The Electoral College is ripe for reform

In fact the 3/5 rule was forced on the slave states to limit the political power of the slave system.

But giving the provisions the very worse construction, what does it amount to? I answer—It is a downright disability laid upon the slaveholding States; one which deprives those States of two-fifths of their natural basis of representation. A black man in a free State is worth just two-fifths more than a black man in a slave State, as a basis of political power under the Constitution. Therefore, instead of encouraging slavery, the Constitution encourages freedom by giving an increase of “two-fifths” of political power to free over slave States. So much for the three-fifths clause; taking it at is worst, it still leans to freedom, not slavery; for, be it remembered that the Constitution nowhere forbids a coloured man to vote.[23][24] Frederick Douglass (emphasis mine)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_Compromise

 

69 percent of lawyers favored abolishing the EC in 1987.

No better reason to keep it.

 

Agree. EC is outdated and unnecessary. No reason why a Republican's vote in CA or Democrat's vote in TX shouldn't count.

The people should be allowed to directly elect president who will appoint Supreme Court that will interpret Constitution correctly and with the contemporary view for vague parts of Constitution such as 'cruel and unusual' and 'due process.' We view those much different now.

When EC was created, there also wasn't issues that would impact other states such as water rights and climate change.

 

The NPVIC does not "get rid of" the EC.

 

This is why it's still necessary and also why the libs want to get rid of it. They are the party that wants to disenfranchise millions of people

 

So wanting peoples votes to be equal to every other persons vote is now disenfranchisement?

The current system disenfranchises voters — not moving to a popular vote where everyone is treated equally. Right not republicans in California and Democrats in Texas have ZERO say in who is president.

 

Yes actually. It's called tyranny of the minority. Would you be OK if white people voted to officially make black people 2nd class citizens? It would be ok if everyone had an equal vote, right?

 

Tyranny of the minority is what we have now.

Why are you ok with that?

I think it’s harder to convince 50% +1 of voters to do heinous acts than it is to convince around 30% of people in strategic locations to do so.

Also, your scenario is kind of ironic since it is under the system you support that we initially had slavery and second class citizens.

Moving to a popular vote also wouldn’t impact the senate so states would still have representation, they just couldn’t ignore the majority any longer. Right now the house is weighted away from the people towards the states, the senate was designed to only represent the states and the presidency also represents the states. It wasn’t intended to be that way.

 

I don't believe any of that and think it's utter BS. So, we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

You are welcome to waste your time. Personally I have little of it available for that sort of thing. I want smaller government. Not much else matters to me politically. Voting doesn't provide that. It always increases the size of government. So I don't vote. Of course you are welcome to vote as are all adult citizens.

 

Obviously it wouldn't.

 

You don’t believe facts?

I guess that tracks

I mean — you do you. But I can prove everything I just posted.

 

That is just camouflaging the ugly pig. If a state decides to appoint electors based on a national popular vote, its electors are in name only and for any purpose the electoral college is moot for them. That is effectively doing away with the electoral college and completely disenfranchising the states who did not join the NPVIC.

 

Now now. What you posted is opinion, not facts. Own up to it.

 

False, States vote in the Senate AND the Electoral college. Guess what People don't vote in national vote, YOU have never voted in a national election nor for a President. You have only voted for ELECTORS from your state to cast your STATE's EC votes and your state doesn't even have to let you do that. You said that states were MERELY and ONLY tracts of land are you withdrawing that now?

 

Nope, people vote not states.

 

What is outdated? What changed?

Can you show me where there votes aren't counted in the elections for their State's Electors?

How do we view them different now, how has due process changed? And have you ever read the Federalist Papers or studied the Constitutional Convention as to WHY the founding fathers were so against direct election of the President and the Senators (it took an amendment to change from the State legislatures appointing the Senators and amendment which should be repealed BTW) and against democracy?

The STATES, balanced out by the Congressional make up and Electoral College select the President.

ROFL do you even know why we abandoned the Articles of Confederacy and adopted the Constitution? No nothing to do with conflicts between states..... nothing at all............

 

Nope as the Constitution dictates they do. What do you think happens in the EC and in the Senate? You don't think votes take place?

Have you even watched either of the Political conventions before when that voting takes place? When the person stands up and declares Madam Chairman the great state of [fill in the blank] cast IT'S votes for [fill in the blank].

Are you denying states are legal entities and have certain sovereignties? Their own governments and courts and schools and yes even CITIZENS.

 

And. States. change. their. law. as. they. see. fit. so. what. happens. when. like. in. 2020. state. officials. change. their. mind. and. declare. their. agreement. null. and. void. what. is. the. enforcement. mechanism. BETWEEN. states?

 

But it is your goal to make it inconsequential and force some states to require their Electors to cast votes for someone the citizens of the State did not chose giving up the citizens of their state their voice.

 

Why don't we just get rid of the States all together then? You said they are just lines on a map anyway.

 

Yes, they are tracs of land and are not people.

 

Many changes. We no longer have slavery which was main reason for EC. Electors also chosen by winner-take-all now instead of by legislatures.

Over 90% campaign events in battleground states.

Cruel and unusual punishment/due process is much different now compared to when Constitution written because our morals/values change.

Art of Confed irrelevant. Congress can do very little when poor Republican policies, signed by minority Republican president and approved by judges appointed by the minority, flood cities they don't represent. Also issues of minority (Republicans) stripping away individual liberty and equal protection from women. THAT'S the tyranny of minority founders talking about.

 

While I am not completely unsurprised that the alternative facts group thinks easily proven items are really secretly opinions, I will inquire to ask which one of the statements that I made do you believe is an opinion and I will be happy to source it or show some simple math.

 

Because innovation would die — states compete with one another and test out a myriad of laws and variations of laws that make the nation as a whole a better place up until they start subverting democracy through gerrymandering and vote rigging.