Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
According to International IDEA, the United States has almost the lowest voter turnout in the world, ranked a measly 140 out of 163. Perhaps Americans are apathetic, or maybe they’re just concerned their vote is meaningless in the face of America's massive political machine. Can my vote really change the course of politics, or am I just a grain of sand on the massive beach of democracy?
 |
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008-2010 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
The Electorial College decides
I agree with Iraqvet!
And that's why we must push for the abolition of the Electoral College ASAP, because I live in a state (Texas) that is Republican dominated even though I plan to vote Democratic this year. It is upsetting to think my vote and support for Barack Obama will amount to nothing! Free the elections! Let the PEOPLE, not an elite group, decide!
- Dale Husband
October 16, 2008 5:32PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I disagree with Dale Husband
If we were to go to a popular vote then the elections would be pretty much decided by the four largest cities in the country. All other states would not matter. This makes sure that every state has some say in the election.
- Iraqvet
October 16, 2008 5:57PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
No way!
"If we were to go to a popular vote then the elections would be pretty much decided by the four largest cities in the country."
Why? That argument would only make sense if all four largest cities voted the same way every time. Cultural and industrial differences between them makes that unlikely.
"All other states would not matter. This makes sure that every state has some say in the election."
Why? That makes no sense, really. If a state is known to be leaning towards the Democrats under the present system, there is no reason for the Republican candidate to bother with it, and vice versa. Having Presidents elected by popular vote forces the candidates of both major parties to work that much harder to win votes in every single state.
- Dale Husband
October 16, 2008 11:57PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
electoral votes
"If we were to go to a popular vote then the elections would be pretty much decided by the four largest cities in the country. All other states would not matter. This makes sure that every state has some say in the election ."
Every state does not have the same say. California has 55 electoral votes, while Wyoming has 3. In fact it's grossly disproportionate. California has approx 33million people while Wyoming has approx 500,000. So proportionately speaking a person in wyoming have a greater voice then a person in California.
Moreover If the largest cities in california carry the state to the democratic candidate then all the republic votes are essentially ignored and their electoral college votes go to a democrat.
both of these examples show a gross misrepresentation by the electoral college.
- Serothis
March 24, 2009 10:43PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.