User login
Navigation
Syndicate
Electoral Vote, could someone explain that?
This is the first US election that I've paid close attention to. Or should I say *this* close attention to. The fall-out and snowball effect of US politics very much impacts my life in any number of ways. So much so, I'm beginning to think I should get to vote for your leader as well. Just kidding of course, I don't want to be sounding like a helpless victim here.
It's been an interesting presidential race to watch. I do not understand the Electoral vote. How does that work and why? Up north here we vote and the guy with the most votes wins. Somehow the fact that a guy can have the majority of the popular vote and still lose the election seems ...well...it does *not* scream democracy to me.
I risk sounding like a dummy, but politics is something I've just started trying to figure out. I've never thought too deeply or broadly about it before.
I do not post this to have a big political debate. I was just hoping there was a short and sweet answer to the "electoral vote". What is it and why?
Comments
I'm not sure that any of us U
I'm not sure that any of us U.S. citizens understand the electoral college any better than you do, Hope
I have often wondered why we still use it. I believe that in the beginning, the electoral college was created with the idea in mind that many people would have a hard time getting information about candidates for President. If there were several candidates, none would get a majority of the popular vote, thereby making for a difficult administration. I, personally, think the electoral college is outdated, but I am not an expert on the subject. Here is a link to a site that gives a history as well as some pros and cons on the subject.
Lauralyn
I understand it
Here you go:
http://www.howstuffworks.com/electoral-college.htm
one argument for keeping the electoral college
...is that, if we had a straight popular vote, presidents would only focus on the problems of California and New York (the most populous states) and happily let everyone else go right down the drain. Whether you agree with that is up to you. It is so rare that someone loses the popular vote and wins the electoral college-- Bush vs. Gore was only the second or third time-- that it usually does not matter much. The US should not "scream democracy" because it is not a democracy. It is a republic. Maybe it should become a democracy, but that's not what it is now.
an opinion piece
You might find this interesting.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10803-2004Oct29.html
In case you don't know, the US Congress, which is the legislative branch of gov't, has two houses, the Senate (2 Senators for each state) and the House of Representatives (Representatives are allocated by the population of each state, and are usually called Congressmen/women). Each state gets the same number of electoral votes as it has Reps + Senators, except that the District of Columbia has no representatives or senators while still having 3 electoral votes. You probably knew some of that but not all.
another thing . . .
Keep in mind that when the United States formed they were very much that -- united *states.* The individual states had a much stronger individual identity, and there was a great deal of debate about how much power the federal government should have. (Not that the debate has ended . . .) Just as we have our famous Federalist Papers, there are the famous Anti-Federalist Papers, which stake out a very strong states' right position.
It's not a great analogy, but imagine the individual nations of the European Union today and their strong sense of individual identity. In some ways the first states of the U.S. were also imagined as individual republics loosely bound together. So as they tried to imagine a way of selecting the head of the commonwealth, it made sense to think in terms of each state having a distinct voice.
I wish that were still true! As the national parties have become increasingly involved in local races -- and of course, as a result of increased mobility, techology, etc. -- those individual identities have been very muted. But that's another subject entirely.
Shaun
Thanx for the info and the li
Thanx for the info and the links . I have not checked out the links yet but will do so when I get back home from holidays. Because I'm just plain old nosey
.
And "I WANT TO VOTE TOO" !!!. Whine!!
well, there's a way to do that!
All you have to do is move to the US, stick around for a few years, go through some red tape and pass a citizenship test.
The world is watching
About wanting to vote, Hope, there were several websites up this year where non-US citizens could "vote" for Bush or Kerry. The main point of which was to try to clue the average US citizen into the fact that the whole planet cares about and is affected by what happens in the 2004 election. Heard about them on the radio, haven't gone to the sites, though.
Someone above explained how the number of each state's electoral votes are determined. But I don't think it was made clear that the electoral college is actually made up of real people--the electoral votes are determined by Electors, i.e., real people who are appointed to cast the electoral votes for each state. The electors for each state usually cast their votes for the candidate who wins the popular vote in their state, however, they do not HAVE to.
This is an excellent site explaining why the "Founding Fathers" dreamt up this system: A Brief History of the Electoral College.
______
May The Hair On Your Toes Never Fall Out
--Traditional Hobbit Blessing
To be completely honest...
I prefer it the other way 'round:
http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=38493f63-...
Too bad these are mainly "empty threats."
Whoever wins, I pledge here not to whine about the results like these goobers. God bless the good ol' USA, land that I love (no matter who's CIC).
Pierre Salinger
My mom was good friends with Pierre Salinger, who really did leave the country after the 2000 election was finally decided. (He had a solid extra reason though-- his then-wife, now-widow, is French and they moved to her hometown. So they were near her family.) He's the only person on record as having made good on that statement.
BTW I'm mentioned by name in Pierre Salinger's memoire. But only in one sentence, and that is a story for another thread.
Well If Kerry's elected....
I won't be moving anywhere
I Love my country no matter who's president.
I do have lots of nervous energy today though, I played a little trick on JennyE this morning. Have spent way to much time in political chat rooms today. BAD FLYBABY!
Off topic, Becky do start another thread, I'm intrigued.
trick
That was a way mean trick, jamielea!!!
Oh Becky, don't tease!
Really, I've got to hear more!
S'no secret who I support this election, but over the last few years I've really learned how much good citizenship is not about voting, but about being active in your community and taking care it. That's where lives are improved and hearts and minds are moved. So you gotta keep your perspective about these elections.
