Posted on 04/04/2019 12:26:02 PM PDT by C19fan
The push to abolish the Electoral College is picking up steam as Democrats turn their attention to the 2020. Former Attorney General Eric Holder is among the latest high-profile Democrats to call for eliminating the age-old system, deeming it a “vestige of the past” and “undemocratic.” Some of the Democrats in the crowded 2020 field, ranging from South Bend, Ind., Mayor Peter Buttigieg to Sens. Elizabeth and Kirsten Gillibrand, had previously sounded the call. Warren has argued for a change in which “every vote matters.”
A group of big-state Democratic senators, including Gillibrand (New York), Dick Durbin (Illinois), and Dianne Feinstein (California), introduced a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would jettison the Electoral College. The measure is mostly an exercise to spur debate because such amendments require two-thirds majority votes in both the chambers of Congress, and GOP Senate leaders would no doubt block it from receiving any floor consideration.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
We've done that many times over.
Like 1913, with the direct election of Sinators.
And that might be tempting to finally for Conservative instead of R, if it were one of those governments where alliances have to be made etc.
But that’s not what the forefathers wanted.
And they seemed to have set up a pretty great system.
The EC is not going anywhere.
Holder is uninformed or a deceptive liar. The Electoral College was supposed to be undemocratic. We are not a democracy Eric.
The name of our country is the United STATES, not the United identity groups.
That all depends on how the Electoral College is replaced.
If the Electoral College is eliminated and we go to a direct vote process for President, what happens if no candidate gets a majority? Will a simple plurality be enough to win the election, or will the new law stipulate a runoff between the top two vote-getters?
A runoff would ensure the two party system survives.
What if the Electoral College is replaced with the primary system that is in use for California state elections? In that case, the top two vote-getters move on to the general election, even if the top two are both from the same party.
So you could conceivably end up with Kamala Harris vs. Bernie Sanders for your choices for the Presidency.
Without the college, 5 corrupt cities rule the world. You just have to steal the election in five cities and you take it all.
Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million but if you subtract just NY and Calif she LOST by 3 million. Enough said.
Well, he’s correct. We’re not a democracy, which is just mob-rule. We’re a representative republic which means those of us in fly-over country still have a voice. For now.
‘And they seemed to have set up a pretty great system.’
they didn’t set up the winner take all elections...
I don't see why the smaller states would fall for this but don't rule it out. There are a lot of leftists in the big cities in small states too.
If this happens then the big states completely run things. Whatever predominant party the left coalesces around becomes THE party. The rest of it is noise and tweets. The states just become administrative elements of a big central government.
In other countries with run off systems the number of parties tend to proliferate. For example, in the most recent French presidential election in 2017 four candidates received more than 20% of the vote. Nine parties have seats in the French National Assembly. In the 2014 Brazilian election three candidates received more than 20% of the vote in the first round. The Brazilian National Congress has 16 parties with seats.
The end of the 2-party system would actually be the only benefit as far as I’m concerned.
Of course, the enormous downside of blue state ballot factories wiping out the rest of the country would destroy this solitary upside. The integrity of our presidential elections will only be as valid as our most corrupt state, which is to say our elections will quickly become no more legitimate than any communist dictator’s election.
Also, the left loves to complain about the amount of money in politics now - just imagine the price tag on running advertisements on 315 million people’s TV sets.
We would have to change the constitution to a parliamentary system. The parties would proliferations like rabbits, hamsters & gerbils!
One of the greatest ideas the FF had was establishing the Executive power as a separate and independent branch as opposed to just a legislator from the party in charge who won a popularity contest.
“The elimination of the Electoral College means the end of the two party system in the US.”
No, elimination of the Electoral College means the end of the US.
Exactly!
Risk? The Democrat’s very clear overall goal is to diminish American wealth, success, military superiority, and national unity. They risk nothing with their incessant attempts to tear down every traditional American institution.
All the more campaign fodder against Dimwitz in low to mid range population states
They’ll NEVER have enough to amend the Constitution, so the more they keep it up, the more campaign material
HAMMER these fascist bastards on this and other issues
Oh, and what about 2 Senators per state? Why no Dimwitz mouthing off about this?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.