Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Should the Electoral College stay or go [View all]patrice
(47,992 posts)12. That is part of its purpose, but another part is to weight less populated areas
more heavily, so their votes stand a chance against population centers.
I was listening to someone the other day make the case that the fix is to end the "winner take all" aspect of the Electoral College, which is sketched out in this article:
http://www.historycentral.com/elections/Electoralcollgewhy.html
The electoral college is also part of compromises made at the convention to satisfy the small states. Under the system of the Electoral College each state had the same number of electoral votes as they have representative in Congress, thus no state could have less then 3. The result of this system is that in this election the state of Wyoming cast about 210,000 votes, and thus each elector represented 70,000 votes, while in California approximately 9,700,000 votes were cast for 54 votes, thus representing 179,000 votes per electorate. Obviously this creates an unfair advantage to voters in the small states whose votes actually count more then those people living in medium and large states.
One aspect of the electoral system that is not mandated in the constitution is the fact that the winner takes all the votes in the state. Therefore it makes no difference if you win a state by 50.1% or by 80% of the vote you receive the same number of electoral votes. This can be a recipe for one individual to win some states by large pluralities and lose others by small number of votes, and thus this is an easy scenario for one candidate winning the popular vote while another winning the electoral vote. This winner take all methods used in picking electors has been decided by the states themselves. This trend took place over the course of the 19th century.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
32 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Agreed, based on the idea that everyone has the same worth as a person, their votes should
GreenPartyVoter
Nov 2012
#2
If there were no campaiging (everyone would receive a voters' guide instead) would there be a
patrice
Nov 2012
#4
Campaigns should be publicly funded and the Electoral College is an anachronism!
LongTomH
Nov 2012
#6
That is part of its purpose, but another part is to weight less populated areas
patrice
Nov 2012
#12
Yes - Or it would be if we had authentic public financed campaigns & NO dependence upon MSM
patrice
Nov 2012
#21
Good point! Without EVs, HOW could you do a recount if you needed to, unless we're using paper
patrice
Nov 2012
#24