Is a 97% success rate to low to be considered working.
Only 2 times has a president lost the popular vote and wont the electoral.
Cleveland lost his reelection bid and though he won the popular vote (the south) he lost the the electoral. only carried 18 states.
Gore had the popular vote by carrying the West coast, northeast and upper midwest. While bush carried the rest of the country.
The only improvement I could see would be to eliminate the actual electors and have the States popular vote count as a win and then just have a majority of the states. So it's a 1 state 1 vote thing, and say you have to carry 26 of the 50.
Just remember 97% of the time the electoral college votes with the popular vote.. I can`t even think of anything that has that success rate.
Friday, November 11, 2011 10:27:47 AM
@donax i fail to see how some individuals' votes aren`t as important as others. please explain. and while you`re at it, why it would matter that "population centers" have more say? places with larger populations are still made up of individuals. it`s not like just because someone lives in florida, they`re going to vote republican. it sounds as if you`ve been looking at too many "red vs blue" maps and ignoring the gradient.
instead of just reading the first sentence and then spouting off the same stuff why do you try to understand what people are saying.
I think the electoral college makes sense. I was stating that Gore won the popular vote, but the popular vote wasn't really representative of the entire country, which is why the founding fathers had the electoral college because they knew that population centers would have more say that rural states and that rural states needed a way to have a say in elections.
And actually Gore won the popular vote has EVERYTHING to do with how presidents are elected. Get off your high horse and stop assuming everyone to be ignorant