that was just a mistake. Im going to put up an annotation. This is why I stick to social studies and not math! Thanks for watching, hope you subscribe, my bad math aside.
Some of the other videos I saw on the Electoral College were obviously really against it. I don't want to know what they think of it. I want to know how it works.
HAHAHAHA ! ! ! I think The Founders would chase 90% of the politicians and bureaucrats into the nearest jail cells, loose the keys while returning the land under D.C. to the swamp it once was, then burn down everything still standing inside "The Beltway" ! ! ! THEN they would take the rest of U.S. Spoiled Americans out behind the barn.
It’s a weird argument they make for the pros of the electoral college vote . Basically if the population of a state is too ignorant to vote correctly the elector can overrule the very people that voted them into power to represent them....
Love your stuff. I just explained it to my child to think about it kind of like if we were taking a vote on our street where we live and each house had a vote, I would ask my family what they thought and then go vote - so there's input from all but not a vote from all.
Hey sorry for posting this so late but I just wanted to thank you!!! I got a 98 on the US history regents this past june... i watched all your videos and felt so confident going into the regents!! i also encouraged all of my friends to watch them and will be encouraging my younger friends as well! once again these are great and thanks
I'm just presenting information, I try to keep my own bias out of it. I think I tried to show the positives, negatives and steep the whole kettle of learning in the intentions of the founders. I can assure you there is no flag wrapped around my eyes and mind.
I agreed with and supported your explanation until you made the "no flag" comment. For shame. There SHOULD be a "flag wrapped around every American's mind". Heart, too.
So a Faithless Elector can throw an election? Seems like an unnecessary loophole. Why not just get rid of the Electors and make it automatic - the popular vote gets the electoral votes. Why have an actual person as an Elector? Why leave it open to the possibility of corruption?
They can do that, but may not be chosen by the legislature to be electors again. Additionally, if someone was chosen to represent that party in choosing the President, their allegiance is pretty strong unless they fear the parties/people have nominated someone (like say voting against Hitler). That just an extreme example, but I think political philosophies usually run consistent for many that they choose to be electors with some exceptions sometimes.
You explain things so well. I am a college student and my professors don't seem to explain things as well as you do. Thank you for your wonderful videos.
But when you break it down, the POTUS isn't elected by the people. It is elected by the electors. If Florida votes for a republican those electors can vote blue. I understand the electoral college BUT to say the American people vote their president is kinda a false statement. These 538 electors decide our president. I think its flawed and kinda unfair. Just my opinion.
Have done A LOT of research on the electoral college & stayed very confused, so this really helped. I have two questions. First: Most importantly if a faithless electors can vote in opposition to the popular vote of the state they are representing, what is the point of having a populous vote? Second: Very importantly WHO chooses the electors? From everything I've read it seems to vary from state to state but keeps sighting 'the Party". What party are they referring to?
Okay, heads up at the back of the class! What party are they referring to? ( Answer ) Lets say you live in California, 98% of all elected officials are democrat. So the party < would be democrat in the state of California.. WHO chooses the electors ? Answer ..THE PUBLIC! Each state has representatives, the public votes for House Members and Senators ! Again, lets use California ( California has two senators in the United States Senate and 53 representatives in the United States House of Representatives) Meaning they are solid democrat with 53 electoral college votes. To change that, the public would have to start voting Republicans to the Senate and House during the Midterm elections.
Another way to put it is that the EC is our alternate Congress; a special one-issue, one-vote Congress. No one thinks of it as a Congress because they meet in their respective states instead of in Washington, DC. A great book about the early history of US presidential elections is "The Presidential Game" by Richard P. McCormick. He traces how the Two Party system grew to dominate the process via a) nominating conventions, and b) the winner-take-all game where all of a state's electorships are decided by just over half that state's popular vote.
I just discovered you and you have automatically become A MUST HAVE on my lesson plans! Thank you sooo much! You have saved my behind in my first year teaching :) My 8th graders sure thank you!
lol. I reject your apology. I usually wear a jacket and tie, I was feeling extra goofy that day. But thanks for the kudos and I hope you subscribe, I have well over a 100 videos on a wide range of political, civil and historical topics.
I want to thank you for taking the time to answer my question, it has been years that I was not clear about this, and I applaud you for wanting to educate me :)
The Barney Fife at the end of this is how am feeling and am educating myself. To my defense I grew up overseas for a good time and thought I would stay there so I was not educated in American History as much as the others. So this was very helpful! Thank you Mr. Hip Hughes!
Then Grey is your guy for sure. I target kids who do not enjoy the school format so I tend to use a lot of analogies and examples of student discourse. But again, thanks for your input, happy trails!
Yeah Trumps the last guy they vote for. Especially given that the GOP is like being rattled to the extent that Mitt Romney is trying to bumb Trump back. In this case the electoral college would be useful. I can't see the establishment college voting for Trump no matter what the popular vote indicates.
Then if what you say is true then Hillary wins as Democrats have twice as many billionaires as Republicans. Watch on UA-cam "Clinton Cash" documentary or read the book which is on the New York Times best seller list by Peter Schweizer. But we have three months to go and looking at pictures of Hillary being helped up her front steps by 4 men doesn't bode well for Hillary.
Keith, I have this question regarding the Electoral College consequences in the way federalism works in countries. It is my perception that most direct vote presidential systems in the world tend to move their nations towards centralism. In Mexico, Colombia, Argentina, Brazil and countless other nations the federal governments tend to allocate far greater resources to the most populated cities in their countries, which are normally their capital cities too. This happens in Mexico for example, where enormous resources are allocated to our capital Mexico City while entire regions are abandoned. My perception is that direct vote casts a huge influence on political and economic decisions where presidents will always favor highly populated cities and centralise economies by allocating all or most economic resources of the country. For example, Mexico City is home to all the state powers, the executive branch, congress and the judicial branch, as well as of all state dependencies and state monopolies or state enterprises, and also the federal reserve of the country. This happens too in many other countries in the world but it does not seem to happen in the US. Am I correct?
I think you are correct. The best interests of highly populated areas with mega-cities conflict with agricultural best interests of farming/ranching states in areas like land and water use for example. It is not in the best interests of the entire country to allow high population states to dominate. The electoral college seems to be how we cope with these conflicting interests
oh no. maybe you should watch it in slow motion. or backwards..... also check out Common Craft's The Electoral College in Plain English or TED-ED has a great one.. "Does your vote count" just google it.
