SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Absurdity of the Electoral College:
Here's one nice thing we can now say about the Electoral College: it's slightly less harmful to our democracy than it was just days ago. In a 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that states have the right to "bind" their electors, requiring them to support whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote in their state. Justice Elena Kagan's opinion was a blow to so-called "faithless electors," but a win for self-government. "Here," she wrote, "the People rule."
Yet while we can all breathe a sigh of relief that rogue electors won't choose (or be coerced) into derailing the 2020 presidential contest, the Court's unanimous ruling is a helpful reminder that our two-step electoral process provides America with no tangible benefits and near-limitless possibilities for disaster. To put it more bluntly, the Electoral College is a terrible idea. And thanks to the Justices' decision, getting rid of it has never been easier.
[...] The Electoral College, in other words, serves no useful purpose, other than to intermittently and randomly override the people's will. It's the appendix of our body politic. Most of the time we don't notice it, and then every so often it flares up and nearly kills us.
[...] Justice Kagan's words – "Here, the People rule" – are stirring. But today, they are still more aspiration than declaration. By declining to make the Electoral College an even great threat to our democracy, the Court did its job. Now it's up to us. If you live in a state that hasn't joined the interstate compact, you can urge your state legislators and your governor to sign on. And no matter where you're from, you can dispel the myths about the Electoral College and who it really helps, myths that still lead some people to support it despite its total lack of redeeming qualities.
More than 215 years after the Electoral College was last reformed with the 12th Amendment, we once again have the opportunity to protect our presidential-election process and reassert the people's will. Regardless of who wins the White House in 2020, it's a chance we should take.
Would you get rid of the Electoral College? Why or why not?
Also at:
Supremes Signal a Brave New World of Popular Presidential Elections
Supreme Court Rules State 'Faithless Elector' Laws Constitutional
U.S. Supreme Court curbs 'faithless electors' in presidential voting
Supreme Court rules states can remove 'faithless electors'
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 13 2020, @05:44PM (4 children)
You're not winning any points in this argument.
Every single election cycle in my lifetime, has been decided by a minority. Don't believe me? Look at the history - rarely does more than 25, maybe 30% of the eligible voting body even bother to GET OUT AND VOTE!!
Like any other poorly designed, faulty poll, this poll FAILS because only self-selecting people respond.
In every single election cycle in my lifetime, the MAJORITY VOTED FOR NONE OF THE ABOVE!!!
So, ultimately, you're just whining that your minority may have been infinitesimally larger than the other minority. If you want "fair elections", you need to mandate that all eligible voters get off their phat couch potato asses, and VOTE!
(Score: 2) by legont on Monday July 13 2020, @06:34PM
None of the above definitely should be an option and if it wins, all the candidates on the list should be prohibited from participating in the next few cycles. This would bring most of the folks to vote.
Without, our democracy is a farce not worse participating in.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday July 13 2020, @07:23PM (2 children)
Only if you died in 1800 [electproject.org]. Actual numbers in recent elections are more like 60% for presidential elections, and 40% for mid-term congressional elections.
The really low numbers are for local elections - understandable, because at least where I am frequently there aren't many contested elections.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 13 2020, @09:50PM (1 child)
Hmmm - voting is roughly double what I said. And, I can't figure out how I arrived at my numbers. OK, thinking . . .
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday July 13 2020, @10:06PM
Well, given that 75.8% of statistics are just made up on the spot by somebody trying to push an opinion without doing research, I think that question answers itself.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.