Reply #21: let me try again.

[apsuman]

You said that in 11% of the electon were over turned by the EC, well, everyone knew about the EC, it wasn't sprung on them the day after the election. The candidates know that they have to win the EC, not the popular vote. Your claim that the EC is a "star chamber" is over the top.

Starting in 1796, I count 54 presidential elections. Further, I was apparently wrong, in 1824, the election was thrown to the house of representatives as the constitution called for, so only 3 elections determined by the EC have had the winner of the popular vote not win the EC. So, 3 of 54 is 5.5%, half of your 11%. And if you say that the EC somehow twarts the will of the people Cleveland came back to beat Harrison in 1892.

In a previous post and even in another thread I tried to say that the EC serves a purpose. It did in 1796, it did in 1896, it did in 1996 and it does today. While not designed for this one task, I dare say the the EC has prevented as many as seven different Presidential elections from going to federal court. This country has had the same constitution with only 26 (27?) admendments to it since 1796 because the collective people agree with the ground rules for determining who the winner(s) is. Throwing 7 presidential elections to the federal court, not the state courts of Alabama to determine there those 4 electoral votes go, but to any federal judge willing to take up the case is a recipe for disaster. We would be as unstable as say Italy.

Further I think the EC works here because we have sovereign entities known as States that weild power. Parlimentary systems with immediate run off, conditional ballots, rank order voting, etc. work in nations, IMHO, where the regions do not have any unifying culture or political framework. The labour member from Glouster has to believe in the exact same labour platform as the labour member from Wessex. Here in this country, the Democrat Senator from Louisiana does NOT have to agree with the same platform as the democrat Senator from Vermont. If you are going to have a parliament system then you might as well as do away with the 50 states.