Should the US begin to implement a national vote that counts individuals rather than the electoral college?

  • Straight to argument

    The whole system is flawed. Stcking to this one point, individual votes matter not at all. 12 guys we supposedly elect can and have said we dont care, this is who you get. Doesnt happen often but proves if they disagree screw the rest of America. "well we vote for the reps and they make informed decisions for us". Who can name them without using the internet or google, or hasnt had to use google to figure it out already? When did we vote for them? Americans as a whole might vote more and be more interested in the politics of our own country if we were actually allowed to make the choice instead of just giving us the illusion that our choice matters

  • The Electoral College is only making things worse for us now

    The Electoral College is severely flawed and makes individual votes less important. We need change and a real system that accommodates us all instead of rigging elections with an electoral college. As times change, systems need to be updated. How can you ever expect to grow or improve if we just cling to traditional methods that only hurt us? Time to stop living in the past and do things for the better. It's sad to see how many others are so scared of change. No the electoral college is not fair in any way, quit lying to yourselves.

  • Let the people decide

    When you reside in a state that is dominated by one party, democrat or republican, the individual votes do not carry weight anymore. The far left and the far right will always, always vote for their party while the people in the middle will vote for the best candidate. Let the voters decide, even if they still vote for their party. At least every vote is counted and not just the politicians.

  • The Electoral Vote Devalues the Individual Vote and Every Single Vote SHOULD Count!

    The debates should center around the actual issues and winning over the hearts, minds and votes of the people, not over which states have a greater value to win! Focusing on states with a larger electoral value pollutes the vote by devaluing the less populated states, as if they don't really matter. Why SHOULD one person THINK that their vote could make THE difference if the electoral vote outweighs the popular vote? This is especially crucial in a very close race, when ONE VOTE COULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

  • Yes count individuals.

    Individual votes should be what elects a President not electoral votes. Even though the electoral vote should be counted by the most popular vote this is not what happens. The electoral vote can go for what the people choose or against them which is usually the case. I think Presidents should be elected by the people's vote as our forefathers agreed upon.

  • Each vote should count

    Weather it is a low income person trying to scrape by or a person who has lived well off their entire lives each vote should be counted as equal. No single person or small group can be trusted to represent a whole state and all the difference of opinion. I really believe that the people of the United States of America deserve the chance to actually have a say in THEIR government. Would you let someone hire an employee for you without knowing the person doing the hiring? How can you trust someone who doesn't know your situation to make an important decision for you? Remember our politicians are the peoples employees and as I see it most need to be fired. I will say again everyone has the right to be heard and that's what voting is for.

  • Why an electoral college...or representatives for that matter?

    Why do I vote for someone in an electoral college to vote? Why do we believe that 435 house representatives properly represent the voices of 312 million Americans? Am I supposed to believe my views on specific legislative issues are properly represented every time? Why can't Americans vote on specific legislative issues rather than a representative to vote for them? The simple truth is that our current democratic state is flawed because there is always a 50% chance that our beliefs will be misrepresented in a yea or nea vote closed to the public.

  • It is just no longer needed.

    When the electoral college was instituted it was done so to protect the smaller states, and it made sense, back then some states had very small populations, but it is just no longer necessary. Every state counts their citizens votes and each and every state files and counts those votes. A President should be elected by popular vote only. If the GOP has its way with it's redistricting and new laws they wish to implement we could end up having a President elected by a small minority. Had the GOP gotten it's why this time Romney would have won, yet Obama would have had 6 million more votes. We live in a Constitutional Republic and I for one want my President elected by the people, not the 1%.

  • Electoral Delegates Out of Proportion to Vote

    Because all states but two award all of their delegates to the candidate with the most votes, it is completely unfair. The fair way would be to apportion delegates; but that would be extremely difficult to do for small states with 3-4 delegates. The only fair way is to do it by popular vote-- but where every vote--especially all absentee ballots-- in every state must be counted (which is not the way it is done now) before any numbers are posted or released to the public. If it takes a day or two, so be it. No one should be swayed by prophetic news commentators based on a fraction of the total votes.