Its a similar system of indirect democracy in Germany where the Land(ers) i.e the electors in the German states choose the Members of Parliament & they in turn choose the German President & chancellor - this is so that the President monitors the constitutional soundness of the Chancellor's actions & the Bunderswehr (Germany's Armed forces swear to uphold the constitution & president) the Constitutional court also monitors the President although it is mostly a ceremonial position= balance powers
I still don't see the danger of having, like the example given in the video, a large number of poor people voting in a direct popular vote. In fact, isn't that a positive example of democracy, how they can elect a candidate they believe will give them a better chance of getting out of poverty? Inevitably anyone who wins will have voters who belong to some kind of group that becomes the largest group of their voters. Example, white college educated people voted more for Trump... so that's a group, why is that group ok compared to the group of poor people mathematically? Look at it this way, if Trump (Bush too) won solely because of the electoral college, despite Hillary winning the popular vote, that's perfect evidence that the electoral college is broken and shouldn't exist.
Exactly what they want. They don't want common folk having too much power in such an important decision. It's a buffer for the elite to always have he final say in the vote smh. We need an amendment redefining the election process. This is a mess
ytubeanon No that is an example of it working the way it was designed. It is designed to give every state equal voting rights not people. It is this way so states like NY and CA with large amounts of people would not be able decide what is best for the whole country.
ytubeanon No that is an example of it working the way it was designed. It is designed to give every state equal voting rights not people. It is this way so states like NY and CA with large amounts of people would not be able decide what is best for the whole country.
Explain how you win a state. If there are 51 candidates in California and it's split 25 and 26 between red and blue then how are all 52 EC votes allocated? And how are the two senate EC votes allocated if they're split?
please soneone correct me if I'm wrong....So you mean the peoples vote which is the popular vote doesn't matter if the electoral college representative can choose to not go with the people's popular vote and choose whomever they think should be president which gives them the electoral votes which the candidate would have to get to 270 votes 1st in order to win
If the electors represent the people of their state, then they should be voting exactly the way the people of their state voted, otherwise, they don't represent their state.
Keith, I haven't watched all of the video, but will, but is there more than a seemingly obvious reason that we are not told this (at least in the simple, informative, entertaining way that you get it across)? I mean, "are we kept in the dark" or did I just miss something in Civics class?
So electors are chosen for both Dem/Rep parties. So which of those chosen groups get to actually cast a vote for the president? Only the electors of the parties candidate which won the popular vote? So the other electors do nothing?
@hughesDV Hey man, as a European student I thank you for the great lessons. I got one question though, how come that the house has to choose out of the best three and the senate has to pick one vice president out of only two when noone has the absolute majority? It is linked since the 12th amendment, so how is this possible. Or is this no longer the case since the 12th amendment?
7:28 - Correct me if I'm wrong, but the number of Electors was not always 538, which means that 270 has not always been the 'minimum' a candidate needed to achieve victory for President of the U.S. The 'magic number' for Electors in the year 1800 was *70*, because there were only 138 Electors, because there were only 138 members in Congress, and 70 is the minimum majority of 138. It's important to remember that, because if Puerto Rico would become a state, then the number of Electors would increase to at least 541, because they would get two senators and at least one representative. I'm pointing that out at the 7:45 mark of your video, so I don't currently know if a change in the number of Electors is something you eventually touch on.
But WHO are these electoral college people? who picks them? I would think the candidates would be trying to buy them - send them all kinds of presents and stuff ...
well the fact is you the people of your state did in your local state elections when you elect your representatives and senate members that have your best interest what is why you voted for them in the first place. like the guy said our system of government is designed in a way that all people rich and poor at different times and in many different state and presidential elections have a say and that no single majority would rarely have or hold all the power over the entire government and that no single branch of government can hold all the power over all the people and try to rule as if they own us. now on the topic of why trump could be simply put from all the data on all the representatives/electors the majority was voted in the states to help bring more jobs to our people and to limit the spending the government was doing that was not going toward the things the people wanted such as healthcare and job creation and national security, this in part was also influenced in how the last president ruled where the majority of the states people voted to end the things that was not working, and them representative go into office to take care of them matters to limit government that was doing the things the people didnt want., so now say if you wanted to guarantee a election for a set party, it would require party members to mingle through out all the other states and be able to influence the rest of the people to see your political views and vote the same way you want as a possible outcome, then in each state you would want to vote only for the representatives / electors that only share your same party agenda, and then when it comes time to elect the next precedent then you all would also in your state need to vote that direction as well, then and only then you would have a chance that your party will have a majority say in what the outcome could be. this is not something that can ever be perfectly executed because of the dynamic view points of all the people dont always share the same beliefs or points of views or same values as others, but the process still keeps the system honest to not allow any one group of people to have full control over the government as a whole as something as simple as voting for a different representative next times they are up for reelection can change things back in a different direction.
I felt the biggest concern for some Founding Fathers was keeping the Thirteen Original States united against the threat of the "great powers" of the time: Great Britain, France or Spain. If they didn't stand united, there was a chance that one or more of the established "great powers" would attempt to make the states as colonies. Compromise upon compromise were made to keep the country United: Bi-cameral Congress; Three-fifths compromises; Electoral College; Checks and Balances.
Great video and it helped me alot! but who gets to decide wh's gonna be the electors? Are the electors automatically the members of that state who are members of the house of represantatives?
yes so take a active part in voting in the people that best represent your values, and dont stop their but take a active role in the governing of your state if you want to see real change that you value and others also value in your state.
@@jesusthroughmary who are they then? How are they voted in to be an electorate? I don't understand that part? Do we the people vote them in if so when?
@@KaraLynnJack On Election Day, if you read the ballot carefully, you will see that you are casting a vote for "Presidential Electors For (insert name of your preferred candidate)".
I think that we need a constitutional amendment that would be more democratic, changing the current electoral college from a winner-take-all, in each state, to giving a president a proportional amount of electors in each state.
+Kaydell Leavitt I think first we need a gerrymandering amendment to deal with the problem of parts and Partisan drawn congressional districts. If the elect oral college was tied to these lines I can't even imagine the political partisanship that would be added to the fuel. I do agree though there needs to be a better system that represents the will of the people.
