Quote Originally Posted by GoldenBoy812
The Electoral College is another part of the "checks and balances". You cannot just give ultimate power to a populace, because saddly there are allot, i mean allot of stupid motherfuckers out there. I bet anyone could find 10 people on a college campus that would vote for Flavor Flave to be president in less than an hour.
But have you ever heard of the Electoral College defying the popular vote on any scale at all? Maybe one or two electors will go against their mandate, but not much more than that, and it would be hard to argue that they did so because their own judgement was so much better than the people who sent them to the Electoral College. If there were ever enough Electoral College defectors to actually swing an election, there would be hell to pay, and especially if their rationale was that they were acting as "checks and balances" against "stupid motherfucker" voters. There would be armed insurrection. As a practical matter, the idea that the Electoral College can balance the stupidity of the general electorate is unworkable. And I don't even believe that there are enough truely stupid people who are motivated enough to vote to warrant overriding the popular vote --- if we start down that road, we might just as well do away with Democracy altogether.
dragonrider Reviewed by dragonrider on . One vote is such BS. With all the different candidates, why the heck do we get only one vote? This makes it so there are few supporters for the candidates that could actually make our country prosper (Ron Paul), and the people that vote for them only take votes from the front runner that shares a lot of the same views. If they didn't purposely set it up like this, then they sure are taking advantage of it. Which is why it need to be changed. You should get a primary vote and a secondary vote. That way I could Rating: 5