McCain-warns-there-will-be- war

[sirs]

The electorate is the American people voting.  The Constitution is a document trying in this case to take some of that fabled "democracy" away from the American people voting. 

LOL.....well, that's 1 whacked out interpretation of our country's greatest document.  Thanks for the good chuckle, as I head off to work

[Michael Tee]

<<LOL.....well, that's 1 whacked out interpretation of our country's greatest document.  Thanks for the good chuckle, as I head off to work>>

That's one undisputed analysis of the theory underlying the Electoral College and the College's reason for being.  No historian that I'm aware of has ever advanced another.  Maybe (apart from your own illustrious opinion) you can point me to one who has.

[Amianthus]

That's one undisputed analysis of the theory underlying the Electoral College and the College's reason for being.  No historian that I'm aware of has ever advanced another.  Maybe (apart from your own illustrious opinion) you can point me to one who has.

I'd like to read about this "theory" that the electoral college was setup to take democracy away from the American people.

The only "theory" I've ever heard is the one advanced by the framers: the election was setup the way it was because the President is the leader of the coalition of the various STATES, not the citizens. The state government is supposed to represent the citizens, while the federal government works out relations between states and between the United States as a whole and foreign interests. Therefore, it's the STATES that elect the President, and not the citizens.

[Plane]

<<LOL.....well, that's 1 whacked out interpretation of our country's greatest document.  Thanks for the good chuckle, as I head off to work>>

That's one undisputed analysis of the theory underlying the Electoral College and the College's reason for being.  No historian that I'm aware of has ever advanced another.  Maybe (apart from your own illustrious opinion) you can point me to one who has.

One of the reasons was the lack of instantainious communication , it is so long since the invention of the telegraph that we have become ignorant of the problems faced by people who were seaparated by a few days travel.

When the Elections were held ,a tie would have been hard to deal with unless there were electors who could change their vote.

The constitution was a document of practicality and idealism , the Electorial colledge is a way to acheve both.

Haveing a bit of separation between the people and direct controll of the government is also an intended effect of the Electorial colledge as well as several other features that make the democracy depend on representatives rather then direct votes. This is not enough to keep the people from getting their way , it is enough to allow a fad to blow over before law is made.

This effect has worked against my faction in the Abortion debate , if submitted to a referendum , Abortion rights would very likely fail even now , if submitted to a referendum the same year as Roe Vs Wade was decided it would have failed in a landslide.

[sirs]

<<LOL.....well, that's 1 whacked out interpretation of our country's greatest document.  Thanks for the good chuckle, as I head off to work>>

That's one undisputed analysis of the theory underlying the Electoral College and the College's reason for being.  

See above for proper clarification of that latest response.  Suffice to say, how smart the founders were to prevent major urban populations to dictate who's going to be president for the other 80+% of the country

[_JS]

Actually, with the wink, I'm dead on accurate with how much a joke the idea is.  Borders the Elvis Factor.  But as long as you feel better, that's the important thing     

As I recall Sirs, the electorate chose Al Gore. The electoral college chose George W. Bush.

My Bad.....you're right Js, the Constitution chose Bush over Gore.  Good catch

No. The constitution is a document and cannot perform any action on its own accord.

The electorate are the elgibile voters of the region being discussed (in this case the United States).

The Electoral College is a group of people chosen through a process and allocated by the various states to vote for candidates determined on party lines.

You said that George W Bush was chosen by the electorate, which is false. Al Gore was chosen by the electorate. George W. Bush was chosen by the Electoral College. No one was chosen by the constitution, which is not a living being with a mind of its own. You may state that Bush was chosen through a process written into the U.S. Constitution. That would be accurate.

[Michael Tee]

ALEXANDER HAMILTON FROM THE FEDERALIST PAPERS
http://www.avagara.com/e_c/reference/00012601.htm

<<It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.

