Nader stole the election!

[quasi-modo]

The reason behind electoral college was that the representation from each state can be modified. It keeps the populated states from ruling over the unpopulated. Without it California and The northeast would rule over the rest of the country and try to get a lot of pork thrown their way... meanwhille the other states are getting shafted.

What is the source for that idea? Isn't that just an interpretation made in recent days to justify the way the electoral college is currently being misused?

No, that was the intention of the founders.

Do you remember the New Jersy and the Virginia plans? Virginia wanted every state to be represented based on population. New Jersy said, whoa step off dawg, we want representation because we are a state. Because of this we have a bi-cameral legislature in which the sentate has representation based on state hood and the house based on population. But for the same reason, so that no state gets screwed we have electoral college.

There are many reasons why we have an indirect system, but to phrase this better, the reason each state has a different number of representatives is to prevent the large states from dumping on the small states, and the small states from hurting the large states. It balances it out so the system will benefit both groups equally.

[Adron]

There are many reasons why we have an indirect system, but to phrase this better, the reason each state has a different number of representatives is to prevent the large states from dumping on the small states, and the small states from hurting the large states. It balances it out so the system will benefit both groups equally.

That's the reason for assigning weights to the states that aren't proportional to their population or area, which they could have done while still using an electoral college. Look at the quotes I posted for the reason this precise construction was picked.

[quasi-modo]

if there were not weights, just an indirect election it would not turn out any different from the popular vote so it would end up being canned. Electors rarely vote out of line, the electors are chosen because of how loyal they are to their party, almost how radical they are. They go for the fanatics from what I have read and heard.

[Adron]

if there were not weights, just an indirect election it would not turn out any different from the popular vote so it would end up being canned. Electors rarely vote out of line, the electors are chosen because of how loyal they are to their party, almost how radical they are. They go for the fanatics from what I have read and heard.

Ah, but that's how it works now, not how the founding fathers wanted it to work!

[quasi-modo]

if there were not weights, just an indirect election it would not turn out any different from the popular vote so it would end up being canned. Electors rarely vote out of line, the electors are chosen because of how loyal they are to their party, almost how radical they are. They go for the fanatics from what I have read and heard.

Ah, but that's how it works now, not how the founding fathers wanted it to work!

Yes it is... The founding fathers put their weights on it. As my memory serves me it happened around the same time as the virginia and mass plans.

[idoL]

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't as simple as if they are voting for Mr.Nader they're not voting for Mr.Bush or Mr.Kerry thus votes are lost from both?

[Adron]

Yes it is... The founding fathers put their weights on it. As my memory serves me it happened around the same time as the virginia and mass plans.

Throw in some better keywords so I have something to google for!

[quasi-modo]

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't as simple as if they are voting for Mr.Nader they're not voting for Mr.Bush or Mr.Kerry thus votes are lost from both?

Sort of, but the people who are voting for Nader are the far lefties who would probably otherwise be voting for Kerry if Nader were not there. So its hurting Kerry now. Like the ancient proverb "A vote for nader is half as good as a vote for bush, but twice as good as a vote for Kerry".

[quasi-modo]

Yes it is... The founding fathers put their weights on it. As my memory serves me it happened around the same time as the virginia and mass plans.

Throw in some better keywords so I have something to google for!

Virginia Plan. Massachusetts Plan.

[Adron]

I did some googling, but what I came up with was just info on how the system had failed when parties started campaigning for their electors. Which still doesn't say the intentions were different, just that people had been unable to live up to the intentions.

[quasi-modo]

That does not sound like it has anything to do with the plans which created our bicameral legislature.

[Adron]

That does not sound like it has anything to do with the plans which created our bicameral legislature.

Hmmmm? I'd love to see links to transcripts of documents dated from when the constitution was thought up. Or good keywords for finding them, as the links I've found haven't shown anything other than that the intentions were to have an "intellectual" election made by trustworthy people selected by the voters.