Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Abolish the electoral college?

What would happen? Republicans would never hold power again?

No, that’s ridiculous. In no world would it lead to a single party state. That’s delusional thinking.

What would actually happen is the Republican Party would become more moderate in an attempt to cultivate more voters. Then the Democrats would slowly move left instead of the constant shift to the right they’ve undergone for the last three decades.

This is the result of just a simple popular vote. Something like rank choice voting could even lead to more viable third parties. Or at least coalitions instead of just two parties.

Somehow this is opposed by those that shout the loudest about “we the people”, but they fail to realize the only word in that statement they care about is “we”.

Just remember, the world is on an endless march towards progress. God will not send judgement. It’s only us.

No justice, no peace.

There’s my political rant for the hour.
Theyitis · 36-40, M
The Republican Party becoming more moderate to cultivate more voters is what should have happened after the last three elections (2018, 2020, 2022). By nominating Trump again they have shown that they’re not interested in that strategy. Instead they intend to cater to the interests of a dwindling pool of extremists and use anti-democratic tactics like making it more difficult for people to vote and allowing Republican state legislatures to overturn the will of the people to win elections. I’m not convinced that even if we could somehow effect a switch to electing the president by popular vote that the Republicans would be compelled to expand their coalition and try to compete fairly and democratically.
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
The work around on the Constitutional issue is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Under it, participating states (and DC) agree to cast all their electoral votes for the candidate receiving the largest national popular vote. The compact is triggered when sufficient states (plus DC) have joined it to have a majority of the Electoral Vote. It currently has 17 states and DC, representing 39% of the Electoral College but 77% of the 270 electoral votes needed to elect the President.

A more equitable solution closer to the original intent of the framers of the Constitution, imho, is if every state allotted its Electors in proportion to the popular vote in their states rather than on a winner-take-all basis. This would still make smaller, rural states relevant, forcing candidates and parties to campaign nationally rather than just a few swing states with a disparate amount of leverage for their size, and approximate the national popular vote.
trollslayer · 46-50, M
@dancingtongue i thin the second idea is much more feasible, but i doubt many states would do that unless all did that. A red dominated state is not likely to give up 1/3 of it’s EC votes to democrats unless. Blue dominated state is willing to do the same. And if all states did it, the EC vote would be more reflective of the Popular vote, and the GOP would never go for that.
spjennifer · 61-69, T
The 3 different Parties was already in process when the Repugs took tRump as their "Dear Leader". The Tea Party loons were already in the process of splitting from the GOP, then they made a deal with tRump to keep the Right united under his thumb. Should he lose yet again this time, I fully suspect the schism to happen for real this time and then the Establishment Republicans will have a lot of work to do rebuilding before they're ever Elected again, if ever and the Tea Party can yell and scream all they want, on their own.
The "Electoral College" is an ideology from a bygone era and should be abolished, screw the "Electors" (And the cheating the Republicans tried to use them for) and let the People have their voice! We live in a fascinating era of technology so why aren't we using Iris scans for everyone as an ID to vote?
wildbill83 · 36-40, M
Democrats would slowly move left instead of the constant shift to the right they’ve undergone for the last three decades.

not sure what rock you've been sleeping under, but democrats have moved so left in recent decades, that people who were once considered moderates/independents, are now considered far right by the democrats...
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@wildbill83 The rock of actual reality
wildbill83 · 36-40, M
@PalteseMalconFunch says the new person that doesn't even know what gender it is...

pretty sure your time here will be brief...🤔
wildbill83 · 36-40, M
@PalteseMalconFunch Lets ask RFK Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, or the dozens of other lifelong democrats that have switched parties recently... 🤔
TexChik · F
Libs can't win a fair election. Hence, they want to abolish the Electoral College and create a system where the blue states decide the president for the rest of the country. No thanks.
trollslayer · 46-50, M
Unfortunately, the EC is at the very core of the Constitution and changing means re-thinking the entire government. The main philosophy 250 years ago was United States - separate states with a united central government. Therefore, it is the states who decide who will represent them in the federal government, not the population as a whole. You don’t vote for president; you vote for electors who represent your state and make the decision for your state.

This is why I have a hard time with the scotus telling colorado they have to keep Trump on the ballot. States have the exclusive right to determine how their electors are chosen, and colorado decided their law did not allow for electors to vote for Trump. But the SCOTUS ruling throws all that under the bus because it allows the federal government to now dictate who the states can choose for electors.
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@trollslayer It does. But I just don’t care. The thoughts of people two centuries ago have little bearing on how I view the world. If our system is insufficient to change then our system is useless.
trollslayer · 46-50, M
@PalteseMalconFunch the last 8 years have shown me how much potential there is for corruption in the EC. A popular vote for president is much harder to corrupt.
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@trollslayer It would gerrymandering harder, at least in some small ways. The simple truth is the more voices are heard the better things will be in the long term.
jehova · 31-35, M
Also slavery no longer exists (in America) so its entirely invalid just more beaurocracy to waste time money and effort.
jehova · 31-35, M
@PalteseMalconFunch accurately i might add
jehova · 31-35, M
@PalteseMalconFunch also criticism is not making fun of its constructive not 'demeaning'.
exchrist · 31-35
@PalteseMalconFunch do you mean the quintessence of America?
easterniowegin · 51-55, M
Too many ppl don't seem to understand the idea of a union of sovereign states. The only way this works is if the smaller states have some form of power within the structure. What reason would most states have to participate within a union of states if everything could be dictated by one or two states?
jehova · 31-35, M
@easterniowegin we agree the math doesnt support that. Also what incentive do the people have to participate at all if their vote is waited to be less than 1.
Ex.
those states only account for a total of 17% of the country's total population
population 19.57 million (NYS) + 39,128,162 (California) = 58,698,162 ÷ 345,426,571 (us population total 2024)= .1699294928 of the us. Population. Thus its a bs rationale.
Heartlander · 80-89, M
It would be seen as an attempt to strip some states of their power and might tempt them and others to break from the union.
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@Heartlander It would. But oh well. Not my problem. 🤷🏻‍♀
Rolexeo · 26-30, M
@PalteseMalconFunch Electoral college is here to stay so it is your problem lol
It would be far more democratic.

