Is It Time To Abolish The Electoral College?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 20 сер 2024
- Did you know that the U.S. is one of the few democracies in the world that doesn’t elect its president by some form of popular vote?
Every presidential election cycle, the Electoral College comes under scrutiny, and with good reason - it allows a politician to become president without actually winning the popular vote. That’s exactly what happened in 2016 when Trump won the White House, even though Hillary Clinton received 3 million more votes. Many critics fear this could happen again in 2020.
So why is a system, that is inherently unfair because it gives more weight to some states over others, still a thing in American politics?
In this episode of our series, “You vs. The System,” we’ll look at how the Electoral College messes with your vote, the system’s racist history and if it’s time to get rid of the Electoral College once and for all.
#ElectoralCollege #SwingStates #Election2020
Subscribe for more videos: ajplus.co/subs...
Sign up for subtext, our newsletter about the people and movements driving change in our society: ajplus.co/ekdv4
Follow us on Instagram: / ajplus
Like us on Facebook: / ajplusenglish
Follow us on Twitter: / ajplus
Sign up for subtext, our newsletter about the people and movements driving change in our society: ajplus.co/g6euk
Republicans would never want to get rid of it. Thanks to it, It was the only way we got our last 2 Republican presidents.
They need whatever edge to help them cheat. If it aint voter suppression, Its Gerrymandering!
@N FLmao I don't? That's funny considering you're using something out of context to twist your narrative.
For starters, We are a Federal Constitutional Republic where the Constitution was written for the ground work for Democracy. Dumb dumb.
As for Biden, Perhaps if you'd stop watching alt right properganda aka Fox News, You would've gotten the whole story that Biden used the phrase “voter fraud organization,” he was referring to the systems put into place to help people who have trouble voting. He wasn’t admitting to voter fraud.
It amazes me how Trump supporters don't bother doing the research yet repeat things that aren't the whole story and sound so poorly uneducated. Yet Trump did say in Nevada that he loves the poorly uneducated.
Which wasn't taken out of context unlike Biden was. 😂
@N F Oh btw, Ppl in big cities, States, etc. Usually vote Democrat is because of people of color mainly black ppl remember very well was conservatives did to the black ppl down south. Plus the Conservative party has been mostly racist and having the KKk, White Supremacist overall proves it. Not to mention when our political parties overall did a complete flip flop due to The Southern Strategy. So thats why big cities vote blue. Bc there are white ppl, Hispanics, Asians that look down on that. Not to mention all the hate gay ppl get from the alt right and why majority vote Democrat as well.
Gerrymandering was created by Elbridge Gerry (Where the name comes from) who signed a bill that created a partisan district in the Boston. Who was a conservative!
So yeah, I know what im talking about and college and studying abroad makes for great education!
@N F Trump said “We won the evangelicals. We won with young. We won with old. We won with highly educated. We won with poorly educated,” and says “I love the poorly educated!”:
Not a damn thing was taken out of context. Maybe you need a dictionary to find out what context means.
And you say you watch the news? 🤣
Its funny af dealing w/you! Try college, Might do you wonders!😂😂😂
Ever since I learned just EXACTLY how the electoral college works when I was a sophomore in H.S., I've ALWAYS been against it. Just so ridiculous
@BP you must be dumb the way we vote is easy to manipulate the elc can vote against there state and just pay a fine and get a slap on the wrist and get to keep working if someone wins like hrc did in 2016 they should win 1 vote =1 point and whoever has the most points win easy unlike the shit show we have now
I don't want New York, and California to determine the President every election. I think I will stick to supporting the electoral college thank you. Throw out the electoral college, and then swing states, and "flyover states" aka rural states like Nebraska become worthless.
@@valeriouscatastros8717 so instead of most populated states deciding president (most citizen voices are heard in this process) you want states which do not have proper voter base for both parties decide president.
@Tom Marker your comment is supposed to be directed at me?
@@valeriouscatastros8717 Except they don't become worthless. The popular vote is the vote of ALL people in general. Under a candidate that most people want, everyone gets the benefits. If you favor the votes of specific people over others, then it's not fair or equal. The president's job is to help ALL Americans, not a few of them.
The Electoral College:
Was made when the United States had less than 3 million people in it 😒...... Now we have 330 million people in this country, so it’s beyond dated 😒🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️
So how did Obama become president and won his re-election?
ua-cam.com/video/JFGhX0hLy6E/v-deo.html | Educate yourself and stop living on the Democratic Plantation
Prager U is funded by far right billionaires, and created to put out propaganda for the right. Just say no to Prager. Also, probably ignore anyone who uses the phrase "democratic plantation." The Republican party chose to go after the white racist vote.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
@@grmpEqweer I listen to different news media. I listen to TYT, Vox, Vice, and this channel. I also listen to conservative media and centrist media. And it’s always the leftist media who are the most biased. I blame the mainstream left media for constantly saying Biden is the only one who beat Trump, I blame TYT for supporting Sanders. It should’ve been Andrew Yang and Gabbard as his VP but nope. When Trump wins, is Centrists and Republicans know you leftists are gonna cry and protest again. So good making the Democrat Party the party of crybabies, sore losers, and hypocrites.
