Eliminate the Electoral College

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned
Che, even if this were true, I hardly think the Supremes would conclude that by creating a constitutional process for a people's referendum generally means that the State Legislature had delegated to the people the right to determine how the electors should be apportioned. That is a major stretch.

Actually that is common sense-the legislature had eveyr right to surrender its power. Again, the constitution says the state legislature decides-if the state legislature surrenders its power to the people, the state legislature decided.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Che, even if this were true, I hardly think the Supremes would conclude that by creating a constitutional process for a people's referendum generally means that the State Legislature had delegated to the people the right to determine how the electors should be apportioned.

They might.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I hardly think the Supremes would conclude that by creating a constitutional process for a people's referendum generally means that the State Legislature had delegated to the people the right to determine how the electors should be apportioned. That is a major stretch.

No, that's no stretch at all. The Legislature has decided, by allowing a referendum how the electors shall be divided (if at all). As the clause says 'in a manner the legislature shall direct'. It doesn't say the legislature must vote on the issue, it says the legislature can DIRECT the process for seperating electoral votes.

Besides, the SCOTUS would probably not be able to decide this anyway, since I couldn't see a person having standing to challenge it unless we have another 2000 election debacle.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
I still don't see why a simple 'one vote from one American counts as one vote for one candidate' system is opposed by PLATO and others, unless there were purely partisan political reasons for it (eg one side would always win, or something).

I feel, as did the founding fathers, that large population centers should not be able to dominate national politics.

[Sava]

Originally posted by PLATO


I feel, as did the founding fathers, that large population centers should not be able to dominate national politics.

PLATO and other don't like democracy... one person, one vote... may the best candidate win.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by PLATO
I feel, as did the founding fathers, that large population centers should not be able to dominate national politics.

Why should a bunch of hicks who don't know enough to move someplace with jobs get to dominate?

[PLATO]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Why should a bunch of hicks who don't know enough to move someplace with jobs get to dominate?

This statement shows why those from population centers shouldn't dominate national thought.

Ye-Haw.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Sava
PLATO and other don't like democracy... one person, one vote... may the best candidate win.

When Jerry Springer becomes a highly rated TV show, I think we should ALL question democracy .

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
When Jerry Springer becomes a highly rated TV show, I think we should ALL question democracy .

One of the few comments made by a conservative that actually made me stop and question socialism was a comment by David Horowitz. "You can't build socialism with the people who go on Jerry Springer."

[Imran Siddiqui]

Sometimes I fear for the masses of this country. You know what I'm talking about, che, go a little bit out of our Southern cities (or even in them ) and you are in the scary boonies!

Hell, I'm sure you can find plenty out there that think that Matthew Shephard 'deserved it'!!

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO


I feel, as did the founding fathers, that large population centers should not be able to dominate national politics.

There were no large population centers when the Foudning Fathers were around, with the country being 95% rural- and given that in most states you had to be a landed gentleman to vote, this was hardly an issue.

The Founding Fathers expected the state legislatures to have more direct say in chosing electors, much like they used to chose senators.

But most legislatures have surrendered their powers by now-to the voters themselves.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Sava
PLATO and other don't like democracy... one person, one vote... may the best candidate win.

Funny you should say that. The founding fathers were much more into representation than democracy. I believe that our States should be fully democratic, but that our Union should be representative.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by PLATO
Funny you should say that. The founding fathers were much more into representation than democracy. I believe that our States should be fully democratic, but that our Union should be representative.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap


There were no large population centers when the Foudning Fathers were around, with the country being 95% rural- and given that in most states you had to be a landed gentleman to vote, this was hardly an issue.

Boston, Philadelphia, and New York were all population centers at the time. The Southern States were worried about these centers being able to dominate them politically...and they still are.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by PLATO
The founding fathers . . .

don't live here anymore.