And the Republican party would basically become irrelevant.

You are right it might not lead to a single party rule but in other countries with a similar system other parties would actually have a fairer shake.

I think the Democrats might actually move more left because their base would actually matter.

Getting rid of first past the post too would be far better.
@PalteseMalconFunch I agree. And the reason I say the GOP specifically would die is because the electoral college is the only way a party can lose the popular vote for 20 years without consequences.
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow It would mellow. What we currently have would cease to exist.
@PalteseMalconFunch It would not be around. It would be like the Whig Party.


No party brand can lose elections for 20 years without an artificial mechanism to keep it afloat.

I don't know for sure if they would be more mellow though except maybe on some religious stuff.

Then again mellow by my Canadian standard vs US standard are kind of different starting points.

I mean Obama was to the right of Stephen Harper who was our most right wing PM in decades.
jehova · 31-35, M
not true those states only account for a total of 17% of the countty's total population
population 19.57 million (NYS) + 39,128,162 (California) = 58,698,162 ÷ 345,426,571 (us population total 2024)= .1699294928 of the us. Population. Thus thats a bs rationale.
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@jehova Yes that’s what I said originally? Like literally that’s what this post is about? What?
jehova · 31-35, M
@PalteseMalconFunch ok cool i ran the math to confirm. It checks out! 100%agree!
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Just remember, the world is on an endless march towards progress.
Progress? Where? To what end? The complete collapse of society?
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@Bellatrix2024 Depends. What do you think a non-collapsed society looks like?
allygator18 · 22-25, F
What about tthe Electoral College basketball team nicknamed the Votes.
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
Well those two statements arent exclusive. While the Republicans may never hold power again, room emerges for a new non rural party to fill that void and take Cenerist ground from the Democrats. 😷
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@whowasthatmaskedman They can rename themselves sure. But the point is it will reduce the extremity of right wing political parties, whatever they call themselves
@whowasthatmaskedman
While the Republicans may never hold power again
So I guess Donald Trump was correct when he warned us that if people didn't vote for him, this might be the last election ever to be held, because your dreams of the emergence of a "new non-rural party" to fill some kind of void, just isn't going to happen, and we both know it.
And why would anyone wish for yet another party that just doesn't care about rural voters?
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@Bellatrix2024 I can only report what happening in my country, without an electoral college. The Rural party shrank and formed a coalition with the conservatives. They stand together, representing big business and the rural interests, by negotiation, against the more left leaning party..
As for the earlier part regarding Trump. He is a perculiarly America phenomenon. Almost any place else he would be a joke. But the real issue is then people from the Federalist Society now. They are ready this time and if Trump gets within a bulls roar of a win they will tie the whole thing up in court and paralyse the process until they can take over or muddy the waters so badly a new election needs to be called. All the while the nation is taking on water and settling by the bow..😷
jehova · 31-35, M
Spot on something needs to change.
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@jehova It does. It won’t. But I don’t need another reason to think of the US as another failed experiment that will inform future generations.
jackson55 · M
Get rid of the EC, then California and New York would call the shots.
jehova · 31-35, M
@jackson55 not true those states only account for a total of 17% of the countries total population
population.19.57 million (NYS) + 39,128,162 (California) = 58,698,162 ÷ 345,426,571(us population total 2024)= .1699294928 of the us. Population. Thus thats a bs rationale.
jehova · 31-35, M
@PalteseMalconFunch anyway thanks i needed to do the math.
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@jehova what does that have to do with anything? One person, one vote. There is nothing beyond that. If you can’t win in that system then you deserve to lose.
wildbill83 · 36-40, M
or we could just buy some land from Canada (somewhere in northern Canada will suffice...), stick all the marxists and people who wanna do away with EC there, and let them start their own country... 🤔
MoveAlong · 70-79, M
It would force the candidates pander to every state instead of the usual 6-8 they pander to now.
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@MoveAlong Yea I might actually have a voice then. I could do with at least some pandering.
What would actually happen is the Republican Party would become more moderate in an attempt to cultivate more voters.
No, that wouldn't happen, because they're already far too moderate.
PalteseMalconFunch · 36-40, TNew
@Bellatrix2024 Wait, you think the US Republican Party is already far too moderate?? 🤣
trollslayer · 46-50, M
The real problem is we have given the presidency too much power and importance.
HobNoblin · 36-40, M
We need electoral colleges at the state level as well.
Convivial · 26-30, F
And well said

 
Post Comment