The indefensible reality is that more than 99% of campaign attention (ad spending and visits) was showered on voters in just ten states in 2012- and that in today's political climate, the swing states have become increasingly fewer and fixed. Where you live determines how much, if at all, your vote matters. With the Electoral College and federalism, the Founding Fathers meant to empower the states to pursue their own interests within the confines of the Constitution. National Popular Vote is an exercise of that power, not an attack upon it. The Electoral College is now the set of 538 dedicated party activists who vote as rubberstamps for their party’s presidential candidate. That is not what the Founders intended. The Founding Fathers in the Constitution did not require states to allow their citizens to vote for president, much less award all their electoral votes based upon the vote of their citizens. The presidential election system we have today is not in the Constitution. State-by-state winner-take-all laws to award Electoral College votes, were eventually enacted by states, using their exclusive power to do so, AFTER the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution. Now our current system can be changed by state laws again. During the course of campaigns, candidates are educated and campaign about the local, regional, and state issues most important to the handful of battleground states they need to win. They take this knowledge and prioritization with them once they are elected. Candidates need to be educated and care about all of our states. The current state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), under which all of a state's electoral votes are awarded to the candidate who gets the most votes in each separate state, ensures that the candidates, after the conventions, in 2012 did not reach out to about 80% of the states and their voters. 10 of the original 13 states are ignored now. Candidates had no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they were safely ahead or hopelessly behind. 80% of the states and people were just spectators to the presidential election. That's more than 85 million voters, more than 200 million Americans. Policies important to the citizens of non-battleground states are not as highly prioritized as policies important to ‘battleground’ states when it comes to governing. Since World War II, a shift of a few thousand votes in one or two states would have elected the second-place candidate in 4 of the 15 presidential elections The National Popular Vote bill preserves the Electoral College and state control of elections. It changes the way electoral votes are awarded in the Electoral College. Under National Popular Vote, every voter, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would be included in the state counts and national count. States have the responsibility and power to make all of their voters relevant in every presidential election and beyond. Unable to agree on any particular method, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method for selecting presidential electors exclusively to the states by adopting the language contained in section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution-- "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . ." The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as "plenary" and "exclusive." Federalism concerns the allocation of power between state governments and the national government. The National Popular Vote bill concerns how votes are tallied, not how much power state governments possess relative to the national government. The powers of state governments are neither increased nor decreased based on whether presidential electors are selected along the state boundary lines, or national lines (as with the National Popular Vote).
Letter to the Editor, Nov. 2, 2018 NewspaperNovember 2, 2018 | Daily Review, The & Sunday Review (Towanda, PA) Author: Staff Writer | Section: Letters To Editor 793 Words | Readability: Lexile: 1120, grade level(s): 9 10 11-12 Why do we have an Electoral College system? EDITOR: Many people still believe President Trump is an illegitimate president and refuse to acknowledge the results of the election because he didn't win the popular vote. It would be nonsensical to believe Hillary Clinton should be entitled to the presidential throne because she won the popular vote. Since the last election, many people would like to see the Electoral College system abolished before the next presidential election. Many people are not very cognizant as to why our founding fathers put the electoral system in the U.S. Constitution. They realized the election of the president and vice president was more than a matter of just counting votes. It needed to express the will of the people, and it had to be a constitutional and legislative process. Article II section 1 of the Constitution lays out the process for our presidential elections. The electoral system is used every four years for the election of the president and vice president. The number of electors in each state is equal to the total number of U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives the state is entitled to in congress. Each electoral vote is equal to one vote in congress. This guarantees each state their Constitutional rights to self representation, whether they are voting for the president or voting in any other legislative procedure in Congress. Every state, no matter how small, and Washington D.C. are guaranteed at least three electors. In pursuant to the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution, Washington D. C. is considered to be a state for the election process. Each state has two groups of electors, one to represent the Republicans and one to represent the Democrats. When you vote for your favorite candidate on the ballot, you are selecting the electors for that candidate's political party. In most states, the candidate that wins the popular vote is awarded all the electoral votes of that state. However, in Maine and Nebraska, the electoral votes are rewarded to the candidate that wins each congressional district, so it is possible to win all or part of the electoral votes in these states. In a presidential election there are 51 popular votes cast, one for each state and one for Washington D.C. In most states, the political parties nominate the electors at their political state conventions. The electors are usually state elected officials, people who have a strong affiliation with the presidential candidates, or party leaders. Twenty-seven states have laws which compel the electors to vote for their party's candidate. In the remaining states, it is common practice for the electors to vote for their party's candidate. In pursuant to the 12th Amendment, the electors convene at their state capital on the Monday following the second Wednesday in December to cast their votes. Each elector casts two ballots; one for the president and one for the vice president. The ballots must also consist of a list of all the people voted for. This process is sometimes referred to as the second election. The ballots are certified and sealed and sent to the U.S. Senate to be opened and counted in a joint session of Congress. In early January, the president of the Senate, the incumbent vice president, a member of the executive branch of the federal government, opens, counts the ballots, and calls out the results of the election. Sometimes this is referred to as the third election. The candidate with the majority of electoral votes is declared the president and vice president. By using the electoral system, in pursuant to Article II section 1, the election of our president is treated the same as any other legislative procedure of our federal government. The electoral system maintains the constitutional rights of each state. Our election procedure starts with the will of the people in each state. Since the number of electors is equal to the number of senators and representatives in each state, it is the same as though they are voting in a joint session of Congress. When the votes are counted by the vice president, the process is passing through the hands of the executive branch of our government. Once he announces the results of the election, it becomes the law of the land. To do away with the electoral process, and have a popular vote system would be a derision of our Constitution and cataclysmic to our democracy and democratic legislative process. It would be an abridgment upon the constitutional rights of each state's self representation in the legislative procedure. A popular vote would bypass our democratic legislative process, and it would totally obliterate the constitutional, legislative and democratic process of how we elect our president and vice president. Whether you like it or not, under our constitution, Donald Trump is our legitimate president. Craig H. Pierce
Hey I'm not sure I understood this. You said each state gets 3 votes. Then you said the elector is the state rep and senators. So wyoming has 1 state rep and 2 senators and yet 1 + 2= 13??/
The Electoral College really encourages many people in certain states not to vote since if it is solid towards one canidate then they feel that their vote won't make a difference (particuarly if it is for the opposite canidate)
I’m conservative and no matter how many I’ve listened to these kinds of videos explaining the electoral college I still don’t get it. Why not just each state count as one vote? California got together they voted and that counts as their vote. Texas got together they voted and that counts as one vote. 50 states, tie breaker would have to be figured out somehow. Not sure yet. But electoral college, who are they? Are they people? How come they get to be in the electoral college? Who selected them? These are the real questions that need to be answered not this BS explanation that explains nothing.
It’s based on the actual population of the state. Would it be fair for California which has the highest population in the country has the same weight as Wyoming which has one of the lowest populations in the country.
@@daking2152 yes I do think it is fair for Wyoming to be treated equally as California. It’s called the United States isn’t it? If I were wyoming I would secede then.
