[Vision2020] Why Was the Electoral College Created?

[Tom Hansen]

There is no uniformity among the states regarding the electoral college.
Some states break down their electoral votes and award them to candidates based on percentage of popular votes won.

Then there are other states (like Idaho) that award ALL their electoral votes to the candidate who received the majority of the popular vote . . . keeping in mind that “majority” is simply a matter of “50% + 1”.  For example, if one of these states has 10,001 registered voters and 25 electoral votes, and a candidate receives 5,001 popular votes (a majority), that candidate receives all 25 electoral votes . . . kinda destroys any value of a vote cast by a Democrat in Idaho at presidential elections, huh?

Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .

"Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
http://www.MoscowCares.com
  
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho


>> On Jan 9, 2020, at 3:03 PM, Scott Dredge <sdredge408 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There's nothing mysterious about the Electoral College.  Both parties are well aware of how the system works and the math involved to achieve "270 to win".  If the Democrats can't figure out how to appeal to voters in the rust belt and key swing states, they won't be winning back the White House any time soon.
> 
>> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 12:13 PM Moscow Cares <moscowcares at moscow.com> wrote:
>> I seriously believe that “WE THE PEOPLE” have outlived the necessity of the electoral college.
>> 
>> Of course, there are some people who disagree with me.  Ain’t that right, President Trump?
>> 
>> Courtesy of History at:
>> 
>> https://www.history.com/news/electoral-college-founding-fathers-constitutional-convention
>> 
>> ———————————————
>> 
>> <image.jpg>
>> 
>> Five times in history, presidential candidates have won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College. This has led some to question why Americans use this system to elect their presidents in the first place.
>>  
>> Among the many thorny questions debated by the delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, one of the hardest to resolve was how to elect the president. The Founding Fathers debated for months, with some arguing that Congress should pick the president and others insistent on a democratic popular vote.
>>  
>> Their compromise is known as the Electoral College.
>>  
>> The system calls for the creation, every four years, of a temporary group of electors equal to the total number of representatives in Congress. Technically, it is these electors, and not the American people, who vote for the president. In modern elections, the first candidate to get 270 of the 538 total electoral votes wins the White House.
>>  
>> The Electoral College was never intended to be the “perfect” system for picking the president, says George Edwards III, emeritus political science professor at Texas A&M University.
>>  
>> “It wasn’t like the Founders said, ‘Hey, what a great idea! This is the preferred way to select the chief executive, period,’” says Edwards. “They were tired, impatient, frustrated. They cobbled together this plan because they couldn’t agree on anything else.”
>>  
>> At the time of the Philadelphia convention, no other country in the world directly elected its chief executive, so the delegates were wading into uncharted territory. Further complicating the task was a deep-rooted distrust of executive power. After all, the fledgling nation had just fought its way out from under a tyrannical king and overreaching colonial governors. They didn’t want another despot on their hands.
>>  
>> One group of delegates felt strongly that Congress shouldn’t have anything to do with picking the president. Too much opportunity for chummy corruption between the executive and legislative branches.
>>  
>> Another camp was dead set against letting the people elect the president by a straight popular vote. First, they thought 18th-century voters lacked the resources to be fully informed about the candidates, especially in rural outposts. Second, they feared a headstrong “democratic mob” steering the country astray. And third, a populist president appealing directly to the people could command dangerous amounts of power.
>>  
>> Out of those drawn-out debates came a compromise based on the idea of electoral intermediaries. These intermediaries wouldn’t be picked by Congress or elected by the people. Instead, the states would each appoint independent “electors” who would cast the actual ballots for the presidency.
>> 
>> ———————————————
>> 
>> Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .
>> 
>> "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
>> http://www.MoscowCares.com
>>   
>> Tom Hansen
>> Moscow, Idaho
>> 
>> =======================================================
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>                http://www.fsr.net
>>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20200109/19026c2a/attachment.html>