Austin Martín Hernández As you just listen too, it was built to keep White in power 😒🤦🏽♂️..... with minorities slowly becoming the majority, whites are losing power in America, and the elect College is losing its staying power, because it was not built for minorities only whites....🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️....Education is key 🔑 😂...
It would be one thing if we got to vote in our electors. Who are these people and why are they making decisions for us?
no, thats not the problem. im a progressive living in a red state. that means that my vote, and the vote of those like me, doesnt mean jackshit at the end of the day. the electoral college will ALWAYS go to the right in this state.......ALWAYS. if we had a direct election.....like we have for every other public office......my vote would be counted with others that voted the same as i did through out the entire country.....instead of being portioned up like a piece of pie and counted individually by states.
@Tom Marker yes.....thats the point
@Tom Marker thats a "thats the way things work, get used to it" argument. sort of like "slavery is legal, get used to it"; or "yeah, i know it sucks that you women cant vote, but thats the way it is.....get used to it"; or "so you cant vote; we gave you blacks your freedom, it is what it is.....get used to it"
thats the way the constitution was written jackass; that means its a federal issue, not a state one.
@@1369Stiles supposed the roles were reversed. What if Dems always won the electoral college (that isn’t even true for Republicans as 12 out of the last 22 presidents have been Democrats), and Republicans always won the popular vote. Would you still be for abolishing the electoral college? Even if it meant the right always had the White House. According to you guys it’s very evil, so shouldn’t you still be against it if this were the case?
@@stevegoldson67 yes, jackass, i would. why? because the presidential elections are the ONLY elections in this country where a small group of people decide the outcome of said elections as a proxy to hundreds of millions. i want every person in this country to have their vote counted. as stated, i live i a red state. that means that the majority of our local government....including our senators and reps....are going to be republicans. THEY get elected by the people, not by proxies. now, the presidential race is about the entire country, not just states and counties; that means that my vote should count as part of the the entire country. and i say the same about my red brothers and sisters in blue states. their votes dont count for shit there either.
see, i want everyone to have their votes count, not just mine.....or my "side"
also, i want ranked choice voting; that would eliminate both the electoral college and our two party system; AND there is a good chance that my "guy" wouldnt win there as well. however, it would be a better representation of what the PEOPLE want, rather than what a few proxy voters want.
Technically the _first_ vote is when the oligarchs that control both parties decide which two old guys in suits they will _allow_ the rest of the country to vote for as President.
Well said osiris...well said
To be fair, these are the two old guys primary and caucus goers VOTED for!
Get rid of the Electoral College 🤮
Cartier231 Exactly
@BP you talk like bots .. stop
That would make too much sense
Yes, most definitely, because all it does is rig the elections, and not just in Countries in The Americas either.
Contrary to what the expert said, a constitutional amendment is _not_ the only way to circumvent the electoral college - nationalpopularvote.com is working on an interstate compact in which states would award their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. States controlling 196 of the 270 required votes have already signed up. It would only go into effect when member states control a majority of the the electoral votes.
I doubt that one in a million voters could name a single one of the slate of electors they are actually electing when they "vote for president". Bearing in mind that there were often multiple rounds of voting by the electoral college - and as far as I know no elector is bound to a specific candidate beyond the first round of voting - did the founders really intend for people to elect strangers whom they can't even name to vote on their behalf?
The electoral college may not suppress votes but both the RNC and DNC sure do, both through caging efforts like Interstate Crosscheck and manipulation of fraud friendly electronic voting machines. Every election since 2000 involved massive election fraud. Even when Obama won fair and square there were millions of votes that were not counted.
2:30 A bigger issue is the fact that all electoral votes in a state go to the winning candidate, meaning that a candidate who wins by a very small margin can actually gain a lot more votes. This phenomenon happened in 2000 and 2016!
Those were great years
Let's be realistic here though. The odds of the Electoral College being abolished anytime soon is slim to nil.
They'd have to get a 2/3 House, Senate, and State majority (38 states) to agree on it.
@@RB01.10 not to mention there's no way in hell any republican would agree to get rid of the system that allows them any chance to get a president of their party into office
@@Pie_The_Man Exactly
@Zoom ShakaLaka It would require a Constitutional Amendment since the Constitution gives the state legislatures plenary power to select electors as they so choose.
Still wondering what would happen if no one in the country decided to vote
Probably be treated as a tie with the senate appointing the VP and the house appointing prez as per majority
I respect your right to vote for whomever you choose. If you're one of those who are considering not voting at all, someone considering writing in a "protest vote", or if your political sentiment resonates accordingly, then consider voting/writing in Howie Hawkins and Angela Walker for the Green Party of the United States :)
www.gp.org
there will always be the one person that goes against the grain lol
Politicians will vote for themselves
The House of Representatives would select the winner.
Get rid of it
They really should get rid of it.
Let's get rid of the people who want to get rid of it. Also a solution that works. :)
@@hubertcumberdale2651 that's a majority of Americans
No realistic chance anytime soon.