So the person that wins the state they get those electoral vote but if you don't win that state with the popular vote you can spilt the electoral vote so if you can win more states with big number electoral votes/points then you can beat out the popular vote am I right ?
yes but it also depends on who your state has elected as representatives and how you take part in making sure they represent you in all the things that you as the people of your state value most. for the past 8 years sense obama the republicans of all the states have steped up in higher numbers then they have in the past after they have started seeing bad signs that was happening, one trigger was the debt crisis where obama put out nation in more debt then all the past precedents combined in only a few years, that one action alone triggered a massive response against the democratic agendas and where it seemed like nothing was going to happen and obama got reelected cause the majority of representatives was democrats, so they as well voted in representatives and put more pressure on them to do something about the matters that concerned them greatly, so what happened is the republicans stood up in large numbers to elect more republicans that represented their ideals best, and similar even democrats that was fed up with the way things going changed sides and also voted in the similar direction. the people made their voice hurd where it needed to happen the most and through that process now the representatives that are now in office from them elections are representing the people on them matters in a higher degree. rest assured this dont mean its the end of our nation just cause you may or may not like the next pres that got elected, your voice is hurd thee most through your representatives so stay on task and get to know them and support them when they are representing your values in congress. and the house. to sum this all up better, take a larger part in how your state is operating and be part of the direction your state wants to follow or change it if you dont like it we the people have all the power if we just learn how to use it properly. over all the system is designed that the government has to work for the people and represent them on all matters. and that no single branch of government has absolute control.
I have a question, if the candidate wins the popular vote in each state, the Senator can pick whom they think is the right person and they can disregard the popular vote? Also, would you say you are for the electoral college or against?
Wow, you are a charmer. CPG Grey rocks. I met him @UA-cam and he is a great guy. You on the other hand may need to work on your manners but like all my viewers I do value feedback. Peace.
At 6:00, "the unwritten constitution" ??? It is troubling that the electors of the Electoral College are not technically required to vote according to the popular vote, for their state. Even if they do in practice.
Why is it bad (which you didn't discuss, only the good)? Because it repeatedly falls into the laps of the powers at be. But having said that, I love your very entertaining clips...and you do seem like a genuinely nice guy. Thanks !!!
The electoral college is an important part of our American system.It makes sure that certain states that would otherwise be ignored are not ignored in elections.Did any of you people even watch the video?
he talks out both sides....its unfair wyoming has 3 but he later acknowledges winning big states pretty much seals the deal....just do straight up democracy.
Are you saying that electors ARE our state Representors and Senators? Don't they vote for the President of their own party? That makes mid-term elections even more important. So can't they pass a vote to make it what the people want? Majority rule?
I went to another video where it said that when we vote, we actualy vote for the electrols of that state. This election will be hughe because now there's a stronger 3rd party. How will the elector vote if they can vote for their own party?
Hehe I was talking about OTHERS!!! :P and yes, I subscrbd. Make up for all my lack of paying attention and skipping class for econ and gov classes in highschool. Most of what you are saying makes sense just those few things are a little confusing. P.S. I think yer outfit looks good for whatever thats worth. But if you have some different lighting (and get a more expensive camera) I think that your face would look less red. :D last thing: I'm 31 -- NOT EXACTLY A KIDDO
Your heart reminds me of that guy from She-Ra. I can't remember his name but I've always called him Prince Valentine. He has the heart and the horse and carries a bow.
Brett Reinhardt We are different states making a whole. United States. Popular vote would disenfranchise smaller population states. Electoral system is called a college Two senators and Congressmen proportional to population
I was civil and honest. Maybe I need to be more specific, but I am limited to 500 characters. I tend to be brief and to the point and prefer my information that way.
To me what is dumb is a state with 40 million people has 2 Senators & a state with half a million has 2 Senators. Perhaps California should be split into North & South California & add two more Senators.
I think I need Electoral College for Kindergarten. I still don't understand this.
Short version: it ensures that the majority will NEVER rule.
@@donovanwilliamsroker4734 I love how they refer to it as "indirect democracy." What a scam.
@@donovanwilliamsroker4734 What the flying fuck do you even mean??
Same, glad it’s not just me. I just can’t get my head around this for some reason.
Same hear😂
that was just a mistake. Im going to put up an annotation. This is why I stick to social studies and not math! Thanks for watching, hope you subscribe, my bad math aside.
Some of the other videos I saw on the Electoral College were obviously really against it. I don't want to know what they think of it. I want to know how it works.
The Founders were fearful of factionalism? Well they would have a heart attack if they ever saw the political climate in the 21st century?
HAHAHAHA ! ! ! I think The Founders would chase 90% of the politicians and bureaucrats into the nearest jail cells, loose the keys while returning the land under D.C. to the swamp it once was, then burn down everything still standing inside "The Beltway" ! ! !
THEN they would take the rest of U.S. Spoiled Americans out behind the barn.
It’s a weird argument they make for the pros of the electoral college vote . Basically if the population of a state is too ignorant to vote correctly the elector can overrule the very people that voted them into power to represent them....
They would have a heart attack just seeing black citizens.
More specifically they were fearful of political parties. There was PLENTY of faction in their time.
Love your stuff. I just explained it to my child to think about it kind of like if we were taking a vote on our street where we live and each house had a vote, I would ask my family what they thought and then go vote - so there's input from all but not a vote from all.
Ok thank you for this analogy- honestly you have enabled me to finally understand how it works! I’m a huge fan of a good analogy!!
Hey sorry for posting this so late but I just wanted to thank you!!! I got a 98 on the US history regents this past june... i watched all your videos and felt so confident going into the regents!! i also encouraged all of my friends to watch them and will be encouraging my younger friends as well! once again these are great and thanks
I'm just presenting information, I try to keep my own bias out of it. I think I tried to show the positives, negatives and steep the whole kettle of learning in the intentions of the founders. I can assure you there is no flag wrapped around my eyes and mind.
I agreed with and supported your explanation until you made the "no flag" comment. For shame. There SHOULD be a "flag wrapped around every American's mind". Heart, too.
So a Faithless Elector can throw an election? Seems like an unnecessary loophole. Why not just get rid of the Electors and make it automatic - the popular vote gets the electoral votes. Why have an actual person as an Elector? Why leave it open to the possibility of corruption?
They can do that, but may not be chosen by the legislature to be electors again. Additionally, if someone was chosen to represent that party in choosing the President, their allegiance is pretty strong unless they fear the parties/people have nominated someone (like say voting against Hitler). That just an extreme example, but I think political philosophies usually run consistent for many that they choose to be electors with some exceptions sometimes.
Drew Carey explains this well, loved you on the Price is Right!
+Cadfinad come on down you're the next contestant on thank you for the comment!
Roflmaaaaooooooooooo
10 years later this video is relevant as never before 😄
Dude who are you??? Your a ROCK STAR Keith Hughes!! Thank you for this video. You explained a lot.
I wish I was a rock star unfortunately I cannot change frets and strum. I am quite uncoordinated, so I became a teacher instead.
You explain things so well. I am a college student and my professors don't seem to explain things as well as you do. Thank you for your wonderful videos.
keith is a homo
But when you break it down, the POTUS isn't elected by the people. It is elected by the electors. If Florida votes for a republican those electors can vote blue. I understand the electoral college BUT to say the American people vote their president is kinda a false statement. These 538 electors decide our president. I think its flawed and kinda unfair. Just my opinion.
