A thought about abolishing the electoral college

[More Than A Feeling]

Would abolishing it hurt grassroots organizing? As it stands now, the nation is divided up into precincts, counties, etc that make it easier to set a goal of say, carrying a county for Kerry, or something like that. That goal is something one person can feel is manageable. If the president were decided by popular vote, who at the bottom could see the results of their activism? I know that there are other methods (splitting electoral votes based on disticts, as in Main and Nebraska) but straight up abolishing the EC is one that always seems to be brought up in the mainstream.

[sellitman]

1. I'm for removal of the EC

Seems to me we would have a better chance of controling special interests if they couldn't target one State.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. You can read some thoughts about the EC on my site

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[Demeter]

3. Don't Think So

Universal election would cut the ability to segment the country and cut the power of big donors to swamp local politics. Imagine one well-defined way to vote across the nation, one day holiday, mail-in balloting, so much that can be fixed by changes that have stood the test of time...

[Demit]

4. what's worse than seeing your precinct come out for your candidate,

then watch your candidate lose the electoral votes anyway? The grassroots goal is still the same--to get out the vote for your candidate.

[Wisc Badger]

5. The EC was intended to protect the smaller states

from being trampled over by the more populous of bigger states.

It did it's job very well in the last election (except for the outcome). Many small to medium states (WV or my state WI) were the key to the election (also throw in MN, IA, NM, CO, u get the idea).

Imagine if the only states that counted were NY or CA (now I know that some of you would like that since they are very blue, but how would you feel if they were red?) were the only ones that counted.

You would never see a candidate in Wisconsin or Iowa, they would only campaign in the large states.

The founding fathers got this one right, the EC is a valuable electoral institution that should not be messed with (besides you would never get the required constitutional amendment abolishing to pass 37 states).

Instead the Dem's need to do what Dean says and compete and change minds/harts in all 50 states.:toast:

[BBradley]

7. You hardly ever see a candidate in Wisconsin or Iowa anyway.

The electoral college is weighted based on population anyway, so why not just go straight to the source and have the president be elected by the population. Same deal, no way for the minority to enforce it's will on the majority.

[forgethell]

9. Mainly weighted on population, but

the 2 electoral votes that every state gets because they have two Senators is not. That's how it helps to protect small, rurral states from large, urban ones.

[BBradley]

6. You can still have all the same statistics available.

You can still see who won in which district, which county, and which state. All abolishing the EC would do is prevent a minority of people from enforcing their will on the majority. The only office it would affect would be the presidency. Grass-roots campaigning would be unaffected. All states would still probably get as much attention payed to them as they are now. All arguments against abolishing the electoral college are moot. It's an antiquated system that is unnecessary in today's society.

[K-W]

8. It should certainly be abolished.

Even without the electoral college we will still have various political boundries that organizers can use to set goals.

[idiosyncratic]

10. It should be abolished. The "Blue States" never got to see the

candidates. Without the EC, the candidates would be campaigning everywhere, to everyone.

On the local level voters would be choosing their local/regional/state candidates, but no one state should decide the Presidential election. Only the popular vote should decide the Presidential election.

[sellitman]

11. You got it!

I agree with your statement 100%. I live in CT and I hardly ever saw Kerry. If we did away with the EC he would of been here chomping at the bit.

[Tacos al Carbon]

12. This is all interesting but it's just talk

There is no way for the electoral college to be eliminated short of a Constitutional Amendment and, as has already been pointed out, there is no way on earth such an amendment would have the support of the required number of states.

If you really want to think about Electoral college shenanigans, consider this: Part of the deal in making Texas a state was that it could, at any time, choose to divide into 5 separate states. That means that if they want to, Republicans can add at least 8 more safe electoral votes (for the 8 new senators) and 6-8 Republican Senators.

[ChairOne]

13. Is this a decent explanation of just *why* we have an electoral college?

I've never been totally clear on the matter, and was just lookin around...

http://www.maitreg.com/politics/articles/electoralcollege.asp

EDIT: Hmmm... looking around the rest of the site, it's probably a *bad* explanation - lol - shoulda looked around before posting... In any case, could any of you point me to a *good* explanation of the rationale for its existence?