The American electoral college: made by racists for racists.
@@NoName-tz5ji racism is apart of America’s foundation. You can’t talk about America’s history without talking about racism.
@GREGORY WOLFERMAN And yet, it's how incompetent, highly unqualified candidates like Donald Trump get the job. Someone who should never be in charge of hundreds of millions of lives. How do you justify the desires of small states who wanted someone like Donald Trump?
@GREGORY WOLFERMAN this is such a silly comment ... you say more people vote for Democrats. That's because Democrats have policies that appeal to most Americans. If Republicans want to govern, they should have to appeal to more voters and win more votes! But right now, the electoral college means the Republicans dont have to change, they can win even if most Americans don't want them. Oh and small states ALREADY get ignored. Vermont (blue) and Wyoming (red) both get ignored.
@@justinwashington7076 which is still prevalent everywhere in the society...
@GREGORY WOLFERMAN how about the republican disasters like bush and this monster trump who actually got into the office???...the electoral college needs to be abolished and the representation in the senate, needs to be rethought...it has to be proportional with the voting population of each state...
Because it biases the rules in favour of Republicans and thereby the rich and massive corporations.
Yea, because Dems never support massive corporations. You are the perfect Dem voter so happy while Dem Politicians rob you.
Last time I checked, it was the electoral college who picked Obama, a black man, twice. You Democrats are so biased, and too far left, you lost the blue collar vote, some black & Latino voters (which Trump gain more support from them than the previous two Republican candidates). And y’all call Trump a monster for saying he wasn’t gonna accept the election but since you guys love being hypocrites, you crybaby losers rioted. When Obama won twice, no Republicans rioted or protested on the streets. And y’all doing the same again even tho Hillary Clinton told Biden to not conceive when he loses. And you Democrats love to label anyone you disagree with as a Nazi fascist. Good job making those words mean absolutely nothing cause when a real Nazi comes along, people like me and Republicans are not gonna believe a single damn word you gotta say. Good job of making the Democrat Party the party of crybabies, blatant hypocrisy, & sore losers.
@tad562 If the left wing media wasn’t biased for Joe, we could have a much better candidate like Andrew Yang but nope. When Biden loses, enjoy the consequences for listening to the media like the good little sheep that you are. I got a pacifier just in case cause I know you sore loser crybabies are gonna riot and protest on the streets again when Trump wins his re-election.
@tad562 Nobody is taking away SS or MC.
Do realize that nobody is that stupid, not even Joe. Old people vote like MFERS.
@@mexicanrepublican420 Exactly Biden is a pathetic old man who had no real talent even when young.
What a convoluted process ...America doesn't even sound like democracy
Because it’s not? It’s a republic
Please don’t listen to this dumbass left wing bias shit, look this up on your own this is so dumb
@@andrewdillon6871 Not mutually exclusive.
@@willprange3163 If you look it up, this video is absolutely correct. The vote, as a whole, of the entire population means NOTHING. The vote of people in swing states and those of the EC matter more. This is a FACT.
@@rodney2x48 🤦♂️not my point no need even trying to explain it to someone who can’t comprehend the topic
ONE MAN,ONE VOTE!!!
Wrong. ONE MAN, ONE "vote that can be transferred so that we can have multiple parties in power that represents us" :)
One person, one vote.
nah
Sounds fair!
This is one of the reasons why America should stop espousing "freedom". It's clear that Americans aren't truly free. Freedom can be defined in a lot of ways
Its simple freedom means you get to do whatever you want to do with yourself
Super informative! I’ve always been a little confused by the electoral college, it seems completely preposterous.
Don’t ya just love that you get a better understanding about our government from Al-Jazeera then you do any American media company?!?
@@fedexpress14 right?? this country is nuttier than a fruit cake.
Well I thought this was not very informative, then again I am an advocate for the electoral college. We are a collection of states with people living in them who have different ideas on how they wish to live. Getting ride of the electoral college would be disasterous to this country in the long run. If you wish to get rid of the electoral collage then I would ask that we also get rid of state boarders as well as local and state governments and we can just nationalize elections and and centralize all power in D.C. in the hands of a few people.
@@similiustusetpeccator592 well, it wouldn’t be informative to you if you already know about the electoral college in detail, which i did not.
instead of suggesting something preposterous that you probably don’t actually believe, why not make this an interesting discourse and explain why you are an advocate for the electoral college, so i can understand your perspective?
