Asklemmy

43831 readers

1217 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

What are the benefits to the US Electoral College system? (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Boldizzle@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

48 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So I'm a New Zealander and I have a pretty good idea on how the electoral college system works but it honestly sounds like something that can be easily corrupted and it feels like it renders the popular vote absolutely useless unless I'm totally missing something obvious?

So yeah if someone could explain to me what the benefits of such a system are, that would be awesome.

Edit - Thanks for the replies so far, already learning a lot!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

This may sound cynical, but in my experience with it, 100 people are a lot easier to bribe than 230 million.

E: see, the people vote, and the EC are supposed to vote for what their state's people vote for. But, as free citizens, they're allowed to vote for who they want. So, we may get into situations, where the popular vote in a state was for A, but the EC vote was for B. The EC are supposed to represent their state, but should also be allowed to vote for the candidate they think is best (like the other citizens). IMO, it should be a point system. Each state gets the points of the EC count they currently have. The state's popular vote decides the candidate that gets the points of the state. The EC is disolved. Done. This allows the popular vote to win, while still maintaining the original reason for the EC (rural states have less people, but now have as much of a voting power as urban states, when compared to popular votes alone).

[–] kamenoko@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

They are mandated by state law to vote for the candidate that won the state. It is absolutely a ceremonial position.

[–] Elderos@lemmings.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you have a source for the claim that it was originally intended to give more powers to rural states?

[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago

It's what we learned in ELPSA class. I don't really want to go digging in my old textbooks, though :/