Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Agree. Too many stupid and ignorant people to facilitate a working democracy.

    A benevolent dictatorship would be great in theory but you'll always have human bias.

    We should have a benevolent dictatorship ran by super artificial intelligence one day.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JRKinder)
    Then do you not agree that it is a flawed system? The fact that a candidate can win the popular vote but not win the presidency is absurd, no matter how much you like or dislike any individual candidate. Good God, imagine if the same thing happened during the EU referendum...
    Every electoral system is flawed.

    Everyone knows what the rules are before the campaign. If US president was decided by simple majority, the campaigns would have been completely different. The messages would have been different, funds would have been channeled differently and the candidates may have been different. The system may not be perfect but there is no point moaning about it afterwards. It's sour grapes.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sternumator)
    Every electoral system is flawed.

    Everyone knows what the rules are before the campaign. If US president was decided by simple majority, the campaigns would have been completely different. The messages would have been different, funds would have been channeled differently and the candidates may have been different. The system may not be perfect but there is no point moaning about it afterwards. It's sour grapes.
    I never said other electoral systems were without flaws, nor that the campaigns wouldn't have been run differently had that been the case. I was just saying that this one in particular has deep problems. It was the same with Gore vs Bush in 2000. My point was, in a democracy any system that allows someone to win without a majority or even plurality of the popular vote is incredibly flawed, because elections essentially have the purpose of showing the popularity of candidates relative to one another in order to select who will satisfy most people. This system does not achieve that. I'm not moaning afterwards lol, I've been criticising it since A Level.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    This had nothing to do with a democracy.



    He didn't win the population's vote

    He won thru the electoral college which is the least democratic thing ever for God SAKE
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    the ""liberal"" globalist vision:
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by JRKinder)
    I never said other electoral systems were without flaws, nor that the campaigns wouldn't have been run differently had that been the case. I was just saying that this one in particular has deep problems. It was the same with Gore vs Bush in 2000. My point was, in a democracy any system that allows someone to win without a majority or even plurality of the popular vote is incredibly flawed, because elections essentially have the purpose of showing the popularity of candidates relative to one another in order to select who will satisfy most people. This system does not achieve that. I'm not moaning afterwards lol, I've been criticising it since A Level.
    Okay, let's go for this hypothetical. A candidate wins a majority in every single state and DC except Wyoming (the least populous state and lesser in population than DC) but the other candidate wins enough in Wyoming to get the popular vote, on a democratic basis of having to represent everybody who has the stronger mandate?

    And this ignores the reason for the electoral college. [

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by IamJacksContempt)
    Agree. Too many stupid and ignorant people to facilitate a working democracy.

    A benevolent dictatorship would be great in theory but you'll always have human bias.

    We should have a benevolent dictatorship ran by super artificial intelligence one day.
    Super artificial intelligence? are you talkning about robots for government? could this not going wrong one day?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Benevolent dictatorship? Are we in the waning days of the republic like in Ancient Rome? We know the Euro elite hate democracy and want power without accountability so maybe that's the battle that's happening today.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Okay, let's go for this hypothetical. A candidate wins a majority in every single state and DC except Wyoming (the least populous state and lesser in population than DC) but the other candidate wins enough in Wyoming to get the popular vote, on a democratic basis of having to represent everybody who has the stronger mandate?

    And this ignores the reason for the electoral college. [

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The candidate who has won in every other state has the stronger mandate. The president represents the country as a whole, not individual states (that's what the House & Senate are for). It's like saying Sadiq Khan won undemocratically because he didn't win every single London borough, so he can't be representing all of them. But, when the entity as a whole is considered, he is most popular.

    Yes I know, but the EC was set up in the historical context of rebelling against a monarchy. There wasn't even a popular vote amongst the people back then. Now that there is, and almost all states have laws requiring Electors to back the candidate who wins the popular vote, the EC is now redundant.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by JRKinder)
    The candidate who has won in every other state has the stronger mandate. The president represents the country as a whole, not individual states (that's what the House & Senate are for). It's like saying Sadiq Khan won undemocratically because he didn't win every single London borough, so he can't be representing all of them. But, when the entity as a whole is considered, he is most popular.

    Yes I know, but the EC was set up in the historical context of rebelling against a monarchy. There wasn't even a popular vote amongst the people back then. Now that there is, and almost all states have laws requiring Electors to back the candidate who wins the popular vote, the EC is now redundant.
    21 states have no legislation against faithless electors, and the other 29+DC don't enforce it. As recently as 2004 there have been faithless electors, and a threat this year, whether he goes through with it is another matter. In 1836 all 23 of Virginia's electors were faithless with the VP candidate.

