Is it time to get rid of The Electorial system of voting for Presidents???

Are you satisfy with the current way The United States of America votes for a President--or would you be willing to give a popular vote system a try?

Let's be honest, if something gets old and lives beyond its usefulness--you get rid of it--right?  I would venture to say that everybody who is reading this has at least one cell phone--or a push button land phone--but absolutely none of you is currently using a rotary phone--right?  And if you are still currently using a rotary phone, well God bless you.


Ever since some geometrical genius invented something called a wheel, mankind have adapted to the changes, (And often challenges), of new technology.  We have some incredible sewer systems the world over thanks to the inventive minds of the ancient Greeks.  However--could u imagine what the world would be like if nobody came up with the next stage of the sewer system--and so on..to arrive to the type of sewer systems we have now?  Can you imagine what marine travels would be like today--if some guy name Robert Fulton didn't invent a steam boat??  But where are those steamboats now??  Being used in Mariner's Museums all over the world. 


The Pony Express became the U.S Post office.  Now the majority of mails are being delivered by email--causing the Post Offices to be slowly but surely dying.  I guarantee you there is not one of you who have ever driven a model T, let alone--ever even seen one unless you have gone to a museum that includes technology history.  And I am pretty sure that those of you who are in possession of one--will make sure you have your cell phone on you before you leave your house to go where ever you are going.  Just think about trying that with a rotary phone!


So why am I doing all this history talk?  Because I am just wondering what do you think of making the current process of how we vote for a President--namely the Electoral vote--history?  This system has been around since 1787--(that is 225 years for those of you who wanted more specific details!).  It was invented during The Constitutional Convention that took place in Philadelphia from May to September of that year.  At the time--The United States was just barely into its toddler stage.  It still had its original 13 Colonies--and no other States had of yet been added.  It was a convenient system for these people simply because they did not have the technology necessary to count all of the votes across each of the states--and in some case like mountainous New Hampshire-regions, of the States at that current time.  The United States did not have any Presidents, and all of the States were just barely learning how to self govern themselves.


But here we are--225 years later, 37 more States added...with a high probability of adding Puerto Rico as a 51st State--with technology that can let us talk to astronauts flying to Krypton--(Well OK--maybe not Krypton--but you get the point), and we are still using a system that was set up by men who had to use a feathered pen to write down the rules of the electoral voting system??   Don't you think it is time to update this outdated process--and go with the popular votes instead??? 


No--I am not asking this because I am bummed that Obama won.   Clearly if we would have a popular votes system, Obama would have still won by somewhere between  a million and a bazillion votes depending on which liberal media you read.  I have actually been asking this very same question ever since the fiasco that happened in the 2000 election.  I am asking because there are States that seem to have power with the elections--and those that apparently don't mean much to anybody.  When you got a situation where nearly half of The New England States electoral numbers are needed to even match the 55 electoral California has, a state that didn't even become a state until 1850 by the way--there have to be a serious problem with this system.  Would you not agree?  Or....are you someone who maintains that the Electoral System of voting is something that makes the United States unique in international standards, and the American tradition should continue as is?

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Patrick Herring November 14, 2012 at 08:25 PM
Like everything else in this country, this system was kept and maintained to ensure that the small states have their says and get their moments in the spot light. In the perfect world, every vote carries the same weight. But this would not be cool for someone in Iowa, Wisconsin, or New Hampshire. If there is no electoral college, the presidential candidates will not set foot in the small states, instead spending their time in the populous states of California, Texas, Pennsylvania and the like. So... it is not perfect but this system will be around for years to come.........
Zak Leavy November 14, 2012 at 11:08 PM
Thomas, I do agree that the electoral college is antiquated. However, going to just a popular vote method is not going to get minority party representation. In fact two of the "minority party" candidates this year, Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, both tried to be the Republican candidate. But, our electoral system is a winner-take-all single member district voting type. That means that whoever wins the most votes gets the seat (house of reps, Senate, and President). Other countries get multi-party representation by having proportional representation. That's when seats are given out according to vote share in that district. However, those countries always end up having parties for alliances and basically reverting back to a two-party system anyway.
Zak Leavy November 14, 2012 at 11:13 PM
But, in short, for Presidential candidates in most countries it's decided by overall vote totals. Minority party representation can really only be achieved in the legislative branch or if we changed out government to a parliamentary style with a prime minister.
Spencer November 15, 2012 at 03:29 AM
Zak--A Popular vote system would not allow for CNN to proclain Romney the winner of FL--3.7 seconds after the polls close and only 1.5 percent of the votes in Walt Disney county counted. A popular vote system would give equal rights to alll canidates--since all canidates would have to gain popularity through the media. A popular voting system would allow for each voters to be counted one by one---and those one by one--would be people who are still alive--not people who got killed being runned over by a kid playing with a matchbox car back in 1977--and yet somehow that person was able to register to vote in 2007!!! Individulism would be represented. Not CNN looking for the swing states to swing in!!!!!
Zak Leavy November 15, 2012 at 12:55 PM
How would minority parties get the money to compete with the two major parties? How would they poll high enough or get enough vote share to be in the debates? A popular vote system does not mean that minor parties would get more votes. Also, Ross Perot was a minor party candidate in 1992 and got about 19% and that was with the electoral college. Teddy Roosevelt was a minor party candidate for the bull moose party, or progressive depending on what name you choose, and got 27 % of the vote in 1912. There is a political theory that explains why minor parties don't win in the type of electoral system, not the electoral college but the winner take all form. It's called Duverge's Law. It breaks down the psychological and mechanical reasons why minor party candidates don't win. Essentially it's because there aren't enough minor party members to win an election (mechanical). So people don't want to vote for a losing candidate and throw their vote away so they vote for the party that is closest to their ideological beliefs (psychological).


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »