BF2S Forums Electoral College has Cancer

There goes jonsimon with his petty bickering again. I almost feel empty inside when I don't see it.

Anyway, I completely agree with the OP. Good post.

ATG wrote:

If you didn't know, it was devised so that large cities with big populations would not have a monopoly on power.

Isn't this devaluing the votes of the individuals in the large cities? It's nice that the little people get a voice, but I can't support a system that wants to put the wishes of the few above the wishes of the many. If the majority of the population lives in big cities, then it's appropriate that the votes of big cities will have more sway in elections. If small towns feel like their voices aren't being heard, there's an easy solution to this: vote. Besides, who's to say that people in big cities and small towns will necessarily vote differently anyway?

it's a good thing people dont vote, or else they might get what they want.

For the presidential elections, first-past-the-post with the electoral college makes a bit of sense.  States with large cities may want to consider splitting the electoral votes though, maybe everyone for that matter.

For representation though, there's other systems that I think would make American politics a bit more interesting.  I hate the "two party" system with a passion.  Its really like turning the darkening knob on your toaster when you vote, you have the choice between "slightly toasted" Democrats and "burned crispy" Republicans, either way you still voted for toast only.  Middle-right and a little further-right.

Instead, let people vote for their favorite 3 parties in order.  Let the parties police themselves with which members they put up to represent.  People will get a more consistent representation this way.  You vote Libertarian, you will always get libertarian values, you vote Republican, you will get Republican values, etc.  If the rep steps out of line with the party message, he gets replaced quickly without an act of God.  If an individual wants to step away from the party line, he forms his own party with a clearly laid-out platform and runs this way.  I won't even get started on campaign finance reform.

Basic flaws in the current American system:
1)  Inconsistent values with individuals - People can say whatever party they feel like, and then do anything they want when in office even if counter to party values.  You often don't get what you think you're voting for.  Take voting Democrat - is it a Socialist Democrat?  Green Democrat?  Civil Libertarian? Southern Democrat?  Or Republican - are they a Christian Fundamentalist?  Pro-Nationalist Authoritarian?  Neo-conservative?  Market Libertarian?  Small-government Conservative? Any given candidate can change stance like underwear, leaving voters often confused.

2) Rich man's puppets - Candidates are bought and sold and controlled by those with money and influence, ensuring that any given candidate rarely has the voters' best interests at heart on all but the most meaningless issues.

3) Possibility for One-Party Rule - With only two parties and the ablity to gerrymander districts, only manipulating up to 51% of the voter base is necessary to have a dangerous one-party rule.  This was Rove and Co's winning strategery for 6 years and can quickly turn any country into a mess.  Checks and balances means someone is always watching someone else, when you have only rubberstampers things get ugly fast.

4) Low Voter Turnout - This isn't really the fault of the laws and regs, but with only two parties that are actually quite close together, voters don't have a feeling that their interests are really represented and most people couldn't give a damn about politics.  It is proveable that voter participation is highest in countries with the most diverse political spectrum (compare Israel to Germany to Britain to the US).  More parties, more interests represented, more voter turn-out, truer democracy.

There are solutions for each of these, but those currently in power benefit way too much from the status quo so don't look for any fixes real soon.

Last edited by GorillaTicTacs (2007-05-16 23:52:44)

I believe 1 vote should be 1 vote should be 1 vote.  A majority of votes should elect a candidate.  When you say it is removing the power from big city dwellers isn't it returning that power to those who live in small states?  Why do they deserve that power?