    And there was a popular vote back then, do you want figures?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    You've only got yourselves to blame for Brexit and Trump. If the liberal left weren't so nauseatingly condescending, pretentious and on the whole annoying then neither result would have happened. Nothing makes people over the age of 35 vote Brexit or Trump more than young whiny urban hipster douchebags sneering down their noses at them with smug self-righteousness. Millennials are literally a liability at elections. Know one cares how smart you think you are.
    Also having worked for 30 years and raising a family actually does make you better qualified to make decisions than being a snotty undergrad student.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Loads of white millennials voted for Trump.

    The alt right is largely mellinial. Reddit and 4chan are full of these types. TSR even has a quite a few of them.
    I identify as NatSoc.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    21 states have no legislation against faithless electors, and the other 29+DC don't enforce it. As recently as 2004 there have been faithless electors, and a threat this year, whether he goes through with it is another matter. In 1836 all 23 of Virginia's electors were faithless with the VP candidate.

    And there was a popular vote back then, do you want figures?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    My mistake, I have just checked and yes you are right. My A Level knowledge is clearly a bit rusty

    My point still holds though, firstly about representation and secondly about the nature of democracy. Electors rarely vote against the public will, and even when they do it's in a small number (and quoting figures from the 1800s isn't really relevant to the political system today). Electors backtracking on what the public say is similar to MPs backtracking over Brexit - it would be outrageous. It was set up to reduce the likelihood of tyranny but that doesn't mean it can't be flawed democratically. In theory, it could quite easily create an oligarchic class of Electors who cast votes purely based on their own personal opinion, and as you've now established that could legally happen in 21 states.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    the ""liberal"" globalist vision:
    The original liberals were against democracy anyway. They saw it as a threat to private property.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by JRKinder)
    My mistake, I have just checked and yes you are right. My A Level knowledge is clearly a bit rusty

    My point still holds though, firstly about representation and secondly about the nature of democracy. Electors rarely vote against the public will, and even when they do it's in a small number (and quoting figures from the 1800s isn't really relevant to the political system today). Electors backtracking on what the public say is similar to MPs backtracking over Brexit - it would be outrageous. It was set up to reduce the likelihood of tyranny but that doesn't mean it can't be flawed democratically. In theory, it could quite easily create an oligarchic class of Electors who cast votes purely based on their own personal opinion, and as you've now established that could legally happen in 21 states.
    We perhaps have to remember that America is different to Europe. The electors are appointed by the elected legislatures, they in theory stop the people doing anything too rash (as is the theory with Democratic superdelegates after their disastrous campaigns in the 70s). But they also have the second amendment, certainly the most important amendment, if not the most important clause of the Constitution as amended. The second amendment is what protects all other rights enshrined in the constitution, it also allows a popular uprising if the system truly does go against the people.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    end of democracy... i can see a hunger games future
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    You've only got yourselves to blame for Brexit and Trump. If the liberal left weren't so nauseatingly condescending, pretentious and on the whole annoying then neither result would have happened. Nothing makes people over the age of 35 vote Brexit or Trump more than young whiny urban hipster douchebags sneering down their noses at them with smug self-righteousness. Millennials are literally a liability at elections. Know one cares how smart you think you are.
    Why the **** does every Brexiter play this "you are to blame" spiel? Oh wow they are really mean to that group, I think I will vote for that group now.

    And well when the millennials have become the majority, it will be ***** like you that will see their world destroyed. I guess that is why you and everyone like you is fighting so hard, one last-ditch effort.

    Enjoy it while it lasts.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Looks like I can add another name to my list of people who aren't learning and are ready to simply hand Austria, the Netherlands, France, Germany and Italy to their political opponents.

    If you don't win clearly you're not saying the right things, and if anything you're the idiot.

    Oh, and the funny thing is Pew found Trump voters better informed, but that was easy to see.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Germany lol?

    Looooooooool you actually think AfD will ever get any power? Looooooool
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Why you keep losing :

    Attachment 593874

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    WROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG

    Clinton won the working class by 10% points.

    You are such a joke dude.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AperfectBalance)
    The Trump victory was a victory for actual progression and not liberal backtracking.
    :rofl:

    So deluded.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

3,069

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.