The United States of America is “the world’s oldest surviving federation. It is a constitutional republic and representative democracy, “in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law“. The government is regulated by a system of checks and balances defined by the U.S. Constitution, which serves as the country’s supreme legal document.”
The ELECTORAL COLLEGE
As i write this on Nov 1oth Donald J Trump is now President-elect of the USA, having defeated Hillary Clinton.
Trump won decisively yet is still behind on the popular vote(number of individuals that voted). There have been several protests around the country and the topic has come up quite often.
Michigan (16 votes) and Arizona (11) are projected to go to Trump while New Hampshire (4) to Clinton. They will not swing the electoral college vote, unsure if they may affect the popular one.
A friend posted this :
I keep wondering something to myself.
I’ve been seeing all these posts complaining about how Hilary should have got in because she won the popular vote, despite losing the electoral college. Some are even calling for abolishing the electoral college because of it.
Let’s say the roles had been reversed; Let’s say Trump had won the popular vote, but lost the electoral and Hilary had gotten in.
Would the reaction be the same?
to which someone responded :
A real democracy would go by the popular vote. I have voiced my distaste for this since I was in HS (High School) and learned that just because you get the most votes doesn’t mean you win. Get rid of electoral college, get rid of super delegates, and have a true democracy. This is not new that people do not like it, it is being spoken of now because it just happened again.
leading me to respond with :
So if majority rules is the rule, and Clinton got in from the popular, would the republican numerical majority in houses then mean they can pass anything they want? The executive is only one person after all.
“A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is a good example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote — and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope.”
In addition there are other limits on who votes. Why not have voting be open for a year? Why stop someone who is 17 and 364 days from voting but one more day makes them capable? Why prevent only people that were caught and tried of certain crimes form voting when others who committed the same crime can still vote? Why not make voting somehow mandatory if it truly is the best system to count on a vote for vote basis.
Here is a video explaining the Electoral College system and it’s intent.
It may take some effort to understand but it is not a secret. Any argument that it is convoluted or too hard to get is not quite supported by saying we should just count it on a vote to vote basis. That still will mostly not make up the majority of people who will be governed by the decisions of the office holders.
- Intro paragraphs sourced this Infogalactic page about the USA.
- Quote in my above comment and the image were from American Triumvirate: The Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution, and the Bill of Rights