To: L.A.Justice
Deciding the election by popular vote would not be good at all. However, the current winner-take-all system per state is pretty disenfranchising. It should be decided county by county -- but then, that would benefit conservatives.
Voter ID = disenfranchisement, and racism to boot.
millions of votes being cast pointlessly because slightly more people voted for the other guy =/= disenfranchisement.
If the current system were working for the GOP and county-by-county would benefit the dems, can you imagine how loudly they be screaming for it?
11 posted on
10/24/2016 5:45:35 PM PDT by
Wyrd bið ful aræd
(Flag burners can go screw -- I'm mighty PROUD of that ragged old flag)
To: Wyrd bið ful aræd
I don't think county-by-county would work.
I'd love to see all 50 states adopt the Nebraska/Maine model and award electoral votes by Congressional district -- plus the two "extra" electoral votes to the candidate who wins the state overall.
29 posted on
10/24/2016 6:16:34 PM PDT by
Alberta's Child
("Go ahead, bite the Big Apple ... don't mind the maggots.")
To: Wyrd bið ful aræd
The Electoral College makes more sense when coupled with the original States choice of Senators. States were represented in Washington as States. When that was changed to popular vote the States became effectively provinces and the people bgan the loss of rights and opportunities that come with centralized government. The primary layer of protection between the citizen and the Federal Government was removed.
30 posted on
10/24/2016 6:17:09 PM PDT by
arthurus
(Hillary's campaign is getting shaky)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson