Help Me Understand - Electoral Votes

by Sam Whiskey 19 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Sam Whiskey

  Good morning friends. For the first time in my life, I'm a registered voter. I know who I would like to see become our next president. My conundrum is this (I know I just registered, but this has become an afterthought-kind of like buyers remorse); Why should I participate in the popular vote process if ultimately the electoral voting process trumps the popular voting process? I saw this Yahoo! article this and am trying to fully grasp it. Any comments will be greatly appreciated.

  _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

  Presidents are elected not by national popular vote but by an 18th century constitutional compromise called the Electoral College .

  HOW IT FORMED

  When framers were drafting the U.S. Constitution , there were two competing ideas on how to elect the president. One group said Congress should do it; the other said it should be a national vote of eligible citizens. There also were disputes over how much slaves should count in representation in Congress and over how power would be distributed between small and large states. The compromise became part of the second article of the Constitution, although the words " Electoral College " are not included. The electors pick the president and vice president.

  VOTE TOTALS

  Each state gets one electoral vote for each of its representatives in the House and Senate. The District of Columbia gets three votes. All told, there are 538 votes in the Electoral College. A candidate must have at least 270 to win. Except for Maine and Nebraska, states award all their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the state. In Maine and Nebraska, votes are apportioned by congressional districts. So in 2008, even though John McCain won Nebraska's statewide popular vote, Barack Obama won the 2nd Congressional District and earned one of the state's five electoral votes.

  HOW IT WORKS

  Each state's electors will meet on Dec. 17 in their home states and cast their votes for president and vice president. Congress will meet on Jan. 6, 2013, to conduct an official tally of the electoral votes. Vice President Joe Biden will preside and declare the winner.

  PROBLEM AREAS

  If no candidate gets at least 270 electoral votes , the election goes to the newly elected House of Representatives. Each state delegation in the House gets one vote, and a candidate must win a majority of the states to be elected president. This happened in 1824, when Andrew Jackson won the most popular votes and the most electoral votes, but four candidates split the electoral votes and no one received a majority. The race went to the House and John Quincy Adams , who came in second, was chosen as president. Three other times, candidates won the Electoral College even though they lost the popular vote — in 1876, 1888 and 2000.

  http://news.yahoo.com/why-electoral-college-works-184138906--election.html;_ylt=AgP4RGcvQOvlbsZ5wfit6O.1qHQA;_ylu=X3oDMTQxNm5rZDdxBG1pdANNb3N0UG9wdWxhciBMaXN0aW5nBHBrZwMxMmE5MmFkZS03ZjlhLTNjYTktODc2Ni0yNGEyNTJlN2U4MzYEcG9zAzEyBHNlYwNNb3N0IFBvcHVsYXIEdmVyAzUyODEyZTMxLTBhMDgtMTFlMi1iZmZiLWIyMGY3NzBiMmI4Yw--;_ylg=X3oDMTFsNnAxMGFjBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANwb3B1bGFyBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25z;_ylv=3
• 

  Diest

  Electors are chosen by the popular vote of your state. Some states your vote for president wont really count. IE California Republican vote or a Texas Democrat.

  That being said your vote does count for Sentate, House, State Senate, State House, Govenor....so on. So even if you dont get to pick the president your voice was heard.

  There are 12 or so battleground states like:Colorado, Iowa, Ohio, Virgina...etc Those contested states are really where your vote counts the most.

  Really the best reason to vote is the right to Bitch, or the right to Gloat....you dont get either of these lovely rights without voting.
• 

  Band on the Run

  The Electoral College was set up when states were supreme. The masses were distrusted. Framers of the Const'n left much correspondence revealing their abhorence of the masses. In their view, one needed to be educated and possess rather large tracts of land in order to be responsible enough to vote. When the United States was formed, franchise was severely limited. The Civil War caused a fundamental change in the power of the states and the federal government. FDR's New Deal meant that the federal government expanded greatly.

  Electoral votes are apportioned according to congressional districts - the population count so there is correlation. When I worked in the Senate for the Subcommittee on the Const'n, the chair tried very hard to amend the const'n to have direct election determine the election. The political will to amend the Const'n does not exist.

  It is also possible for an appointed elector to vote his own preference in many states and ignore the popular vote count. The Const'n was ratified by state ratifying conventions, not a popular vote. I doubt if the Const'n were framed today if we would have an Electoral College. People love tradition. Particularly with the rise of textualists such as Justices Scalia and Thomas, the const'n becomes frozen in the politics of 1789, not today.

  Most Americans don't even seem to be aware that there is an Electoral College. I rarely hear it explained. Commentators assume theri audience already know the college exists and the pros and cons concerning its function. If we all attended elite, great schools, not explaining the Electoral College would make sense.

  Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College counts thanks to all the trouble in Fla. All the way through school, I rarely heard it mentioned by teachers. I believe it is a dinosaur. When the federal const'n was ratified, I expect most Americans viewed themselves as citizen sof a particular state before they viewed themselves as American. Until 9/11, I saw my primary allegiance and identification to a city. Today most people think of themselves as US citizens who happen to reside in a particular state. The news media focuses on national issues to serve the largest amount of viewers. Local news is rarely covered well. The New York Times is a good example. International news and national news is covered well. When important things happend on a local basis, I was forced to purchase local tabloid papers to piece together the coverage.
• 

  Sam Whiskey

  Diest and Band ~

  Thank you very much for your insights. Question; Could this be the reason for such small voter turnouts? I've heard that only 20% of the population actually votes. On the other hand, why do the candidates

  attempt to appeal to the masses via television commercials if only the electoral votes count? Why spend all of that money on advertising if you're only looking for the 270 votes to win?

  Still a little confused....
• 

  NewChapter

  Depends on where you live, Sam. I'd say if you are in Texas or Mississippi, your vote doesn't really matter. Republicans will win and take the state and all of the electoral votes. Now ever if you're a Republican, it doesn't really matter if you vote on that issue or not, because Republicans will win. And if you're a Republican in New York, your vote won't really matter either, because of the electoral college.

  I live in a swing state. That's why the candidates are focusing on our states, there is simply no guarantee which way we will go. The president and Romney are here all the time, right now. The entire presidency is decided by the swing states. The base will not change.

  But there are other issues on your ballot! Senators, state houses, Congress, judges, issues. So educate yourself on your state and local politics, the judges, the issues so that you are prepared to choose on those also. That is where you will likely make the biggest difference. Read the issues carefully---sometimes it is very confusing on what a yes or no vote actually means, so break them down. You can check our a judge's history and what groups that hold your values rate them at.
• 

  Glander

  Simple, if your candidate of choice wins the electoral college system is fine. If not, then it needs to be revised.
• 

  Nambo

  Same as here in the UK, 80% dont bother voting because they are clever enough to have figured out that the two choices we are given, are really the same party, just with a differant set of puppets as the front men, the Bible calls the hidden hand, Babylon the Great, The Wizard of Oz calls him the man behind the curtain.

  Of course those 80% are not clever enough, else they would get together and vote for some other candidate that would represent the peoples and the constitution of the United States rather than the International financial Elite that pay the advertising fees you mentioned in order to get their man in.
• 

  NeverKnew

  As far as going to the polls, when there's a strong possibility that your candidate will probably lose, you vote with the attitude of a Cleveland Brown's fan. Why bother going to the game? (Sorry Cleveland - Steelers fan here) *giggling* On a serious note, sadly, many who are eligible to vote do not see how seriously their lives can be affected by their negligence.

  Electors who vote against the popular vote are deemed "Faithless Electors" and while they CAN vote against the popular vote, generally, they do not. In some states there are repercussions for doing so.

  Don't worry about things you have no control over. Exercise your right. Your voice is important. :)
• 

  Justitia Themis

  Question; Could this be the reason for such small voter turnouts? I've heard that only 20% of the population actually votes.

  It is unlikely that the Electoral College is responsible for voter apathy; in fact, it has a long non-illustrious history that pre-dates this nation. One need only examine the voting records subsequent to state constitutional conventions to see that voters often fail to vote even when they can greatly impact their state and their personal lives.

  For example, in Indiana in 1846, only half of the people who cast a vote for a governor voted on a constitutional question.

  Even worse, in 1922 in Virginia, 25,000 less people voted on their constitutional issues than voted on them in 1900. And that was AFTER women's suffrage and growth dramatically added to the voter base.

  50 years after Texas' 1875 convention, only 20% of people voted on the proposed amendments to the state constitution.

  Basically, Americans in general do not want to bother researching the issues and voting, but they want to whine about the results.
• 

  moshe

  I received a big glossy card in the mail here in Florida extolling Prop4 on the ballot-- nowhere does it explain what Prop4 is or the reason for it. The PAC that put this card out, just wants you to retain a subliminal message-- vote , Yes.