@@repeatdefender6032 Though we all live in the same country we are a collection of states. People have differences on how they wish to live. Therefore in this vast country we have differnt cultures in different areas in the United states. So that people in those states have a more equal vote vs having a pure democtratic vote we have the electoral college. Getting rid of it would me that states like New York and California with population greatly exceeding that of states like Wyoming would have greater say and their population is concentrated in very small areas. The electoral college takes some of that power the bigger states would otherwise have and gives it to states that have less population so that each state is better represented and each culture is better represented. That's why I mentioned what I did above about getting rid of state boarders because making it purely democratic popular vote in a way erases state boarders not fairly representing diverse cultures and differences in opinion in this country. If you look in the past at every time a candiate has won despite the popular vote going to the other person, more states voted for the candidate that won that election. As far as your vote not counting because of the electoral college, is wrong. If you do the math for total cast votes for California in 2016 and divide it by the total number of votes cast nation wide you get roughly 10% if you do the same for California's electoral votes divided by the total nation wide electoral votes you get roughly the same percentage (.1027 vs .1022). The same is true for the rest of the states. I advise you to read the Federalist papers about the electoral college. The reason the founders didn't want a pure democratic vote is because pure democracy's are evil. They were very intellegent and understood by reading past history. The three great greek philosophers hated democracy and Socrates was killed because of it. It will always go from a democracy to despotism. If people who vote in a democracy don't pay attention and educate themselves so they can make good judgements then you will always see tyranny come out of it. People can easily be swayed to one direction or another if they are not careful. You can easily have more than half the population be ignorant and they will stupidly elect these individuals in. One of my favorite quotes from Thomas Jefferson, "Democracy is 51% of the majority voting to take the rights away from the other 49%". So individuals in these type of governments must alway remain vigilant, but can you honestly tell me that every American who votes today is vigilant and understands what their representatives believe instead of just voting for the guy with a D or R next to their name? I sure as hell can't. Even with the safeguards put in place by our founders it is still very easy to lose this country and we are closer now than ever before.
If the electoral college didn't exist we wouldn't be in this mess.
The electoral college needs to go. If popular votes really count then we really don't need the e.c. ever again. But the election depends on the e.c. and who THEY choose.
Don’t ya just love that you get a better understanding about our government from Al-Jazeera then you do any American media company?!?
Great journalism has no boarders, It's beautiful.
not to mention they're funded by a foreign government that violates human rights
@@gregmattox1192 Perhaps, but US gets first place by far in that category
@DH This is coming from people who believed Trump would force Mexico to pay for a border wall, but winds up paying for it themselves thanks to their own tax payer money.
Congrats. You funded your own propaganda.
@DH The explanation is better than anything I’ve seen from US media. Read the network’s wiki page. It is relatively neutral. Please source me your inflammatory accusations and I’ll look at them.
We need to get rid of the electoral college and the lifelong term of the SC
It's never going to happen. No way will they get a 2/3 House, Senate, and 38 state agreement.
Saying the electoral college helps small states is kind of ironic. The electoral college is a winner take all system. That means that even if the difference is only a thousand, the winner will take ALL the points. That means the thousands of people that voted in that state are not being represented at all. This doesn't mean that the popular vote is a much better idea. If we used the popular vote, candidates would only have to go to the big states with many people. That means that many of the smaller states are going to be forgotten. Both systems would not represent the losers. The electoral college would take away half the people that voted while the popular vote would make the small states forgotten. This just means that we need to create a new system. Maybe a mix of both systems. But most people would only speak up about this problem if their candidate loses and that goes for both sides.
Yeah I agree, what if we kept the electoral college but got rid of the winner-takes-all system and every state was like Nebraska and Maine?
Why would candidates only go to high population states? If both candidates fight over the same areas, then the candidate that also reaches out to the neglected groups will have an edge. The reality is that people aren't divided so much by state but by things like race, education, gender and class. Candidates will go after voting blocs, it's ludicrous to think all californians are the same.
@@ft7037 The Electoral College is not a winner take all system. It is the system most states have decided to use. And just who is going to make them give up this system? The Federal Goivernment doesn't have the power, and if they don't that tells you no one does.
100% agreed. The majority should matter more than the electoral college.
The Electoral College of each state is a reflection of the majority of the popular vote in each state.
The majority therefore matters, as the majority determines which way the Electoral College votes.
The electorates should vote in line with the people they are supposed to represent, not winner take all
I favor the use of voting by mail instead of voting in person. Voter suppression is used to deny representation of all the people. The current system obstructs equal justice in law.
explains why no third party candidate has a chance
Exactly. And if you did have a viable third party, chances are that no one would ever get a clear majority in the Electoral College, which would mean that selection of the president would fall to The House of Representatives every four years! It would be taken out of the hands of the people all together.
@@alansach8437 or alternatively the two candidates who got the most electoral votes go into a runoff election while the candidate with the least votes drops out. Or you could go with Ranked choice voting which Eliminates the need for a runoff vote.
This has always blown my mind. I get that every state big or small needs to be represented. But for things like president it should be all about popular vote. I am a Californian and I know my vote never really matters. States with small populations carry too much weight. I understand why other parts of the conuntry can't empathize with big cities with big city problems but they are fooling themselves when they say small towns are the real America. The real America is where "all of the people live!" Big cities.
I found out that the last time California voted for a Republican presidential candidate was for George H.W. Bush in 1988. Why has it gone Democratic every election since?
On a counter to that I lived in California for my first 26 years, my vote never mattered in California. The majority voted for things that aren’t things I believe in. The state itself didn’t reflect my values. I moved to a state where people vote like me and the state reflects my values more.
Get rid of it, introduce preferential voting and open it up to all parties., more like a Westminster system
But as was said, the odds of it actually happening are slim to nil. You'd have to get a 2/3 House, 2/3 Senate, and 38 state agreement.
