NAVIGATION MAIN MENU

COMPENDIUM LIBRARY/TWITTER MONITOR
VIDEO GALLERY
Economic News
Newsbrief Archives
Democrat Leadership Twitter and Realtime Feeds
Cabinet twitter and realtime feeds
North America weblog
International weblog
Democrats twitter directory
Latest Government Jobs and Public Tenders
Jobs Matrix
Global Travel Information
Pop Entertainment Forum
Start Portal


Please make a donation to support upkeep of the daily news journal, back archives, twitter feeds and the compendium library.










electoral college system« Thread Started on Nov 10, 2006, 12

Daily newsbrief journal for November 2006, also see http://www.usdemocrats.com/brief for a global 100-page perpetual brief and follow twitter @usdemocrats


electoral college system« Thread Started on Nov 10, 2006, 12

Postby admin » Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:48 am

electoral college system« Thread Started on Nov 10, 2006, 12:40am » --------------------------------------------------------------------------------the electoral college system for all those who dont know is was initially put in place a hundred or more years ago to give fair and adequate weight to each state depending on population size to make sure the presidential representation is fair based on the representative population size in each geographic area Each State is allocated a number of Presidential 'Electors' equal to the number of its U.S. Senators (always 2) PLUS the number of representative districts in each state which is different from state to state obviously cuz every state has its own population size. eg California or Texas has way more local residents than say Nebraska or DC. So therefor California would get 2 senate + 53 representative votes Nebraska on the other hand gets 2 senate + 3 representative votes heres the current electoral vote allocations: (may change in future depending on number of district rep seats based on population and districting factors) Alabama 9 Alaska 3 Arizona 10 Arkansas 6 California 55 Colorado 9 Connecticut 7 Delaware 3 D.C. 3 Florida 27 Georgia 15 Hawaii 4 Idaho 4 Illinois 21 Indiana 11 Iowa 7 Kansas 6 Kentucky 8 Louisiana 9 Maine 4 Maryland 10 Massachusetts 12 Michigan 17 Minnesota 10 Mississippi 6 Missouri 11 Montana 3 Nebraska 5 Nevada 5 New Hampshire 4 New Jersey 15 New Mexico 5 New York 31 North Carolina 15 North Dakota 3 Ohio 20 Oklahoma 7 Oregon 7 Pennsylvania 21 Rhode Island 4 South Carolina 8 South Dakota 3 Tennessee 11 Texas 34 Utah 5 Vermont 3 Virginia 13 Washington 11 West Virginia 5 Wisconsin 10 Wyoming 3 After the popular national vote for president voted by every citizen, the upcoming president must also win the 'electoral vote' which is a separate election held by each state with the number of 'electoral votes' based on how many votes each state is assigned table above. The winning president from each state accumulates 'electoral votes' to vote with on the each state's behalf with the state's appointed 'electors'. so as an example; in 2004 Ohio 'supposedly' voted (before all the vote thievery and election fraud) 2,859,764 for the Republican Pres/VP and 2,741,165 for the Democratic President/VP so therefore the Republican's pres won Ohio so they got 20 electoral votes, Democrats won California so the Democrat's president won 55 electoral votes to vote with and so on.. The president with the higher number of votes at the state level supposedly wins regardless if they got more total votes from the general public. In the case that the popular vote is won and the electoral college vote supercedes it like it did in 2000 where AL GORE got more votes from the American people but was denied the presidency due to a getting less electoral votes by a foul and fraudulent plays and criminal interference in Florida and New Mexico, like i stated, a pure democracy gives the power to the people where all human beings are equal and therefor their vote is given the same weight as anyone else whether they live in a more populous state and/or not and is unpolluted by the state, opinions of others, or judges or other people representing them so therefor the popular vote should supercede the electoral college vote in such a scenario and not the other way around where political forces at the state level carries more weight. To put it simply, a pure democracy should be collect all the votes from every citizen in the United States, add them up and see who got more votes. Anything other than this is dilution and at its core an argument of who's vote counts more and has more weight, a politician's influenced vote or a citizen's. At its core, the purity of a true vote should go to the citizen. anyways carrying on,... sonicthehedgehog "be kind" Member (477 Posts) - 9:07 PM 9-Nov | edit--------------------------------------------------------------------------------In the 2004 Presidential Election, The G.O.P. (another name for the Republican Party) got supposed larger vote tallies from states Alabama,Alaska,Arkansas,Arizona,Colorado,Florida,Georgia,Idaho,Indiana,Iowa,Kansas,Kentucky, Louisiana,Misssissippi,Missouri,Montana,Nebraska,Nevada,New Mexico,North Carolina,North Dakota, Ohio,Oklahoma,South Carolina,South Dakota,Tennessee,Texas,Utah,Virginia,West Virginia and Wyoming. so.. (9+3+6+10+9+27+15+4+11+7+6+8+9+6+11+3+5+5+5+15+3+20+7+8+3+11+34+5+13+5+3=286 electoral votes) Kerry Edwards won these states California,Connecticut,Delaware,District of Columbia,Hawaii,Illinois,Maine,Maryland,Massachusetts, Michigan,Minnesota,New Hampshire,New Jersey,New York,Oregon,Pennsylvania,Rhode Island,Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin so..