slug.com slug.com

5 3

Would Abolishing the Electoral College Incentivize Voter Fraud?

As things stand, if a political party perpetrates voter fraud in a national election... it's a Threshold sort of thing. Most states are winner-take-all states. If cheating does not alter the outcome of the state's election then essentially the slate is wiped clean. Only the electoral votes count towards a candidate's total.

But... in an election decided solely by popular vote... each and every vote counts towards a candidate's total. So even if voter fraud is below the threshold to carry a state... those fraudulent votes still count.
Every little bit hurts.

Now consider that some democrats in California support allowing illegal aliens to vote in local elections. And once registered to vote those non-citizens would never, ever vote in a federal election. Perish the thought. Most certainly not...not unless they get confused or something. (Voter Fraud By Accident there's a new wrinkle for ya.)
Just this week a democrat in Congress called for the decriminalization of illegal immigration.
Just this month alone, one hundred thousand illegal immigrants crossed our Southern border.

Many democrats are also calling for the voting age to be lowered to the age of 16.
Why would they support such an obviously bad idea?
They need numbers. And rather than sway existing voters towards their policies, they need new voters.

Their "stealth agenda" is rather non-ninja, it's kinda pathetically obvious.
There are good reasons why we're not a pure democracy. There are reasons why we choose a representative that is supposedly better informed, better educated and perhaps a bit more intelligent than the average constituent. The Mob Rules is a good song, but a poor form of government.

An_Ominous 7 Apr 3
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

5 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

We are a confederacy of 50 sovereign states, agreed to unite under a constitution (and a cotract to consolidate the debt of the revolutionary war)
That being said it is the states that elect the president not the people. It is not a vote of 350 mil but a vote of 50 states.
In order to dissolve the electorial college you literally wpuld have to dissolve the sovereignty of states.

1

I understand the current method to undercut the Electoral College; a state votes to change its election law to cast their Electoral Votes for the candidate that wins the overall popular vote in the nation as a whole. I suppose this is legal, but doesn't it effectively disenfranchise the citizens of that state if the results get flipped by the new law? I suppose it will take some of these Blue states having to cast their Electoral votes for Donald Trump in 2020 for the activists to feel their self-inflicted wounds. These voting laws should be illegal because they potentially disenfranchise their citizens and they also remove the effectiveness of political voices in all but the large urban areas. If we think our government doesn't hear us now, just wait.

If democrats can't change a law... they make an end run around it.
The states that have pledged their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote are denying the voice of their state. In fact they're pretty much denying the reason we have states. If we implement laws like these, why even have states?
The only problem I have with the Electoral College is that the Electors do not have to vote the way that their state did. They are supposed to... but they are not obligated to.
In fact after election day but before the vote was certified some democrats were applying pressure trying to get some Electors to change their vote. Yeah... that wasn't election tampering or anything.

The only Electoral College reform that I think we need is to do away with electors. When the state's vote is tallied the Electoral Votes should be automatically cast for the candidate that won the state.

If the democrats want to eliminate the Electoral College... then they should do away with the Senate as well, because it operates on the same principle.

1

Yeah, preposterous. You can't pursue policy for the sole purpose of winning elections. Why do they even want to do this? Because they lost the election and with it, power and control. Why do they want to pack the supreme court? Because they lost power and control. The modern Democrat party is the party of expedience. Well, check that--the Republican party isn't really different. This stuff has been going on for quite some time. I'm an independent reluctantly standing with Republicans because the Democrats have fallen off the edge, and I think they're actually MORE corrupt than the right (ignoring the far right/far left, but the far left has moved so far left they're nearly right of the right--in fact, I was joking, but that idea has some merit I'll need to think more about). I think there is nothing Democrats wouldn't do anymore to maintain power and control. Ethics/morals--they're not longer relevant. All that matters is power and control. This is NOT good for our country. I still consider myself 'in the middle', but the middle moved. Dramatically. The Democrats just left me standing there. Anyway, Democrats are simply a very bad idea right now, and I don't know if sanity will ever return--short of Kuhn's catastrophic event...Done babbling.

For babbling that was quite cogent 🙂
Although I tend to lean conservative... I used to pretty much ignore politics. I used to say there was little difference between the parties. Demons vs Devils... they'll both send the nation to hell in the lowest bid handbasket.
I don't feel that way anymore. I started writing political stuff because one side of the aisle insults my intelligence a whole lot more than the other does. And well when the insult is egregious that's when I tend to write something.
I'm still cynical and skeptical... I realize that one of the reasons the problem at the border hasn't been solved is that elements on both sides of the aisle prefer it to remain open. The party wants an issue to remain unresolved so that they can campaign on it and bludgeon the other party with it.
When the democrats had a super majority they could have passed their much vaunted "comprehensive immigration reform." That they didn't makes me suspect that they would rather it remain an issue.
Now, I'm babbling. 🙂

@An_Ominous, makes a lot of sense. I think we pretty much see this thing the same way. It's an odd position for a middle-of-the-roader to 'pick a side'--reluctantly or not. It's NOT a comfortable position, but it's authentic, and in my view as rational as I can be. I still call myself an independent, and that's born out in some specific policy positions. The easier part is I don't consider Trump a Republican either. So, in a sense I can still stand outside the institution substantively--like nationalism--separate, but with a trade agreement.

