|
Post by Nord Ronnoc on Nov 6, 2012 1:39:20 GMT 1
On PBS, there's a documentary called Electoral Dysfunction that does an excellent job of explaining the Electoral College, the pros and cons of it, voting rights, Voter ID laws, and the process of voting. It doesn't show any bias. However, at the end of the documentary, it puts the Republicans in Indiana om a bad light. In fact, not long after the Constitution was ratified, we didn't have any voting rights until more amendments were passed and ratified over the years. Also, former President Richard Nixon advocated for an act that basically combines the Electoral College with the popular vote, known as the Popular Vote Initiative, and as of this post, it's close to being passed, which should be ratified by 2016. It is a bipartisan movement supported by liberals, conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, independents, etc. You guys should watch it when you get the chance. Here are a few links: electoraldysfunction.org/about/www.nationalpopularvote.com/
|
|
|
Post by Cali on Nov 6, 2012 2:42:23 GMT 1
Don't places like France, Germany, Ukraine, and pretty much everywhere in Europe. Except the United Kingdom. Also, the US has a similar issue obviously. As far as the UK goes, I think John Cleese hosted a PSA about it. Gonna see if I can dig it up sometime.
|
|
|
Post by Nord Ronnoc on Nov 6, 2012 3:06:29 GMT 1
That would be interesting to see, Cali. I hope I would enjoy it.
|
|
|
Post by Clint Johnston on Nov 6, 2012 8:36:00 GMT 1
The electoral college is a relic of classism. The founding fathers didn't want some popular peasant getting in (which is exactly what happened when Jackson showed up), so they set it up so that they and the better class would have the final vote for President. Meaning that the legislature would choose the electors and the legislators would be white property owning males They would pick the best of their cadre, and those "best" would be given the popular vote results and left to cast their ballots.
Now all it is a way to narrow down campaigning locations.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Nov 6, 2012 11:52:35 GMT 1
The way it is set up right now seems to invalidate the opinions of a large contingent of voters. The whole red state blue state thing where these places would elect a dog if it was wearing the right colour tie guarantees that only the votes in swing states matter.
*shrugs* pretty stupid if you ask me.
Anyway, my rant on this subject has a lot more to do with campaign financing. A US federal election is a three ring circus on a scale to make PT Barnum sweat with jealousy. There is so much under the table financing running these things that I find it impossible that the candidates are not beholden to massive lobby interests. You can't spend the combined GDP of the continent of Africa on your election and call yourself your own man. It's impossible.
I also find it beyond madness that the PotUS has time spend an entire year on re-election every 4 years. job can't be that important if you can leave it for a 10 month stretch to run for office.
Up here the election is 6 weeks. That's it. We dissolve Parliament so no one gets to show off and they have 6 weeks to make their case, then we vote.
I think the year long electioneering is just to pander and show off to the press. It's wasteful. I see all this money getting flushed to people who make their living doing what? Making turds look polished. I actually think elections are now the US's biggest industry. And it produces nothing but shiny turds.
/rant.
|
|