Tweeting these out at this point. Love this guy, total winner in my book!
Have done A LOT of research on the electoral college & stayed very confused, so this really helped. I have two questions. First: Most importantly if a faithless electors can vote in opposition to the popular vote of the state they are representing, what is the point of having a populous vote? Second: Very importantly WHO chooses the electors? From everything I've read it seems to vary from state to state but keeps sighting 'the Party". What party are they referring to?
Okay, heads up at the back of the class! What party are they referring to? ( Answer ) Lets say you live in California, 98% of all elected officials are democrat. So the party < would be democrat in the state of California.. WHO chooses the electors ? Answer ..THE PUBLIC! Each state has representatives, the public votes for House Members and Senators ! Again, lets use California ( California has two senators in the United States Senate and 53 representatives in the United States House of Representatives) Meaning they are solid democrat with 53 electoral college votes. To change that, the public would have to start voting Republicans to the Senate and House during the Midterm elections.
@@judyjenkins7088 still do not get it and I am not a dimwit !!
@@judyjenkins7088 Not sure why you felt it necessary to be insulting.
I can see your heart, sir.
Another way to put it is that the EC is our alternate Congress; a special one-issue, one-vote Congress. No one thinks of it as a Congress because they meet in their respective states instead of in Washington, DC.
A great book about the early history of US presidential elections is "The Presidential Game" by Richard P. McCormick. He traces how the Two Party system grew to dominate the process via a) nominating conventions, and b) the winner-take-all game where all of a state's electorships are decided by just over half that state's popular vote.
I just discovered you and you have automatically become A MUST HAVE on my lesson plans! Thank you sooo much! You have saved my behind in my first year teaching :)
My 8th graders sure thank you!
I could save your behind, and much more 🤔😋
So my vote really doesn't count ?
+Gutafack ! Well it sort of does. Kinda.
no it does not. Unless you vote in the majority. If you don't, your candidate get nothing at all.
only for state and local
Your vote represents your state. It's the majority for your state.
SO why vote.
lol. I reject your apology. I usually wear a jacket and tie, I was feeling extra goofy that day. But thanks for the kudos and I hope you subscribe, I have well over a 100 videos on a wide range of political, civil and historical topics.
I want to thank you for taking the time to answer my question, it has been years that I was not clear about this, and I applaud you for wanting to educate me :)
The Barney Fife at the end of this is how am feeling and am educating myself. To my defense I grew up overseas for a good time and thought I would stay there so I was not educated in American History as much as the others. So this was very helpful! Thank you Mr. Hip Hughes!
You can’t go wrong with Barney Fife
I love how you included Andy and Barry at the very end, nice touch!
Then Grey is your guy for sure. I target kids who do not enjoy the school format so I tend to use a lot of analogies and examples of student discourse. But again, thanks for your input, happy trails!
But what if the electors only vote for the candidate that suits their own interests as opposed to those of the people they "represent?"
+Buffalo “Chris Truitt” New Yorker Then you get Bush and Cheney, like you will get Trump & ???. the big money always wins.
Yeah Trumps the last guy they vote for. Especially given that the GOP is like being rattled to the extent that Mitt Romney is trying to bumb Trump back. In this case the electoral college would be useful. I can't see the establishment college voting for Trump no matter what the popular vote indicates.
Then if what you say is true then Hillary wins as Democrats have twice as many billionaires as Republicans.
Watch on UA-cam "Clinton Cash" documentary or read the book which is on the New York Times best seller list by Peter Schweizer. But we have three months to go and looking at pictures of Hillary being helped up her front steps by 4 men doesn't bode well for Hillary.
so much for all the predictions in this thread
You LOST, hope you got over it.
Thank you for making this video ! God Bless your souls
After listening intently, I am still confused!!!
Keith, I have this question regarding the Electoral College consequences in the way federalism works in countries. It is my perception that most direct vote presidential systems in the world tend to move their nations towards centralism. In Mexico, Colombia, Argentina, Brazil and countless other nations the federal governments tend to allocate far greater resources to the most populated cities in their countries, which are normally their capital cities too. This happens in Mexico for example, where enormous resources are allocated to our capital Mexico City while entire regions are abandoned. My perception is that direct vote casts a huge influence on political and economic decisions where presidents will always favor highly populated cities and centralise economies by allocating all or most economic resources of the country. For example, Mexico City is home to all the state powers, the executive branch, congress and the judicial branch, as well as of all state dependencies and state monopolies or state enterprises, and also the federal reserve of the country. This happens too in many other countries in the world but it does not seem to happen in the US. Am I correct?
I think you are correct. The best interests of highly populated areas with mega-cities conflict with agricultural best interests of farming/ranching states in areas like land and water use for example. It is not in the best interests of the entire country to allow high population states to dominate. The electoral college seems to be how we cope with these conflicting interests
Love your videos man...just so you know, you accidently put 13 votes for Wyoming instead of 3 when you added them up on screen
Thank you for this video. You we're very concise and informative.
Tyler Murphy
Check out the 3/5 compromise video
oh no. maybe you should watch it in slow motion. or backwards..... also check out Common Craft's The Electoral College in Plain English or TED-ED has a great one.. "Does your vote count" just google it.
Thank you for your video. I learned this in my political science course in college but I forgot how it worked.
Its a similar system of indirect democracy in Germany where the Land(ers) i.e the electors in the German states choose the Members of Parliament & they in turn choose the German President & chancellor - this is so that the President monitors the constitutional soundness of the Chancellor's actions & the Bunderswehr (Germany's Armed forces swear to uphold the constitution & president) the Constitutional court also monitors the President although it is mostly a ceremonial position= balance powers
I love edutainment peeps. Subscribed! Keep up the good and noble work.
Thank you so much for explaining this to my mother.
I still don't see the danger of having, like the example given in the video, a large number of poor people voting in a direct popular vote. In fact, isn't that a positive example of democracy, how they can elect a candidate they believe will give them a better chance of getting out of poverty?
Inevitably anyone who wins will have voters who belong to some kind of group that becomes the largest group of their voters. Example, white college educated people voted more for Trump... so that's a group, why is that group ok compared to the group of poor people mathematically?
Look at it this way, if Trump (Bush too) won solely because of the electoral college, despite Hillary winning the popular vote, that's perfect evidence that the electoral college is broken and shouldn't exist.
Exactly what they want. They don't want common folk having too much power in such an important decision. It's a buffer for the elite to always have he final say in the vote smh.