I like how they always pick Wyoming as an example when it comes to weighted votes and never pick Vermont, a blue state with almost the same population.
The ratio is worse in Wyoming
Maybe changing the demographic status easier than amending or demolishing the defective electoral college system
Here is a healthy exercise you should all start doing, and heck not just on this topic: Instead of debating this with a fellow American as you usually do, which is a debate that always ends with either an accusation or at the very least a poisonous suspicion that the other guy is only in favor of system X because it benefits him politically. Ask a foreigner! They have no skin in the game and that makes it easy to trust that whatever they think is best, is genuinely what they think is best. The funny thing is though, I can tell which system is going to win that debate before I have even asked, but what's even more revealing: So do you! Both republicans and democrats will accurately predict which system will win. In other words, the moment we removed the political bias from the equation, the whole debate became a no brainer :)
A good example of reasons to get rid of electoral college voting is... I live in SLC Utah, in SLC, we a wrecked with blue voters.... however outside of Salt Lake City, its red, its kinda weird, when the world you know is blue, and yet your state votes red.... 🤷🏽♂️
Why not trash the old system and replace it with what Scandinavia & West Europe have?
🙃because america is a backwards country 🤭
Because that would be White supremacy
They tend to have parliamentary systems. The US has a presidential system with checks and balances and separation of powers. The biggest issues in the US are corruption due to big money and also the voting systems need reforming to encourage a multi-party system.
I've been trying to explain this to people with much backlash!
My rural white friends on line insist (loudly!) that without the electoral college in place they will be under-represented in government. I don't believe it, but they get very heated about that.
@@Edotter well the video did mention that the electoral college keeps the minority rule over the majority. In turn, it's another code of/for white supremacy
The truth is though is that it isn't going away anytime soon.
There's slim to nil chances of getting a 2/3 House, Senate, and 38 state agreement to abolish it.
I am a progressive voter who supported Bernie Sanders and I hold the opinion that the electoral college should not be abolished. The way I see it is that the electoral college is a way to establish equity between the very diverse country we live in, while it is true that the system creates racial inequities, the point of the system is to make sure that politicians running for the presidency cannot ignore the needs and concerns of rural areas. America is a large empire and if we were to abolish the electoral college we would end up with a system that ignores the working people who don’t live in or work in cities. It would be different if we lived in a smaller country like those in Europe, but the role of progressives is to support all working people, not just those in who live in densely populated areas. In the short term, yes it would be better to abolish the electoral college, we cannot just ignore the working class in rural America. I’m sure there is a better system to ensure an equitable distribution of votes, the answer is not to just have large metropolitan areas decide every presidential election
Personally I think the US should just be split into a few smaller nations. That would probably be the best way for people in all regions to get their voices heard and have the governments they want.
We are a republic, not a democracy. The founders understood that pure democracies never work and only become a tyranny of majority. It would allow anyone seeking office to focus on only a few high population states and ignore the rest of the country.
Yup
Okay? We can choose not to be a complete Republic. We can decide what we want for this country. The majority of people want the EC gone, so it should. Also, tyranny of the majority is better than tyranny of the minority. The majority should get the power
At the time of the founding a Democracy and a Republic were considered to be one and the same. They were used interchangeably to describe a form of government where the people chose their leaders, as opposed to a Monarchy. Period.
@alansach8437 Clearly not since Ben Franklin made the distinction when asked what form of government they had created when he replied "A republic, if you can keep it"
A republic is a representative democracy though.
Why qatari monarchy still exist and why its sucks
The framers were not geniuses.
Abolish it!!
ABOLISH IT; IT'S TRASH
Someone say “too much democracyyyyy” 🦅 🇺🇸
It sucks. Let's get rid of it.
This system is a joke.
Me, versus the Electoral College.
First, the United States of America is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. Second, the Electoral college exists to protect the votes of less populated areas. Cities contain huge amounts of Democrats while more rural areas usually have a Republican majority. Allowing the higher populated areas to decide everything just because they have more people makes the vote of citizens living in rural areas useless because their vote will always be drowned out by Democrat votes. So the Electoral College keeps it fair and gives people living in rural areas a fighting chance.
That is correct that we are a Constitutional Republic and not a democracy. I wish civics classes would teach this more that we are a republic because I keep seeing people keep using the democracy mantra. Also, the election for President is actually technically a function of the states for lack of a better term. People need to realize that we are having fifty different elections for President on election day and not one gigantic national popular vote.
Republicans would be smart to support an amendment to abolish the EC. Once AZ, GA & TX move out of the red column, they will be down 69 votes. Trump's margin in 2016 was 36 votes and that relied on flipping 3 states that usually votes blue. So that is kind of best case scenario for them.
Red states don't need to ratify it until it benefits them. If they wait till Dems realize the EC benefits them they might not be so eager to change it later.
It won’t happen anytime soon since you’d have to get a 2/3 House and 2/3 Senate vote.
Not to mention a 38 state agreement
State referendums and local candidates are the only things that influenced me to vote in this election.