@chuckpo Interesting. I don't consider Trump a republican either. Historically he's supported issues antithetical to conservative positions.
He sure as hell wasn't my first choice for the republican nominee. The way he campaigned against other republicans was reprehensible. And it was stupid. Now he has deeply ingrained opposition within his own party. That was entirely foreseeable.
With that said... he's done a better job as President. If he would only stop the damn tweeting and the endless bickering he would be inestimably better.
I mean theoretically the reason he became president was to help America not to engage in ceaseless game of one-man-upman-ship.
Again, even though he's easily distracted by well, everything... at least in his policies he does show a measure of common sense. And so far the democratic candidates have not shown an iota of that.

@An_Ominous, I don't feel much differently. However in my attempt to piece together some sense, I've toyed with the idea Trump is fighting a culture war. Man, it is chaotic. But, the guy can't be that stupid--I think how he functions on policy, and it just doesn't mesh. I think we're seeing some influence of reality tv. I think Trump learned 'lessons' he's embraced, and I sure don't want to admit he has a point on that. But, the interesting part to me is the war over weaponized pc/identity politics. Trump as our proxy is one man against everyone outside of his voters, and the dude is winning. Can you feel it? Can you feel the lanes of free speech opening up? I think he's literally moved the ball against pc/identity politics. That's an incredible social change in a really short period of time.

If you were going to fight back against pc/identity politics, how would you fight that battle? Calm reason does NOT work--hasn't worked--ever. And, as much as I hate the carnival atmosphere because it lies somewhere underneath dignity, it does work. Trump works--that's not a huge compliment to human beings. But, what he's doing is working, both in fighting the culture war and sensible policy. I believe no other person could be president right now. This time was built for this guy. He's like a puppet-master.

I didn't support Trump in the primaries either. I voted for him, but I still wasn't sold on him at election time. Now, I'm all in. I don't think he gets us 100%, but he understands more than any other politician I've seen on any side. I actually think he can still improve if he'd listen to us more. It really is about the people and returning the power to the people--all of it.

@chuckpo I'm in full support of him for as long as he is president.
The way the media has a full blown frothing cow about everything he does... Well my wife said that she didn't particularly want to defend him... but the sheer outrageous nature of the attacks against him have moved her to defend him on almost a daily basis.
I used to think that his supporters chose him despite his crass, unfiltered speech. Now... I'm pretty sure his supporters chose him because of those things.
The media won't admit it, but Obama trash talked his political opponents regularly. He did it in more refined sort of way... but the content was still the equivalent of trash talk. And again, the media and leftists don't want to admit that he was divisive... but it's not hard at all to find examples of this.

So... when the pendulum swings far to the left... it sure doesn't stop in the center. And some of the things he says are highly entertaining. His response to Pelosi denying him the House for his State of the Union Address was hilarious.
And I must admit to taking no small pleasure in the liberal's discomfiture. The daily baptism of liberal tears, the gnashing of too white teeth, the rending of high fashion garments... now that's entertainment!
Still I think Trump's problem is that he doesn't know when it's too much. Mar A Lago... gilds the wholly hell out of the lillly and he taunts the media with a similar sense of restraint 🙂
And he's lightyears beyond the best democratic candidate. If he's the republican nominee he'll have my vote.

@An_Ominous, hahaha. Funny. I'm probably closer to your wife. I cringe. It's very uncomfortable for me. But, I keep asking myself how I would fight the leftist oppression, and my answer is I can't. I don't have the tools. I try to reason, and I'm very careful to not be insulting. I play right into their hands. We're easy for them, because they actually WANT that grandiose public display. They're EXACTLY like Trump--exactly. There's not even a little bit of difference. They're just appalled that he fights like they do. I think that's why we hired him. And, he's done an extraordinary job. Democrats elected Trump more than we did. They just don't know it.

1

The game is to flood the zones with illegals, flip Texas. Do away with the electoral college and mint a dozen progressive Presidents. Illegals are voting...as dead people and in conjunction with the false I'd and social security cartel businesses....

1

Democrats want to ban electoral college and they want the majority to decide who is going to be president. They'll be pleasantly surprised to find out that if electoral college is gone, abortion, gay marriage and other topics may swing the other way. More than 51% of population are pro-life, so i guess popular vote would ban abortion. That is just an example.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:27301
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.