We need an amendment redefining the election process. This is a mess
ytubeanon No that is an example of it working the way it was designed. It is designed to give every state equal voting rights not people. It is this way so states like NY and CA with large amounts of people would not be able decide what is best for the whole country.
ytubeanon No that is an example of it working the way it was designed. It is designed to give every state equal voting rights not people. It is this way so states like NY and CA with large amounts of people would not be able decide what is best for the whole country.
I am more confused after watching this video :(
U and me both brother. 🤔
How? Maybe someone can help?
It ensures that the majority will NEVER rule.
@@donovanwilliamsroker4734 good thing the national popular vote interstate compact is getting close to complete.
You people are so dumb. No wonder this country is the way it is.
Every comment here makes me want to jump off a bridge
Explain how you win a state. If there are 51 candidates in California and it's split 25 and 26 between red and blue then how are all 52 EC votes allocated? And how are the two senate EC votes allocated if they're split?
please soneone correct me if I'm wrong....So you mean the peoples vote which is the popular vote doesn't matter if the electoral college representative can choose to not go with the people's popular vote and choose whomever they think should be president which gives them the electoral votes which the candidate would have to get to 270 votes 1st in order to win
Clinton won popular
so my vote doesn't work and It doesn't matter if I do vote ?
sure seems that way, huh!!
This video is wrong!!! The electoral college is there to make sure your vote is HEARD.
Explained in 10 minutes? I was looking for about 2 minutes.
If the electors represent the people of their state, then they should be voting exactly the way the people of their state voted, otherwise, they don't represent their state.
I think its just the background new anchor from the green screen news clip... I must of forgot to mute it.
So how are the electors chosen?
Thank you for using the KISS method here! Helped a bunch
Love the drums.
I know lots who went to those colleges. ❤
Keith, I haven't watched all of the video, but will, but is there more than a seemingly obvious reason that we are not told this (at least in the simple, informative, entertaining way that you get it across)? I mean, "are we kept in the dark" or did I just miss something in Civics class?
So electors are chosen for both Dem/Rep parties. So which of those chosen groups get to actually cast a vote for the president? Only the electors of the parties candidate which won the popular vote? So the other electors do nothing?
Right. No free bus ride for those folks.
Hip Hughes I figured that’s how it should work but I wasn’t sure. Thanks for the video. Such an evergreen topic.
@@hiphughes Does the electoral college vote after the people cast their votes then?
@hughesDV Hey man, as a European student I thank you for the great lessons. I got one question though, how come that the house has to choose out of the best three and the senate has to pick one vice president out of only two when noone has the absolute majority? It is linked since the 12th amendment, so how is this possible. Or is this no longer the case since the 12th amendment?
Thanks for posting these awesome vids.
You mentioned the factionalism mentioned in federalist paper 10 written by Alexander Hamilton. Wasn't paper 10 written by James Madison?
KeepanOpenMind yes it was! But this guy knows so much im sure he makes mistakes too! lol
So does my vote even count?
No, not when electing a president. Not while there is still an Electorial College.
thanks a bunch for your explanation!....you did a great job!
In other words, in reality your vote is almost meaningless. But it gives the populous the illusion they have a ‘say’ in government.
What issue did the electoral college fix
Wow. Your productions have gotten so much better. Way to work on the craft.
Excellent video. Very easy to understand. Thank you.
7:28 - Correct me if I'm wrong, but the number of Electors was not always 538, which means that 270 has not always been the 'minimum' a candidate needed to achieve victory for President of the U.S. The 'magic number' for Electors in the year 1800 was *70*, because there were only 138 Electors, because there were only 138 members in Congress, and 70 is the minimum majority of 138.
It's important to remember that, because if Puerto Rico would become a state, then the number of Electors would increase to at least 541, because they would get two senators and at least one representative.
I'm pointing that out at the 7:45 mark of your video, so I don't currently know if a change in the number of Electors is something you eventually touch on.
Nope ur correct. It correlates to the census and the actual number of electors has gone up each time a new state joined.
How do individual states decide who will be part of their electoral college? Thank you very very much for these videos!!!
But WHO are these electoral college people? who picks them? I would think the candidates would be trying to buy them - send them all kinds of presents and stuff
...
That's How Trump won!!
well the fact is you the people of your state did in your local state elections when you elect your representatives and senate members that have your best interest what is why you voted for them in the first place. like the guy said our system of government is designed in a way that all people rich and poor at different times and in many different state and presidential elections have a say and that no single majority would rarely have or hold all the power over the entire government and that no single branch of government can hold all the power over all the people and try to rule as if they own us.
now on the topic of why trump could be simply put from all the data on all the representatives/electors the majority was voted in the states to help bring more jobs to our people and to limit the spending the government was doing that was not going toward the things the people wanted such as healthcare and job creation and national security, this in part was also influenced in how the last president ruled where the majority of the states people voted to end the things that was not working, and them representative go into office to take care of them matters to limit government that was doing the things the people didnt want., so now say if you wanted to guarantee a election for a set party, it would require party members to mingle through out all the other states and be able to influence the rest of the people to see your political views and vote the same way you want as a possible outcome, then in each state you would want to vote only for the representatives / electors that only share your same party agenda, and then when it comes time to elect the next precedent then you all would also in your state need to vote that direction as well, then and only then you would have a chance that your party will have a majority say in what the outcome could be. this is not something that can ever be perfectly executed because of the dynamic view points of all the people dont always share the same beliefs or points of views or same values as others, but the process still keeps the system honest to not allow any one group of people to have full control over the government as a whole as something as simple as voting for a different representative next times they are up for reelection can change things back in a different direction.
This explanation is for dummies? My brain hurts. I must be a total rock head. This explenation went right over my head. 🤕😕😳😆
Just saw this comment. A 98 is pretty damn impressive. Im glad you did so well, good luck as you continue to kick the worlds ass.
I felt the biggest concern for some Founding Fathers was keeping the Thirteen Original States united against the threat of the "great powers" of the time: Great Britain, France or Spain. If they didn't stand united, there was a chance that one or more of the established "great powers" would attempt to make the states as colonies.
Compromise upon compromise were made to keep the country United: Bi-cameral Congress; Three-fifths compromises; Electoral College; Checks and Balances.
Great video and it helped me alot! but who gets to decide wh's gonna be the electors? Are the electors automatically the members of that state who are members of the house of represantatives?
The electors are chosen by the political party, as are the Presidential candidates.
yes so take a active part in voting in the people that best represent your values, and dont stop their but take a active role in the governing of your state if you want to see real change that you value and others also value in your state.
The electors cannot hold any government office, so no, they are not Members of Congress.
@@jesusthroughmary who are they then? How are they voted in to be an electorate? I don't understand that part? Do we the people vote them in if so when?
@@KaraLynnJack On Election Day, if you read the ballot carefully, you will see that you are casting a vote for "Presidential Electors For (insert name of your preferred candidate)".
