|
|
As America hurtles toward the next presidential race, the HBO film
'Recount' will relive the fervor of 2000's messy election. Kevin Spacey
and Denis Leary take Al Gore's fight to the courts on May 25 - make your own case here on the boards, where the most cogent arguments will be featured in a special poll on HBO.com. And don't worry - this time all the votes will be counted.
The question: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral votes?
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
11/19/08
|
|
(252 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral votes?
Nov 19, 2008 4:27 PM
|
The Electoral College seems to exist as a way to combat regional disparity but in practice creates scenarios where votes in only a few states "count". The EC needs to either be completely discarded, or at the very least, handled in such a way that Electoral Votes are not "winner take all" in each state, but distributed in proportion to the popular vote in each state. Florida, for example, should have been split down the middle (25 / 2 = 12.5 ) in 2000. Some states, such as North Dakota I believe, do this already. This needs to be the rule across the board. Not only does the current electoral process make it too easy to cheat by making it harder to vote or instructions harder to follow in a few "battleground" states, it also distorts results. In 2008, Obama clearly won the popular vote but not at the same proportion that the Electoral Vote would suggest.
If the EC is to exist, the rules need to change to become more fair and less difficult to cheat. Ideally, there should be no EC. Ideally, every vote across the entire nation would be cast and counted in EXACTLY THE SAME FASHION ; a simple paper ballot where a person makes a mark next to the person they want to vote for. It's easy to do, easy to count (even for computers), easy to recount by hand, and very hard to cheat. More than anything, the United States needs a non-partisan body to determine uniform voting rules across the country.
|
|
|
Posts:
652
Registered:
1/17/08
|
|
(251 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral votes?
Nov 7, 2008 12:41 PM
|
This most recent election it really wasn't an issue, as the President-elect won by the majority of both, but it has always been my opinion that it should be the popular vote, the vote of the people, that should mean much, much more than anything else. It's ridiculous to think that anything other than the people's vote should matter in my view. Isn't that what democracy is all about?
--
*********
Host_Ginna
HBO Forums Host
|
|
|
Posts:
5
Registered:
10/23/08
|
|
|
Posts:
168
Registered:
9/14/07
|
|
(249 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral votes?
Jun 10, 2008 9:10 PM
|
By the way although Horberger wrote the article the figures and facts are direct quotes from Shirers own "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich". Something I'm thinking, that you should have recognized since you read both the English and German editions.
Just to refresh your memory:
The story of how Hitler became a dictator is set forth in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, by William Shirer, on which this article is based.
In the presidential election held on March 13, 1932, there were four candidates: the incumbent, Field Marshall Paul von Hindenburg, Hitler, and two minor candidates, Ernst Thaelmann and Theodore Duesterberg. The results were:
Hindenburg 49.6 percent
Hitler 30.1 percent
Thaelmann 13.2 percent
Duesterberg 6.8 percent
At the risk of belaboring the obvious, almost 70 percent of the German people voted against Hitler, causing his supporter Joseph Goebbels, who would later become Hitler?s minister of propaganda, to lament in his journal, ?We?re beaten; terrible outlook. Party circles badly depressed and dejected.?
Since Hindenberg had not received a majority of the vote, however, a runoff election had to be held among the top three vote-getters. On April 19, 1932, the runoff results were:
Hindenburg 53.0 percent
Hitler 36.8 percent
Thaelmann 10.2 percent
Thus, even though Hitler?s vote total had risen, he still had been decisively rejected by the German people.
On June 1, 1932, Hindenberg appointed Franz von Papen as chancellor of
|
|
|
Posts:
168
Registered:
9/14/07
|
|
(248 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 8:37 PM
|
> nightshades wrote:
> >"By the way Beagle the source that I quoted that
> quoted the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich was
> written by Jacob Hornberger."
>
> Hornberger's analysis and conclusions are contrary to
> Shirer's own opinion as I've pointed out repeatedly.
>
> Have you ever actually read The Rise and Fall
> of the Third Reich, I wonder? I've read it
> in both the English and German languages.
>
> Drop this topic, please ...
>
> --
> I, Beagle CMXIV
No, I won't drop it. We are not talking about opinions when it comes to Hitler's rise to power. We are talking about the facts, and the facts are that Hitler was directly rejected from any political office by the populace. You as quoted in your own post, brought the topic up to begin with as a reason that the president shouldn't be elected by the populace. And now that you don't wish to discuss it you have decided all on your own that it shouldn't be discussed. Why? If the reason were indeed that it had nothing to do with the subject being discussed, why were you the first to initiate it into the conversation?
Secondly, many people are quite unaware that Hitler was not elected to any governmental position, and certainly not one of power, and they use it as a reason to keep the electoral voting system in place.
I am all for the rule of majority, and the majorities decision as to whether or not the electoral college voting system remains as is, however they should make those decisions based on FACTS not FICTION. So in my opinion the subject is more than relevant.
And still I ask "What is your reason for not wanting to discuss it, when you brought it up in the first place?"
And make no mistake, I don't expect you to answer the question, but as I said once before "silence many times speaks louder than words."
--
Edited by nightshades at 06/10/2008 5:38 PM PDT
|
|
|
Posts:
1,604
Registered:
10/30/05
|
|
(247 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 6:52 PM
|
nightshades wrote:
>"By the way Beagle the source that I quoted that quoted the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich was written by Jacob Hornberger."