It should be gone long time ago.
I wonder if it would be possible to get rid of the "winner takes all" aspect of the electoral college in the other 48 states without an amendment. If so, that seems like it would be a good path towards getting rid of it completely. Tt would at least offer some additional representation to voters whose states typically swing the other way.
It would take a Constitutional Amendment to get rid of the "winner takes all" aspect that 48 states currently utilize. The reason being is that the method of choosing electors is a plenary power that the Constitution gives to the state legislatures.
In a popular vote New York and California would always decide who’s president
Good.
Actually, Texas comes in second, then Florida and then New York. Even still, your statement assumes that every voter in each state votes the same, which wouldn't be accurate either.
Given that there are about 150m eligible voters (about 1/2 the population) it wouldn't be possible for California and New York to fully decide any election since together they represent maybe 30m, far short of the majority
@@kenargo together they make up the majority of the popular vote. They would have a enormous political power if not all.
Getting rid of the electoral college will hurt minorities. California now has more Latinx than non-Hispanic whites so it is just a matter of a few years before they are the majority of the electorate and can demand that the two main parties address their issues in order to win the state. Texas will flip to having more Latinx than non-Hispanic whites soon as well. African-Americans are a significant percentage in many states (Georgia, Maryland, Mississippi, Louisiana) and if they banded together and gave their votes to the party that fits their agenda, they would have a lot of leverage (like the Hasidic Jews in NYC). Instead they are trapped in the Democrat party which has not helped them much for decades.
Latinos being the majority of CA doesn't mean they can demand anything. A state needs to become a swing state to get attention nationally. To get parties to vie for your vote you can also be relatively evenly split between the parties so they contest harder.
Biden's share of the latino vote in FL has fallen a few % in polls.
@@theuglykwan - well you do not have to be a swing state, a priori , to affect elections. You just need a voting bloc that has a significant membership that is coordinated to vote a certain way in unison (or close to it). Hasidic Jews in New York are a perfect example; They vote together 100% according to their rebe and they are a significant part of NYC's population (as well as in some counties). Unions are another example. If African Americans in Georgia (where they are roughly 31-32% of the population), were to say that they will vote for the party that will support x and y and z, that gives them a lot of leverage. In effect, the state then would become a "swing state."
Electoral college is for small states to have a voice
Sorry, states don't vote, people do...
@@sandman516 sorry, this isnt a democracy.
They have representatives and senators.
At home we say, this isn't a democracy, abroad we say, WE'RE SPREADING DEMOCRACY 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Constitutional republic > democracy. A republic protects minorities from mob rule and tribalism. The founding fathers were extremely intelligent people to build what they have and yet people want to demonize everything because a few things they did are looked at morally now as wrong. It does not mean everything they did is null and void... Pure democracy is scary, could you imagine if everyone started advocating for killing _____ and voted for that? Without a constitution to protect people, extreme injustices in the name of "democracy" can occur. The smaller states NEED a voice. Let's say theoretically, 310 million people lived in Los Angeles, California and 20 million were spread out amongst the rest of the United States. People who are NOT in Los Angeles would NEVER have a voice in "democracy". Is it not fair to assume that people in California may want different things than those in Alaska or Hawaii for example?
Wish people would look more into this and stop demonizing the electoral college simply due to it allowing a president they hate to be elected.
Never thought I’d hear *white* and *minority* in the same sentence
Have u ever heard of Japan
@@lowiq224 in the US*
I think a Proportional system is the best option: Electors are split between candidates based on their vote share in the state etc. A popular vote is a better choice than the current situation but it would lead to I believe even greater polarisation with the coasts and cities essential choosing the President. Whereas the above proportional system in my belief prevents that.
How is it proportional now when just a few states elect the POTUS over the will of the people?
Unless a Constitutional Amendment was enacted states cannot be compelled to split electoral college votes proportionally like Nebraska and Maine do. The Constitution clearly gives state legislatures plenary power to select electors in the manner that they so choose.
Think with phones you dont need the whole House of Representatives. Representation isnt needed anymore with digital communications. Bit chain tech could make voting near secure.
Longer the Electoral college exists the longer the oligarchist gov's will continue in USA.
Politics in the US is a complicated amalgam of 'distractions' from solving ongoing & current issues that effect the citizens of our country, on a day to day basis . Political parties and the election process need a complete overhaul. First off, the Electoral College is WAY out of date and should be abolished immediately. The only fair & Democratic way to elect a person in office is by Popular vote. The whole system of different political parties is archaic AND an unecessary complication to the operation of our country as well. In other words, there should no longer be separate political parties. Positions in our Legislative, Judicial, Executive Branches, and all the way down to local jurisdictions should be based on merit. experience, etc....NOT with respect to a particular political affiliation. The business of running our country efficiently, fairly, & productively is only hindered by wasting time with political party differentation. PEOPLE should dictate how we take care of the business of keeping our country in order. During political campaigning, Conventions are an unecessary waste of time & money. People should vote for the Candidates of their choice and not have to be concerned with Democrats vs Republicans, etc. This way of thinking goes along the idea of bi-partisanship, but to a much different & higher level.
