It's always been a compromise. Right from the beginning in 1787, the Congress created it because neither alternative--popular vote or some other representative scheme--seemed right and fair. So the founders found an alternative, a gizmo they called "the Electoral College." If you don't trust the people--"what do they know, really?"--and, like nothing else, you want to avoid a king or monarch, an autocrat, then maybe it would be best to put the whole messy business of voting--yes, voting--in the hands of really responsible people and call it a college or something dignified like that, an electoral college.
Perfect.
Not.
The thing is, the number of electors has been, right from the start, based on the number of representatives each state sends to Congress, which means, of course, that the numbers are horribly skewed in favor of Iowa, South Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, those states with very limited populations. If it was a sovereign nation, California (which is full of immigrants from those very states, of course) has the fourth largest economy in the world. Yet, in the all-important Senate of the United States, California gets just two "senators," same as Wyoming, where there are fewer citizens in the whole state than there are on some New York City blocks. If you're from lots-of-people place, you have ever right to scream "unfair."
Among the results of this system is whacky tallying. Biden beat Trump by 7,000,000 votes this year, nation-wide. The 2020 election--let's be clear--was no squeaker. What's more the votes in the Electoral College--if all goes according to plan (don't count on it), was just as heavy laden for VP Biden. For the record, the Democrat should, today, get 306 votes, to the present President's 232. That's not a whisker. Trump got thumped (there's a t-shirt for you--just don't wear it in Sioux County, Iowa).
BUT, Trump, who has proven himself to be unlike any other candidate in the history of these United States, has simply refused to believe that he actually lost. He did--even the Supremes said so (his Supremes, by the way) and did so twice! They're just stupid or scared, says the man with the mouth.
He's lying and all but the most blind and faithful--the holy fools--know it.
So, who knows what'll happen today, when this odd bunch of duly appointed (by the states) get together and cast their votes? Everybody knows what is supposed to happen, but what will happen is anybody's guess when one of the two candidates, the out-sized one, could care less about tradition, honor, and truth--remember the record-breaking size of his "biggest ever" inauguration crowd?
After today, it should be over. Should be.
But no one thinks it will.
(to be continued, I'm sure)
The Electoral college must be in place. Is it completely fair?..... No, but it is very necessary. You can not have the cities dictating policy for states where it makes no sense. The cities want everything from the bread basket, but have zero idea how to set policy or laws for these states. Less government involved with our daily lives is what makes America great. If you look at California you can see how a government that is one sided can run amok. They enact every law that comes across their desk. This would be very bad for smaller states and the electoral college must exist to protect all the states from this terrible type of governing.
ReplyDeleteYeah, government bad.
ReplyDeleteSocial Security
Medicare
Interstate highways
Public services
Government bad.
"This is Sparta."
ReplyDeleteAs Trump quoted in 2016:
First they ignore you,
then they laugh at you,
then they fight you,
then you win.
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” — (Hamlet, I.5)
thanks,
Jerry
A president is elected in two ways: one by direct vote...which includes any yahoo that has a residency in a given place, or some facsimile of that; not that it is wrong, but popular vote tends to lean toward an urban culture where few know how to survive without anyone else- creates a "dependency culture" that requires heavy government involvement...this was so in 1776, and it is now.
ReplyDeleteThe second way is by States, which include both the dependent and the fiercely independent...also called "backward, obstinate, and anal retentive" by the media and urban folks; now this compromise was made so there would be a balance because even in the more urbanized states there is a bunch of the "other folks" live...just look at the maps by how the counties in each state voted.
So the State- all of the people together as an identity vote together. Now this does help the less populated states a bit at times- but without it there is no voice that is equalized the "maddening crowd" whether liberal or conservative, but still the outcome of this election has shown that sometimes the urban flavor subjugates the rural crowd, and of course as in the election 4 years ago it was the other case...hence the last 4 years of whining by the media which tends to go where the money is greater.
So keep the electoral college and allow a rather ingenious arrangement that has lasted the test of time, and will right itself if it is wrong...just look at the last 46 elections:-)