Hornberger's analysis and conclusions are contrary to Shirer's own opinion as I've pointed out repeatedly.
Have you ever actually read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, I wonder? I've read it in both the English and German languages.
Drop this topic, please ...
--
I, Beagle CMXIV
|
|
|
Posts:
168
Registered:
9/14/07
|
|
(246 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 6:26 PM
|
By the way Beagle the source that I quoted that quoted the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich was written by Jacob Hornberger.
--
Edited by nightshades at 06/10/2008 3:28 PM PDT
|
|
|
Posts:
168
Registered:
9/14/07
|
|
(245 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 6:24 PM
|
> The States elect the President; not the people
> as a whole. This is fundamental to our
> Constitutional process.
>
> The Office of President does Not represent all
> of the people: that is entirely contrary to our
> Constitution.
>
> The President is the executor of legislative actions
> approved by Congress (Senate and House of
> Representatives), along with being Commander-in-Chief
> of the military and the primary director of the
> various Federal departments of foreign policy and
> domestic affairs.
>
> The Presidential Office is encumbered by the
> Legislative and Judicial branches of our government
> -- that is to say, our system of checks and
> balances.
>
> If the President were beholden only to the popular
> nationwide vote of the majority, what would prevent
> that person from initiating plebiscites to validate
> any chosen action?
>
> Shades of Huey P. Long, Adolf Hitler, Mussolini and
> going all the way back to Pericles loom.
>
> Beware ...
>
> --
> I, Beagle CMXIV
This is your original post Beagle. It was you who brought up the subject of Hitler to begin with, and now it's off topic. Off topic must mean only when someone else brings out the facts that show contrary to your opinion.
By the way AKtow, that last post of mine wasn't to you but to Beagle.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,604
Registered:
10/30/05
|
|
(244 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 5:14 PM
|
Aktow wrote:
>" ... In any event, thanks for the lesson on how Hitler got elected"
Hitler was never elected; that's not how the German political system works. The Chancellor (who holds the governmental reins) is an appointive office, is now and has been for a century or more.
The discussion of German politics is 'way off-topic'.
...
--
I, Beagle CMXIV
|
|
|
Posts:
11
Registered:
6/9/08
|
|
(243 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 4:56 PM
|
nightshades said: I find it more than strange that you also brought up Hitler as an example of why the electoral college is necessary
Actually, it was I that mentioned Hitler. The Founding Fathers wanted the electoral college to act as a buffer between the citizenry and the presidency in the event the majority of the American people voted for a candidate who 'duped' them. As I'm sure you know, there are not many examples of how this could happen, but Hitler seemed to illustrate the idea behind it.
In any event, thanks for the lesson on how Hitler got elected
|
|
|
Posts:
1,604
Registered:
10/30/05
|
|
(242 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 4:37 PM
|
Aktow wrote:
>"HBO didn't do anyone any favors either by portraying the Gore campaign as the victim in all of this. I'm no fan of George Bush, but I understand why the USSC decided the way they did.
>I know there are a lot of people who think Gore got screwed by the USSC, but HBO should know better. I understand it's not easy for people to follow all that went on in Florida, but HBO? There's no excuse for HBO not to understand"
Bravo!
...
--
I, Beagle CMXIV
|
|
|
Posts:
168
Registered:
9/14/07
|
|
(241 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 4:30 PM
|
> Host_Angela wrote:
> >"I have learned a LOT I didn't know thanks to
> this forum!"
>
> I wonder exactly what you've learned? About two
> thirds of these posts are in factual error and/or off
> topic, illogical, incomprehensible and so on.
>
> It's an interesting topic but you should be selective
> about what you learn.
>
> ...
>
> --
> I, Beagle CMXIV
Two thirds of this conversation is not in error, nor is it off topic, illogical, or incomprehensible. It seems I suspect that you have your own agenda. I find it more than strange that you also brought up Hitler as an example of why the electoral college is necessary, and when shown the error of that statement, you chose to ignore it. Just as you choose to ignore anything that you don't wish to discuss.
|
|
|
Posts:
11
Registered:
6/9/08
|
|
(240 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 4:27 PM
|
> I wonder exactly what you've learned? About two
> thirds of these posts are in factual error and/or off
> topic, illogical, incomprehensible and so on.
HBO didn't do anyone any favors either by portraying the Gore campaign as the victim in all of this. I'm no fan of George Bush, but I understand why the USSC decided the way they did.
I know there are a lot of people who think Gore got screwed by the USSC, but HBO should know better. I understand it's not easy for people to follow all that went on in Florida, but HBO? There's no excuse for HBO not to understand
|
|
|
Posts:
1,604
Registered:
10/30/05
|
|
(239 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 3:57 PM
|
Host_Angela wrote:
>"I have learned a LOT I didn't know thanks to this forum!"
I wonder exactly what you've learned? About two thirds of these posts are in factual error and/or off topic, illogical, incomprehensible and so on.
It's an interesting topic but you should be selective about what you learn.
...
--
I, Beagle CMXIV
|
|
|
Posts:
1,604
Registered:
10/30/05
|
|
(238 of 252)
Re: Should the President be elected by popular vote instead of electoral vo
Jun 10, 2008 3:56 PM
|
Delete: double post
--
Edited by Beagle914 at 06/10/2008 12:58 PM PDT
|
|
|
|
|