Because of the future demographic shifts. The Golden Era of America will come to an end. 😪
I guess it will be time for you to go back to Europe then
@@JulianGuevaraphoto Except that I'm not from Europe. Actually never been there.
@@JulianGuevaraphoto Cool I'm going to Africa myself.
If you want to get rid of electoral college make it mandatory to have at least 4 candidates on ballot not just 2
So how do we get rid of it? Who can get this ball roiling
Like they are doing did(kinda) in AZ and Nevada
Grand opening of Justice
Yes
Trump2020
We don't need trash boring politicians
As if Trump is not a trash boring politician
The absolute least they could do is get rid of the winner takes all BS in the other 48 states.
Time to abolish the federal government.
Then have 50 different currencies, 50 different militaries and let the states argue over who controls interstate commerce. Why do you think the states created the federal government genius?
Winner takes all is huge distortion of the vote and yet only two states don't give all votes to the majority winner.
States need to have sovereignty and NYC shouldn't be able to dictate to SD. The electoral college is the only protecting small states from being ruled by CA.
The electoral only determines the president, the most limited branch of government, all other votes are won by the popular vote.
" the most limited branch of government", not when the Senate screwed the last president on judicial nominations and has given a rubber stamp to the next.
It's an imperfect system, and it needs to change.
Never
BIDEN HARRIS 2020
Get rid of the electoral college.
From 1952 to 1988 california was consistently red...i bet you would have loved electoral college back then...if ca ever flipped back red, would you still day the popular vote should rule?
There are a lot of ppl mainly republicans who will argue that it’s dumb to get rid of the electoral college. They say that because they know they need it for republicans to win because ideology they don’t have the majority support. ABOLISH THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE. Whoever gets the most votes wins. Period. More people would vote if so.
So basically the 500k voters of Wyoming or Montana are more important than 8 million republican voters in CA or NY ??
Or 300k vermont or RI are more important than the 5 million Democratic voters in Texas or Florida????
This is very much a theory this guy seems to have about the origins of the electoral college. Not saying he's wrong, but he's not all right
Yes abolish it now
Bring on The National Popular Vote Inter-state Compact!! We need just a few more states to join and the electoral college is irrelevant. We need a new constitutional convention to rewrite the document to meet the conditions and the needs of the country for the 21st century. Most of us are getting very tired of being governed by a minority of the electorate. The voice of the majority is not being adequately represented.
Yes. Push that by pushing state leaders to agree to it with a national vote for it. A National VOTE on a binding resolution to end electoral college is needed ( if Democrats control White House & House & Senate) as a possible means to effect change in selecting President, Vice President and all Members of US Congress and to secure a real one-person-one-vote election -- an equal voice for all US citizens.
Don’t you need a 2/3 House and 2/3 Senate vote as well as a 38 state agreement though ?
Control,control,control ,control,control,control,control,control,control & more control until infinity!!!!!!!!!
How dare the electoral college work the way its supposed to
You should really read the Federalist Papers.
Revolution!
A political revolution. A National VOTE on a binding resolution to end electoral college is needed ( if Democrats control White House & House & Senate) as a possible means to effect change in selecting President, Vice President and all Members of US Congress and to secure a real one-person-one-vote election -- an equal voice for all US citizens.
@@suezbell1 But as was stated, they'd need a supermajority in the House and Senate (both with 2/3), as well as 38 states.
Very, very unlikely to happen anytime soon.
Just split electoral votes in each state by congressional district
So votes are not equal. Freedom it isn't.
Yes and no. Socrates didn't favor democracy for a reason. It would always bring discrimination to smaller populated areas. However, the value of the electoral college vote needs to shift a little from time to time throughout the states.
.37 seconds in and the BS flies high! Is Obama not black? What I would like to see is less propaganda and more facts.
No and it'll be absolute idiocy/lunacy to submit to the tyranny of the majority.
Electoral College gots to go
Make a video on "how to eliminate Electoral College"
📝Summary of American Electoral System🇺🇸:
🗳In short, the final word for the electoral college
🗳 The electoral college violated the popular will, four times most notably in the case of George Bush Jr. and Trump, who lost the popular vote
🗳 All electoral college votes in each state go to the candidate who wins the public vote, with the exception of two states (Nebraska and Maine whose votes go according to the percentage of each candidate)
🗳 The number of electoral college members is (538), and each state gets a number of members according to the population
🗳 A candidate to win the presidency needs the votes of (270) members of an electoral college
🗳 Congress 🏛 It consists of two upper and lower chambers, the upper one is the Senate, with (100) members, with (2) members from each state, and it is concerned with foreign affairs and administrative and judicial appointments, the lower House🏛 of Representatives with (435) members and is concerned with internal affairs, the budget, laws and legislation
📍The Democrats control the House of Representatives now and it is very expected that they will win the Senate 🏛 and the presidency. This happened several times, most recently during the Obama era.
📍Joe Biden is also likely not to complete his term, so Kamala Harris will be president.
📍As a result of motivating people to shake off Trump's nightmare, early voting has reached a record high, equal to a third of voters.