<<It was also peculiarly desirable to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder. This evil was not least to be dreaded in the election of a magistrate, who was to have so important an agency in the administration of the government as the President of the United States. But the precautions which have been so happily concerted in the system under consideration, promise an effectual security against this mischief. The choice of SEVERAL, to form an intermediate body of electors, will be much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements, than the choice of ONE who was himself to be the final object of the public wishes. And as the electors, chosen in each State, are to assemble and vote in the State in which they are chosen, this detached and divided situation will expose them much less to heats and ferments, which might be communicated from them to the people, than if they were all to be convened at one time, in one place. >>

[sirs]

You said that George W Bush was chosen by the electorate, which is false. Al Gore was chosen by the electorate. George W. Bush was chosen by the Electoral College. No one was chosen by the constitution, which is not a living being with a mind of its own.

Actually, it was put together by those "living beings with minds of their own" folk, and I did already concede about the electorate vs electoral college.  So why the need to repeat that is quite puzzling

You may state that Bush was chosen through a process written into the U.S. Constitution. That would be accurate.

Pretty much, what I inferred

[Amianthus]

[snippage]

This doesn't say that it was setup to take democracy from the people; indeed it shows that democratic principles are adhered to: "selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass."

[_JS]

<<LOL.....well, that's 1 whacked out interpretation of our country's greatest document.  Thanks for the good chuckle, as I head off to work>>

That's one undisputed analysis of the theory underlying the Electoral College and the College's reason for being.  

See above for proper clarification of that latest response.  Suffice to say, how smart the founders were to prevent major urban populations to dictate who's going to be president for the other 80+% of the country

LOL

Do you realize that your sentence is completely illogical? If 80% of the country lived outside of major urban centers, then they and not those deranged urbanites would be the ones electing the president and enforcing their will upon the minority.

The Electoral College is an 18th century relic from a time when "democracy" still primarily referred to white male landowners, who were certainly not the majority of the people in the country. They wanted a system similar enough to Britain (which at the time had "rotten boroughs" and other guarantees) to ensure that the great unwashed masses did not send some uncouth nutter to the office of the President.

This had nothing to do with protecting the sanctified and holy rural puritans from the evil scourge of the demonic cities. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson were sharp guys, no doubt, but even they could not foresee that there would one day be a state of Washington where a politician could win only a few counties and win the entire state handily!

[Amianthus]

This had nothing to do with protecting the sanctified and holy rural puritans from the evil scourge of the demonic cities. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson were sharp guys, no doubt, but even they could not foresee that there would one day be a state of Washington where a politician could win only a few counties and win the entire state handily!

Of course, in the current system, that's balanced by states who do NOT have huge concentrations of population in small areas.

[_JS]

This had nothing to do with protecting the sanctified and holy rural puritans from the evil scourge of the demonic cities. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson were sharp guys, no doubt, but even they could not foresee that there would one day be a state of Washington where a politician could win only a few counties and win the entire state handily!

Of course, in the current system, that's balanced by states who do NOT have huge concentrations of population in small areas.

Why not just let the people vote?

No other nation relies on an 18th century board of electors to do their voting for them.

[Amianthus]

No other nation relies on an 18th century board of electors to do their voting for them.

How are the members of the House of Lords chosen? For that matter, how is the British Prime Minister chosen?

[Amianthus]

No other nation relies on an 18th century board of electors to do their voting for them.

For that matter, how is the President of China elected?

Want more examples?

[sirs]

This had nothing to do with protecting the sanctified and holy rural puritans from the evil scourge of the demonic cities. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson were sharp guys, no doubt, but even they could not foresee that there would one day be a state of Washington where a politician could win only a few counties and win the entire state handily!

Of course, in the current system, that's balanced by states who do NOT have huge concentrations of population in small areas.

BINGO

Of course, in the current system, that's balanced by states who do NOT have huge concentrations of population in small areas.

Why not just let the people vote?  No other nation relies on an 18th century board of electors to do their voting for them.

asked and answered already.  A) People do vote, and B) So that the largest, most urbanized areas of the country aren't dictating who's going to be rural America's President, each and every election cycle