That said, sometimes I get so disheartened by partisan politics that I'd leave the country too -- if I thought there were a better one. For so many reasons, this is the place for me. (No offense to non-Americans, of course! Remember, I didn't say other countries are worse, just not better.)
Shaun
Shaun, go look in journals, very neat
Jenny, LOL!!!!!!!
threats
I guess I should admit that I made the threat to move to Texas if Kerry was elected. But it was because of this website here:
http://goldengirls03.org/Texas_Future.htm
hehehehe! Luckily, I don't have to now. Wonder if I could have talked the Texans to expand the state line just 40 miles to the west?
Funny Jenny
If Texas agrees, I'm sure they would have gone 80 miles north too!
"It's nice to be important, but it is more important to be nice."
AnneP.
Texas/New Mexico
Heck, why don't they just take all of New Mexico, or at least to the Rio Grande? That would include both of us.
PS, Anne, we have got to get together one of these days!!! Wouldn't that be fun!?
Secession
The American web traffic to Canada's Immigration site jumped dramatically after Tuesday's election. I think it might be easier if the blue states seceded to Canada. California, of course, would hook up with Mexico instead.
Note tongue planted firmly in cheek.
Coffee Crisp and Universal Health Care all around!
Rose
Technically...
The United States is a "democratic republic."
A "republic" is a nation who's leader is not a monarch and whose government consists of representatives and officers who (in theory) represent the interests of the citizens.
A "democratic republic" is a form of government whereby these offices, representatives, and leaders are elected "by the people".
______
May The Hair On Your Toes Never Fall Out
--Traditional Hobbit Blessing
Regarding paragraph one
You see, there's this little thing called "national sovereignty"...
"goobers?"
Proverbs 15:1
Ephesians 4:32
You see...
there's a little thing called "double standard". We claim sovereignty for ourselves so fiercely that our government won't sign any of the global human rights, environmental, nuclear, chemical weapons, or other bans/treaties that are in the best interests of our country and planet. But our goverment has no respect for the national sovereignty of other nations, especially if they're not particularly "white". Oh, yes, the racist underpinnings of our foreign policy are pretty apparent to the rest of the planet. We like to topple their governments in secret or not-so-secret wars and to replace thier leaders with warlords, dictators, and/or CIA agents.
Since WWII, the US has bombed twenty three nations. These small or large scale military actions were, in most cases, blatant forms of interventions--i.e. interfering in the sovereignty of another nation.
Korea, Indonesia, Vietnam, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan--all of the carnage in these countries before 2001 was caused by U.S. interference in order to destroy the basic rights and capacity of those peoples to construct their own independent, sovereign society. This doesn't even touch the mess in Central and South America or Africa that we caused by propping up dictatorships, etc.
We have a long, secret history of war crimes, my dear. Most other countries conisder America to be the "Satan" of foreign policy. And all for the sacred cause of fighting communism, but fighting communism with armies wasn't actually what ended communism, was it? It was the containment of the Cold War that did it. Darn, too bad we invaded all those countries and killed all those civilians for nothing.
So the countries of this planet that are aligning with the globaization of the world economy and free market mechanics kind of expect sovereignty to be shared nowadays. That, and our policies and politics affect the entire planet, so we have a moral obligation to love our neighbors as ourselves. And everyone is our neighbor.
''As a woman, the current cli
''As a woman, the current climate is becoming intolerable. Bush has just appointed a man to the FDA reproductive health panel who believes that women with medical trouble should pray to Jesus for relief. If this is what America is becoming, I cannot live here. The only reason I can sleep at night is the thought that I can leave the country if he wins.''
This is a non-goober talking? I feel sorry for her, actually.
Anyway, "goober" is pretty lighthearted and mild, compared to "Rethuglican" "Bushitler" and a few other unprintable ones that I came across last night on Democratic Underground. Perhaps they could benefit from your post there. Mind if I copy/paste?
O-kay...
I don’t want to start an OT “thread within a thread” on this one. If time permits, I may start a separate thread at a later, less politically tense time to address it.
For now, suffice it to say that the foreign policy outlined in your post is confirmation that I cast my vote wisely yesterday.
Sincerely,
Susannah
By all means
name calling by anyone is unproductive and un-spiritual. I have to watch myself on this, being human. But I believe in "the law of kindness in the tongue" as guide for everyone.
Two words...
Culture War
It's happening, you and I are on opposite sides of it, we're not going to agree.
I guess...
I think Dinesh D'Souza says it better than I ever could, anyway.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/06/29/IN290713.DTL
Sorry
Keep getting an error message and refreshing double posts.
Well,
as I said, we're not going to agree.
There are many excellent things about this country which make me proud. I am a patriot, I love this country, I am the proof that Ann Coulter has got it all wrong--liberals love this country just as much as moderates and conservatives do, and can be just as driven by faith. I own a flag, I am a disciple of Jesus.
But for the last three decades conservatives and neo-cons have tried to dismantle the underpinnings of our government and infrastructure that guarantee the very existence of D'Souza's bullet points on what makes America great.
Loving this country and acknowledging what makes it great doesn't change the fact that there are dire problems in this same great country and that they aren't being taken care of by this administration.
I cannot fully make my case on this point without hijacking this thread any more than I may have already done, and also without disregarding the wishes of the posters at this community--that we not bring the national political debate in here with us.
I'd be happy to make the case, if you're interested in hearing it. Just let me know the most appropriate venue for you.
Peace be with you.
And also with you...
However, I do have a problem with the viewpoint expressed in your post, and I will post it elsewhere.
Post new comment