(55+7+3+3+4+21+4+10+12+17+10+4+15+31+7+21+4+3+11+10=252 electoral votes) Now in theory by ensuring the proper representation at the state and presidential levels this electoral college is a protection mechanism to ensure proper parity and bridge the electing the president by the statehouse or by the people. The people of each state vote for the president and the winner of that popular vote sets the number of electoral votes that inevitably the president gets to vote with in favor of his/her presidency. Eg. again like sampled above, Ohio supposedly voted for a republican president so the republican party is given 20 electoral votes. In theory the panel of electors are automatically cast by the same vote for the president/VP. This means if a certain presidential candidate wins a state, lets use california this time using 2004 numbers, he/she wins the ability to use 55 electoral votes.. a president must have more than 270 electoral votes which means he/she won the majority of the total 538 electoral votes available. In 2004 the GOP secured 286 electoral votes and the democratic party got 252 electoral votes) In 2000 they illegally blocked recounts in Florida and there was some illegal crap in New Mexico as well that improperly blocked Gore from a proper recount in getting the 25 Florida electoral votes to win the presidency. There was a 537 vote difference, a proper recount should have been conducted but was denied by the supreme court at the time and let the electoral college give a win to the republicans 271 to the democrats 266. If the subsequent election in florida was recounted properly, it was found that Gore carried and won that state, therefor wouldve got the 25 electoral votes and won the election. Gore in 2000 officially got 50,999,897 votes from the American People, GWB got 50,456,002 total votes. Al Gore won. The electoral college was used as a political device used to scam the election and set up an incorrect polluted dynamic where it declared, 'we, the elected governors, certain judges, lawyers and politicians are more powerful than you the people and our opinions, can outveto you as the public and our votes carry more weight than you the people' .. and therefor set up an arrogant dynamic of a dictatorship. This is OBVIOUSLY wrong. Subsequently it was found the Gore did win Florida and and therefor won the presidency fair and square in both the popular vote and the electoral vote. The Democratic party on behalf of the American people should go back after this now and re-discover what went on here, why a proper vote count was denied and put accountability on indicting the supreme court justices on fraudulent or criminal misconduct as would be appropriate. I dont care if its a lifetime appointment, even if a supreme court justice is proven to be a criminal they should be indicted and held accountable by the 'people' sonicthehedgehog "be kind" Member (477 Posts) - 9:07 PM 9-Nov | edit--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Anyways heres some other tidbits about the electoral college: A member of the congress or federal government cannot be an 'elector' These 'electors' must be other peers from the public that can be accountable for the public at large. These electors cannot be members of congress or federal government employees. Basically, if the representative officials of the state say the elector is qualified, the elector is qualified, it can be pretty much anyone appointed by the party officials. The U.S. Constitution states only that, "no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector." Electors are usually private citizens seeking to participate in the electoral system on the behalf of their political party and are obviously 'selected' by the political parties they are being appointed by. Under Title III, chapter 1, section 15 of the United States Code, members of the U.S. Congress can object to the qualifications of an elector, or to the manner in which the electors of a state were selected if they wish to object but these objections are allowed only after the electors have cast their votes in the Electoral College meetings. This is where the public should support members of congress if they as your representatives are saying that there are disparities here and people are objecting.. additional issues can be raised if people are objecting to these electors and/or they are being corrupted, paid off, unduly influenced by members of congress or federal government employees or or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States. This is where electoral votes can be contested if they are fraudulent or unworthy. If you want to get the names of electors, you can get them from the Secretary of State or State Elections Division. After the election results are final and certified, the governor of the state must send the names of the electors by registered mail to the Archivist of the United States, National Archives and Records Administration. This "Certificate of Ascertainment" lists the names of the electors appointed and the number of votes received by each. It must also list the names of all other candidates for elector and the number of votes received by each. Images of the actual Certificates of Ascertainment listing the names, and in some instances the addresses, of the electors are now being posted on the National Archives and Records Web site at: http://www.nara.gov/ Anyways there you go
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 82092
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:00 am

Return to November 2006

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron