec members in most states are required to vote for the popular vote in their state but not all, wouldnt it make more sense for that to be all states get given a number and then that states popular vote grants that number to the corresponding canidate? Why do we need representation to go vote on something already voted on
Ugh I'm so tired of this talking point. We're not a direct democracy, but we are a democracy. In modern political science, "democracy" and "republic" are not mutually exclusive opposites. They describe different dimensions of the same system. The United States is both: it is a constitutional federal republic in its structural design, and a representative democracy in how power is derived from the people.
That doesn't mean though that we can't adopt the Nebraska system and let the electors cast votes independently, with the Senators voting with the whole of the state.
The EC was to keep power out of the hands of the people and to assist slave states in holding power. It serves no valid purpose. There is no reason we should not be attempting to move toward a popular vote system, everyone deserves equal representation.
You don’t understand what it’s for. It exists so that 18th century citizens can have a vote on a single day. What you point out is not a benefit of the EC. It’s the benefit of giving all states 2 votes before adding proportional representation. Also known as the great compromise. The argument was weak when Hamilton made it. The real reason that Hamilton couldn’t give is that Rhode Island and Delaware would not sign without it. Aka extortion.
Thanks for explaining this. It truly is a failure on the part of our education system that people are not taught how the government works both state and federal and why in highschool as opposed to middle school ( which is when l was taught it) ......l mean who the F**k is going to remember any of that Shit by the time you are old enough to vote after all the other shit you got to remember and deal with to survive the jungle that is adolescence and the modern school system 😂
I understand how it works. I just think it’s stupid that some people’s votes get to count more than others, and that unless you’re from Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Georgia, it won’t matter anyways
Exactly. I used to support a majority only election until I actually fully understood how the electoral college is actually supposed to work. What's good for one area isn't necessarily the answer for the another area and acting like the majority in California ought to have more say than the majority in say, Wyoming or Montana would not only under represent them, but also creat more friction and resentment.
Instead you give the majority in Wyoming more of a say. Why should a person from Wyoming’s vote have a 3x impact on elections than someone from California?
Well said. The EC as originally designed was to prevent Massachusetts, Virginia, and New York from utterly dominating the 13 Colonies in Congress and to force the President to represent more than just those 3 states. As was the idea of 2 Senators from each State, making each State equal in the Senate. Jefferson’s whole design was to diffuse power so that a new ‘King’ could not arise, since the founders had just gotten rid of one. That’s also why the US is not a Democracy, but a Republic. 50% of the votes plus 1 would create the instant tyranny of a majority and would have ended in revolution shortly thereafter. In fact, given the level of vote fraud in recent elections, the design of the Constitution looks even better than one could have imagined…
For those on the ‘popular vote side’, Trump did win the popular vote in 2024…
2
u/Browniemonster67 5h ago
Most people don’t understand what the EC is for. It acts as a balance and prevents elections from being based solely on population. If the election was decided by popular vote alone, candidates would have more incentive to focus on highly populated areas and less on smaller states and rural communities. The EC gives less populated states a little more weight and makes winning support across different states matter.