  • Electoral College Skews the Results

    Twice the candidate who has won the popular vote has lost to Electoral College. This is not fair as the people can't actually vote for their leader. It isn't fair to the people if they can't even elect their leader. Even worse, the people are practically tricked into thinking that the popular vote is the real deal! The electoral college definately needs reform or to be replaced. In this election Obama barely beat Romney in the popular vote, yet Obama blew out Romney in the Electoral College. The system needs reform because it skews the results and is unfair.

    Posted by: aba
  • The United States should not implement a national vote instead of the electoral college, because all states should have an equal voice.

    The United States should not implement a national vote instead of the electoral college. The electoral college was established to allow states with smaller populations to have a voice in the presidential voting process, comparable with those states with larger populations. If a national vote process was implemented, candidates would only focus on large population states, leaving smaller states disenfranchised.

    Posted by: Cen2I0rd
  • keeping big states from over-ruling small states ensures a fairer outcome

    The electoral college is set up so that smaller states have a slightly greater input in the outcome of determining who is President. Someone can win 50.01% of the vote but not become President unless the representation they won is also across the nation. This is so that a candidate doesn't appeal only to the largest cities and over-rule a rural and suburban population. A democracy of 50%+1 may be a democracy, but it is not fair. The electoral college ensures the lesser populated minority still have a say.

    Posted by: Pir4And
  • If the vote were purely on number of individuals, certain areas would not be campaigned in at all because they do not have the number of people that other areas do.

    The original concept of the electoral college was to find a compromise that would give larger states with more people representation but even the smaller states would still have a minimum of representation. So even Wyoming has at least 3 electoral votes, even though the city of Dallas Texas has more people than the entire state of Wyoming. It is an important concept that even the sparsely populated states still have an important part of the election process. Otherwise the candidates would not care what they think because they do not have enough people to make it worthwhile to campaign there. That would be damaging in the long run. The people in the western less populated states are Americans too and need to have their voices heard as much as the people in the large urban areas.

    Posted by: ddeathnote
  • Problem of Nationalism.

    Having a national vote encourages our government to become even more nationalist than it already is. When is the last time the people in your state made as big a deal about Congressional elections than the presidency? Isolating the vote by state prevents big government corruption and protects American citizens.

  • NO - The electoral college is the fairest and most representative process.

    Each vote does count. We are a REPUBLIC which means representative government. We send duly elected representatives to congress to carry out our legislative wishes. We vote for Electors from our states to vote for our presidential and vice presidential choice at the electoral college. Our founding fathers placed this process in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. Congress does not choose the President, our electoral representatives cast the votes on our behalf. This along with staggered terms helps ensure checks and balances between the Executive and Legislative branches of government are in place, in a timely manner, and more in line with current political, economical, and social trends. Possibly more important are the votes for our Representatives and Senators. Is our system perfect? No. We have sent people to Congress who are guilty of plundering. The bright spot is we can recall them at election time. As Benjamin Franklin said "...we have given you a Republic if you can keep it.." (RE: the Roman Empire.) We need to vote for political parties and candidates who most closely adhere to the principles found in the Constitution and the Ten Commandments.

  • No, the U.S. should not have a vote that counts individuals, instead of the electoral college, because it has worked well this way for many years.

    No, the U.S. should not have a vote that counts individuals, instead of the electoral college. The electoral college has worked for a long time, and is a good way of having an election. It takes into account the different states, and how much they represent the U.S., as a whole.

    Posted by: NorChiquita
  • I think we should stick to the electoral college for presidential elections, because it prevents certain states from having too much influence.

    We have always used the electoral college to pick our president, and I think we should continue to do so. If we went strictly by popular vote, some states would have too much influence in the election, while others would be ignored. Candidates would only campaign in big cities, and smaller cities and states wouldn't get much say in elections.

    Posted by: GaudyTory37

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.