📍Civil unrest, economic decline, ideological clash and American retreat 🇺🇸 will continue and accelerate, no one will be able to Stop it
Two wolves and 1 sheep has to vote on what's for dinner. What would happen?
Listen I know a lot of people dont like the Electoral College. But I still see it as a necessity. Because in 2016, the map sold that Hillary only one in Coastal regions. So as far as I'm concerned the popular vote should really be called the population vote.
If you had direct presidential elections, large cities would determine the outcome just like elections in Canada.
Canada dosent have direct elections at the federal level. Elections are decided in 338 federal Constituencies that each elect an MP. Cities have more people therefore get more seats and have more influence in an election. Simple. Secondly, Canada having an electoral college would still have resulted in a Trudeua victory.
A nation with an actual direct Presidential system would be a nation such as France.
@@harmanvirk4421 elections in Canada are decided by Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. The rest of the country is left out. Political leaders focus most of their campaigns in those 3 cities.
@@philkim2328 I'm Canadian, have worked on election campaigns and understand how the political system works. Those cities have more influence in the election because they have more seats allocated to them because they have a high population. Simple. Why is this bad?
@@harmanvirk4421 3 places should not be able to dictate policy.
The Electoral College also has the right to not base its choice on the public of the state's votes. Say the entire state voted one way the electoral college can vote another way regardless.
Your not afraid of the electoral vote, if not winning takes all the votes, that should be reform like the state of Nebraska. It should not be popular vote only, but as well as rank votting.
The United States is a Constitutional Republic. It is not a democracy. Look up the difference. This is a very biased video.
I for one want the electoral college to be county/state wide as well... Too much of states are run, per say, are run by one city or area
@Zoom ShakaLaka you said it, not me
This is about city people is taxation on rural people quit lying.
Pure nonsense. If you believe any of this, you are deluded.
Citizens in countries with parliamentary style governments don't vote for the head of the government. That person is selected by the party and then approved by some majority of the parliament. The people in those countries only vote for their member of parliament.
*The* electoral college is fiction. States have electoral votes they cast. How they use them is up to the state. Nobody says they have to cast them for all one candidate. Maine and Nebraska cast their votes proportionally. If all the states cast their votes proportionally, nobody would be complaining about any "electoral college".
This method was a compromise necessary to get all the states to join The Union, and it was necessry to get all the states to join because if they didn't they would all have been easier to defeat by European powers. A third possibility was continuing the practice under the Articles of Confederation of giving each state exactly one vote. Every one of the original 13 states that ratified the Constitution of the United States signed essentially signed a contract, and every state that joined The Union afterwards also signed this contract. The US does not restrict people from emigrating, so if you feel living under the rule of your state's constitution and the CotUS is denying you your rights, you can emigrate. The French constitution calls for the direct election of the head of state, so you could emigrate to France if the US is so horrible.
If we didn’t have electoral college then every year California and New York would decide the next president
Not true. It would simply be “whoever gets more votes, wins.” Simple.
@@kl-tj4nx In 2016, Clinton got 3 million more votes across the nation than Trump. She won california by 4 million votes. So you're right. California and New York wouldn't decide the election. California could do it all by itself.
This is very interesting
5:02 PM }|{ 10//28//2020
We're we to go to the popular vote more Americans would vote who believe that their vote doesn't count.
Women should be president
The United States is a Federation. The Great Compromise's Senate portion of the Electoral College is the relevant thing to discuss since the 1960s. The Great Compromise was not racist. It's the United STATES of America and not United PEOPLE of America. It's the states that built the 2nd US government, and it's 3/4 states that have to agree to any changes.
Thank you for pointing out the obvious and not making an attempt to argue why removing the electoral college would be bad.
@@JohnSmith-sg7fn - I assume you mean "obvious" and not office. This Qatari video is alleging that the US presidential election system is racist. My post was just pointing out that the Great Compromise part of the Electoral College (the one responsible for the Wyoming/California complaint) had nothing to do with racism when created 65 years prior to slavery being abolished. The 3/5 Compromise was the racist part. That's gone now. If you take the Great Compromise part of the Electoral College and put it into any other federal government on the planet, you wouldn't say that you're importing a racist way to count votes of this other federation. That's my point.
@@jdpalm1981 You said nothing about that lol
@@JohnSmith-sg7fn - Well, I'm glad that you agree that the way the US elects its president is not racist anymore.
@@jdpalm1981 no it is not racist anymore but it is important to acknowledge the effects of Its racist foundation because they are long lasting .
Smart dude he makes a lot of sense. Electoral college is to me to old, America has changed of since its inception and like other things we have changed through the times I believe we should change to popular vote as that is more reflective of our America now.
so your saying midwest should be ignored 🤔
In India we elect our Prime Minister through the Electoral College and there is not one complaint against the System. This not because there is no Racism or Discrimination, There is loads of it. Every Ethnic group is discriminated in one place or the other but we have moved a lot closer towards stopping Discrimination. When an Indian Prime Minister loses they just move on even if they believe it is because of the system.
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but lost the election. It is the systems fault