07-29-2022, 03:22 PM
(07-29-2022, 03:17 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Allowing for a popular vote for POTUS doesn't equate to straight majority rule. That is a terrible argument for maintaining the EC.
First, the EC wasn't about preventing majority rule. It was about letting the elites pick the president because the average citizen would not know the individuals running. This was, of course, after they moved on from having Congress pick the president which was the same thing. It had nothing to do with preventing majority rule. This is one of the biggest lies in this whole discussion.
Alternatively, it was to allow the states of the United States to each have their own say in who is President of the United States.
Quote:Second, POTUS doesn't "rule." We don't have a ruler. Congress is who makes the laws. Each person in Congress represents a geographical area. The Senate is there to provide this parity you mention, and that is fine. It is a good system. POTUS doesn't rule, though, and they can be put in check by Congress or SCOTUS. Those are the real checks on the office.
I was speaking of the general intent of the Framers, not only in regard to the presidency, which I addressed above.
Quote:Third, the EC is an outdated system that is not even being used as it was intended from the start. As previously mentioned, it exists based on the premise that the average citizen will not even know the candidate for POTUS but they would know a person they would trust to cast a vote on their behalf for POTUS. This is no longer the case. How many people in this country actually cast their ballot for an Elector in this country? The answer is zero. Most people, the vast majority, could not even tell you who the Electors would be if their preferred candidate won. We don't actually use the system as designed. It is only maintained to reduce the power of the citizenry in deciding an election.
I disagree that that was the sole intention behind the EC, again as I explained above. If the states don't have their own say in who is POTUS then why the hell do we have them in the first place? As you know the system was created intentionally to give the states a large degree of autonomy, the EC is just on facet of that.
Quote:And the last point for this soapbox of mine for today is that the role of POTUS is not to oversee the states. That's not the job. The role is to run the executive branch and be the Commander in Chief and the Diplomat in Chief. They have no authority over Congress, over the governors, over anyone other than federal executive branch employees. So the idea that the states choose the POTUS instead of the people is asinine. It is rooted in antiquated thinking that is actually rooted in the ideals of the Articles of Confederation and not the Constitution under which our government is formed.
Again, this is an argument directed at a point that wasn't being made, but I understand how you came to that conclusion.