Who has 6-8 sentences summarizing this
How ,when and by whom are the electorates chosen? I don't understand!!???🤯🤯🤯
I think that we need a constitutional amendment that would be more democratic, changing the current electoral college from a winner-take-all, in each state, to giving a president a proportional amount of electors in each state.
+Kaydell Leavitt I think first we need a gerrymandering amendment to deal with the problem of parts and Partisan drawn congressional districts. If the elect oral college was tied to these lines I can't even imagine the political partisanship that would be added to the fuel. I do agree though there needs to be a better system that represents the will of the people.
+Keith Hughes (HipHughes) i'm too lazy to edit that last comment
Keith Hughes Which edit was that? I don't really know how to go from my Google notifications, back to my comments on UA-cam.
removing gerrymandering would help a lot as well
I can't believe scooby doo got on the airplane
The indefensible reality is that more than 99% of campaign attention (ad spending and visits) was showered on voters in just ten states in 2012- and that in today's political climate, the swing states have become increasingly fewer and fixed.
Where you live determines how much, if at all, your vote matters.
With the Electoral College and federalism, the Founding Fathers meant to empower the states to pursue their own interests within the confines of the Constitution. National Popular Vote is an exercise of that power, not an attack upon it.
The Electoral College is now the set of 538 dedicated party activists who vote as rubberstamps for their party’s presidential candidate. That is not what the Founders intended.
The Founding Fathers in the Constitution did not require states to allow their citizens to vote for president, much less award all their electoral votes based upon the vote of their citizens.
The presidential election system we have today is not in the Constitution. State-by-state winner-take-all laws to award Electoral College votes, were eventually enacted by states, using their exclusive power to do so, AFTER the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution. Now our current system can be changed by state laws again.
During the course of campaigns, candidates are educated and campaign about the local, regional, and state issues most important to the handful of battleground states they need to win. They take this knowledge and prioritization with them once they are elected. Candidates need to be educated and care about all of our states.
The current state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), under which all of a state's electoral votes are awarded to the candidate who gets the most votes in each separate state, ensures that the candidates, after the conventions, in 2012 did not reach out to about 80% of the states and their voters. 10 of the original 13 states are ignored now. Candidates had no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they were safely ahead or hopelessly behind.
80% of the states and people were just spectators to the presidential election. That's more than 85 million voters, more than 200 million Americans.
Policies important to the citizens of non-battleground states are not as highly prioritized as policies important to ‘battleground’ states when it comes to governing.
Since World War II, a shift of a few thousand votes in one or two states would have elected the second-place candidate in 4 of the 15 presidential elections
The National Popular Vote bill preserves the Electoral College and state control of elections. It changes the way electoral votes are awarded in the Electoral College.
Under National Popular Vote, every voter, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would be included in the state counts and national count.
States have the responsibility and power to make all of their voters relevant in every presidential election and beyond.
Unable to agree on any particular method, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method for selecting presidential electors exclusively to the states by adopting the language contained in section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution-- "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . ." The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as "plenary" and "exclusive."
Federalism concerns the allocation of power between state governments and the national government. The National Popular Vote bill concerns how votes are tallied, not how much power state governments possess relative to the national government. The powers of state governments are neither increased nor decreased based on whether presidential electors are selected along the state boundary lines, or national lines (as with the National Popular Vote).
federalist 10 was actually written by james madison
Letter to the Editor, Nov. 2, 2018
NewspaperNovember 2, 2018 | Daily Review, The & Sunday Review (Towanda, PA)
Author: Staff Writer | Section: Letters To Editor
793 Words | Readability: Lexile: 1120, grade level(s): 9 10 11-12
Why do we have an Electoral College system?
EDITOR: Many people still believe President Trump is an illegitimate president and refuse to acknowledge the results of the election because he didn't win the popular vote. It would be nonsensical to believe Hillary Clinton should be entitled to the presidential throne because she won the popular vote. Since the last election, many people would like to see the Electoral College system abolished before the next presidential election. Many people are not very cognizant as to why our founding fathers put the electoral system in the U.S. Constitution. They realized the election of the president and vice president was more than a matter of just counting votes. It needed to express the will of the people, and it had to be a constitutional and legislative process.
Article II section 1 of the Constitution lays out the process for our presidential elections. The electoral system is used every four years for the election of the president and vice president. The number of electors in each state is equal to the total number of U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives the state is entitled to in congress. Each electoral vote is equal to one vote in congress. This guarantees each state their Constitutional rights to self representation, whether they are voting for the president or voting in any other legislative procedure in Congress. Every state, no matter how small, and Washington D.C. are guaranteed at least three electors. In pursuant to the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution, Washington D. C. is considered to be a state for the election process.
Each state has two groups of electors, one to represent the Republicans and one to represent the Democrats. When you vote for your favorite candidate on the ballot, you are selecting the electors for that candidate's political party. In most states, the candidate that wins the popular vote is awarded all the electoral votes of that state. However, in Maine and Nebraska, the electoral votes are rewarded to the candidate that wins each congressional district, so it is possible to win all or part of the electoral votes in these states. In a presidential election there are 51 popular votes cast, one for each state and one for Washington D.C.
In most states, the political parties nominate the electors at their political state conventions. The electors are usually state elected officials, people who have a strong affiliation with the presidential candidates, or party leaders. Twenty-seven states have laws which compel the electors to vote for their party's candidate. In the remaining states, it is common practice for the electors to vote for their party's candidate.
In pursuant to the 12th Amendment, the electors convene at their state capital on the Monday following the second Wednesday in December to cast their votes. Each elector casts two ballots; one for the president and one for the vice president. The ballots must also consist of a list of all the people voted for. This process is sometimes referred to as the second election. The ballots are certified and sealed and sent to the U.S. Senate to be opened and counted in a joint session of Congress. In early January, the president of the Senate, the incumbent vice president, a member of the executive branch of the federal government, opens, counts the ballots, and calls out the results of the election. Sometimes this is referred to as the third election. The candidate with the majority of electoral votes is declared the president and vice president.
By using the electoral system, in pursuant to Article II section 1, the election of our president is treated the same as any other legislative procedure of our federal government. The electoral system maintains the constitutional rights of each state. Our election procedure starts with the will of the people in each state. Since the number of electors is equal to the number of senators and representatives in each state, it is the same as though they are voting in a joint session of Congress. When the votes are counted by the vice president, the process is passing through the hands of the executive branch of our government. Once he announces the results of the election, it becomes the law of the land.
To do away with the electoral process, and have a popular vote system would be a derision of our Constitution and cataclysmic to our democracy and democratic legislative process. It would be an abridgment upon the constitutional rights of each state's self representation in the legislative procedure. A popular vote would bypass our democratic legislative process, and it would totally obliterate the constitutional, legislative and democratic process of how we elect our president and vice president. Whether you like it or not, under our constitution, Donald Trump is our legitimate president.
