Electoral college, should it be eliminated? Options

[sadolakced acid]

Should the electoral college be eliminated?

with it, a person could loose every state by 1 vote except california, and win california by a landslide and then loose the race.

with it, democrats in red states feel thier vote doesn't count, and republicans in blue states feel thier vote doesn't count.

if the electoral college were to be eliminated, then everyone's vote would count.

[luvnspecialsaus]

I say yes.
The electoral college was originally created before there was TV and huge, nationwide campaigning. It was so stupid, uninformed America wouldn't make a mistake. It should absolutely be eliminated because of the technology, nationally broadcast debates, and the general political knowledge people have. The majority of our presidents have gotten the lesser popular vote, but win because of the electoral college.
it's silly and outdated and needs to go!
aaaaaaaaaaaaand I'm done.

[*mipadi*]

The majority of our presidents have gotten the lesser popular vote, but win because of the electoral college.

That's not entirely true. As far as I know, it has only happened twice--once in the late 1800's, and once in 2000. It may have happened a handful of other times, but not in the majority of cases.

Having said that, the issue of the electoral college is a sticky one. In some ways, I feel it's time for it to go. As has been pointed out, the electoral college is a throwback to the days when candidates simply could not campaign all over the US; thus most people were uninformed, so they elected proxies who they trusted to make an informed decision. Of course, political parties now have pledged electors, and with the advent of TV and the Internet, it's easy for a candidate to get his message out anywhere in the US.

The issue comes up that candidates may only campaign in major metropolitan areas, such as NYC or LA, and some might say that's not fair; then again, it's also not fair, in my mind, that a lot of people in the south can throw an election, too (such as happened in 2000).

[sadolakced acid]

That's not entirely true. As far as I know, it has only happened twice--once in the late 1800's, and once in 2000. It may have happened a handful of other times, but not in the majority of cases.

Having said that, the issue of the electoral college is a sticky one. In some ways, I feel it's time for it to go. As has been pointed out, the electoral college is a throwback to the days when candidates simply could not campaign all over the US; thus most people were uninformed, so they elected proxies who they trusted to make an informed decision. Of course, political parties now have pledged electors, and with the advent of TV and the Internet, it's easy for a candidate to get his message out anywhere in the US.

The issue comes up that candidates may only campaign in major metropolitan areas, such as NYC or LA, and some might say that's not fair; then again, it's also not fair, in my mind, that a lot of people in the south can throw an election, too (such as happened in 2000).

actuallly it's happened like... 4 or 5 times or so. 1800s presidents; doesn't really make a difference tho.



the main problem with the electoral college is it makes for a president that only appeals to certain sections of the country.

[*mipadi*]

actuallly it's happened like...  4 or 5 times or so.  1800s presidents; doesn't really make a difference tho. 
the main problem with the electoral college is it makes for a president that only appeals to certain sections of the country.

It occurred 4 times: 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000.