Craig H. Pierce
Am I the only person here who read this?
@@Metalwheel No . I just did.
Hey I'm not sure I understood this. You said each state gets 3 votes. Then you said the elector is the state rep and senators. So wyoming has 1 state rep and 2 senators and yet 1 + 2= 13??/
Still don’t get it. Don’t understand how each state gets the number of electors. I get it is based on population .
The Electoral College really encourages many people in certain states not to vote since if it is solid towards one canidate then they feel that their vote won't make a difference (particuarly if it is for the opposite canidate)
I’m conservative and no matter how many I’ve listened to these kinds of videos explaining the electoral college I still don’t get it. Why not just each state count as one vote? California got together they voted and that counts as their vote. Texas got together they voted and that counts as one vote. 50 states, tie breaker would have to be figured out somehow. Not sure yet. But electoral college, who are they? Are they people? How come they get to be in the electoral college? Who selected them? These are the real questions that need to be answered not this BS explanation that explains nothing.
It’s based on the actual population of the state. Would it be fair for California which has the highest population in the country has the same weight as Wyoming which has one of the lowest populations in the country.
@@daking2152 yes I do think it is fair for Wyoming to be treated equally as California. It’s called the United States isn’t it? If I were wyoming I would secede then.
Another fine lesson. Thank you
“Thhhhhhhhats all folks”
So the person that wins the state they get those electoral vote but if you don't win that state with the popular vote you can spilt the electoral vote so if you can win more states with big number electoral votes/points then you can beat out the popular vote am I right ?
yes but it also depends on who your state has elected as representatives and how you take part in making sure they represent you in all the things that you as the people of your state value most. for the past 8 years sense obama the republicans of all the states have steped up in higher numbers then they have in the past after they have started seeing bad signs that was happening, one trigger was the debt crisis where obama put out nation in more debt then all the past precedents combined in only a few years, that one action alone triggered a massive response against the democratic agendas and where it seemed like nothing was going to happen and obama got reelected cause the majority of representatives was democrats, so they as well voted in representatives and put more pressure on them to do something about the matters that concerned them greatly, so what happened is the republicans stood up in large numbers to elect more republicans that represented their ideals best, and similar even democrats that was fed up with the way things going changed sides and also voted in the similar direction. the people made their voice hurd where it needed to happen the most and through that process now the representatives that are now in office from them elections are representing the people on them matters in a higher degree.
rest assured this dont mean its the end of our nation just cause you may or may not like the next pres that got elected, your voice is hurd thee most through your representatives so stay on task and get to know them and support them when they are representing your values in congress. and the house. to sum this all up better, take a larger part in how your state is operating and be part of the direction your state wants to follow or change it if you dont like it we the people have all the power if we just learn how to use it properly. over all the system is designed that the government has to work for the people and represent them on all matters. and that no single branch of government has absolute control.
I have a question, if the candidate wins the popular vote in each state, the Senator can pick whom they think is the right person and they can disregard the popular vote?
Also, would you say you are for the electoral college or against?
Wow, you are a charmer. CPG Grey rocks. I met him @UA-cam and he is a great guy. You on the other hand may need to work on your manners but like all my viewers I do value feedback. Peace.
At 6:00, "the unwritten constitution" ???
It is troubling that the electors of the Electoral College are not technically required to vote according to the popular vote, for their state. Even if they do in practice.
Thanks! I understand the electoral college way more! This video helped a lot! :)
Hy
Why is it bad (which you didn't discuss, only the good)? Because it repeatedly falls into the laps of the powers at be. But having said that, I love your very entertaining clips...and you do seem like a genuinely nice guy. Thanks !!!
Still super confusing.
Interesting how from the start it prevented the poorer people from having any real say...
YOU know?!?!?! I am so tripping! So, the poor get stomped on even in the good ole USA.
I think you misunderstood. Put the weed down and watch it again.
sometimes one must feed the inside cheeto loving couch server which lives in all of us. taking it stride kiddo!
Nebraska and Maine award some of their electoral vote APPortionally not PROportionally.
Thanks! This really helped me with my history test!
Wasn't Fed 10 James Madison as you originally went to state?
Makes you regret not paying attention to history class back in school days ;-)
The electoral college is an important part of our American system.It makes sure that certain states that would otherwise be ignored are not ignored in elections.Did any of you people even watch the video?
+AandNvg who cares about the states? In a real democracy the people living there should be represented. not the states
he talks out both sides....its unfair wyoming has 3 but he later acknowledges winning big states pretty much seals the deal....just do straight up democracy.
System is still garbage. It is predictably broken.
I guess you did not like my heart on.
how does WY go from 3 votes to 13 on screen shot amni the only one catch this?
yes i was wondering about that too.... was it a typo?
Well done, thank you.
Are you saying that electors ARE our state Representors and Senators? Don't they vote for the President of their own party? That makes mid-term elections even more important. So can't they pass a vote to make it what the people want? Majority rule?
AWESOME! I love the way you teach and the creativity in the video. The Earth Zoom to the White House is a great effect.
Thinks for your explication👍👍
I went to another video where it said that when we vote, we actualy vote for the electrols of that state. This election will be hughe because now there's a stronger 3rd party. How will the elector vote if they can vote for their own party?
good job on the explanation. My only question is where are you finding this word "democracy"?
Hehe I was talking about OTHERS!!! :P and yes, I subscrbd. Make up for all my lack of paying attention and skipping class for econ and gov classes in highschool. Most of what you are saying makes sense just those few things are a little confusing. P.S. I think yer outfit looks good for whatever thats worth. But if you have some different lighting (and get a more expensive camera) I think that your face would look less red. :D last thing: I'm 31 -- NOT EXACTLY A KIDDO
Your heart reminds me of that guy from She-Ra. I can't remember his name but I've always called him Prince Valentine. He has the heart and the horse and carries a bow.
Can no one give a straightforward explanation wtf the electoral college, is??
Brett Reinhardt
We are different states making a whole.
United States.
Popular vote would disenfranchise smaller population states.
Electoral system is called a college
Two senators and Congressmen proportional to population
I was civil and honest. Maybe I need to be more specific, but I am limited to 500 characters. I tend to be brief and to the point and prefer my information that way.
Very curious to know if we are being called horses when he asks us to giddy-up? plus the background noise, LMAO!
No. It was never my intention to call my audience horses. I just think the sound effect is kind of funny.
@@hiphughes agreed sir! Never took that to heart 😅
To me what is dumb is a state with 40 million people has 2 Senators & a state with half a million has 2 Senators. Perhaps California should be split into North & South California & add two more Senators.