MyFox
 

Northton

by northton from the Land of Free Spe

Last Post 1 day, 3 hours Ago


Did Your Vote Really Count?
Nov 6, 2008 | 7:46 AM
Category: Political
Report This Post

If you're like me, Texas, you went out and voted, and you got a sticker!  Mine says, "My vote counted!". 

 

But someone mentioned how much different the popular vote and the electoral votes were in the 2008 presidential election, so I thought I would check it out and see what effect this odd system has had on our country's highest office.  Here's what I found.

 

Samuel J. Tilden would have beaten Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876.

Grover Cleveland would have won against Benjamin Harrison in 1888.

Al Gore would have won against George W. Bush in 2000.

As you can see, it is interesting that the electoral system has taken away your right to vote for your candidate.  It doesn't seem fair to the people.


This info was found at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html
 

If you check it out you will see several elections in which the popular vote and the electoral vote do not match closely.  In 1880 James A. Garfield only won the popular vote by about 7,000 votes, out of over eight million tallied, yet he won the electoral vote by 50 votes!

 

The electoral system has destroyed the ability of anyone outside of the two major parties to win an election in America.  Just one example, in 1992 H. Ross Perot received  just under 20 million votes (19% of the total votes), a little over half of the votes received by George H. Bush, and almost half of the votes received by William J. Clinton.  How many electoral votes did H. Ross Perot receive after being voted for by 19,742,267 American citizens?  ZERO!  Those TWENTY MILLION VOTES were STOLEN from Perot and given to the other two candidates.  Redistribution of votes?

 

 

What do you think?

Is the electoral vote system fair to the American people?

Can any candidate that is not with the two controlling parties ever win a presidential election in this country?

Does your vote really count?

Should we change our current system to a popular vote system?

Why or why not?

16 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 16
Page 1 of 1
bilmorgbc read my blog
Nov 6, 2008 | 8:08 AM

Do you want a few states to dictate to the rest who the leaders are and how the country is governed? That is what would happen without the "current system" which,by the way would take a Constitutional amendment to change. I don't know about you,but I don't want New York and California deciding elections.
Chris_Frisco read my blog
Nov 6, 2008 | 8:12 AM

Yes, it counted. We are a representative republic which I think is the best form of government and not a straight democracy which is mob rule. I will keep what we have.
Damage483 read my blog view my photos
Nov 6, 2008 | 8:29 AM

Ditto, bil and Chris.
philmcgroin read my blog
Nov 6, 2008 | 10:37 AM

I still have a problem with the electorals not following what the people want. In todays world, we don't need them. A person should be elected by popular vote as a whole, not state by state. We should never be held to just two idiots on the ballot either. If a person wants to run for office, they should appear on the ballot if they are legal to do so.
bilmorgbc read my blog
Nov 6, 2008 | 12:08 PM

If you lived in say California I guess you would say your vote counted because they went Democrat as usual. Here's a thought,MOVE.
bink765 read my blog view my photos
Nov 6, 2008 | 12:35 PM

I've done some reading on the electoral and it just doesn't make sense at all how electors are selected for the state. Like reading stereo instructions.

Why is it that CA has 55 Electoral votes with 36,457,549 population.

Texas is at a population of 23,507,783 just 12,949,766 less than CA but only has 34 electoral votes.

New York (this one's a kicker) has 31 electoral votes but only has a state population of 19,306,183.
bink765 read my blog view my photos
Nov 6, 2008 | 12:37 PM

Each state is given a set number of Electors, determined by the number of the its U.S. Congressmen. The number of Representatives in each state correlates with the state population and is amended every decade when the Census is taken. The number of Senators is always two. (To see a list of state populations and their respective number of electoral votes click here).
bink765 read my blog view my photos
Nov 6, 2008 | 12:46 PM

And last is FL with a population of 18,089,888 with 1,216,295 less than NY but has 27 electoral votes as compared to NY with 31.

As of 2006 the Texas state gross product was 1.09 trillion.

As of 2006 the California state gross product was 1.55 trillion.
Dak413 read my blog view my photos
Nov 6, 2008 | 2:39 PM

My vote counted for me, I had my say, did it make a difference, maybe not, but it at least gives me the priveledge to complain about what isn't going right, just like you and everyone else , to me those that don't vote, in this FREE county, shouldn't complain about anything, becuz they were unwilling to participate, I'm proud to live in a country that allows free speech and the freedom to vote !!
dbstealth read my blog
Nov 6, 2008 | 4:21 PM

I voted. I hope I had my say. I have "mixed" feelings about the electoral college. It seems to work for the most part, HOWEVER, electoral college delegates can actually vote AGAINST the popular vote if they deem necessary.
dbstealth read my blog
Nov 6, 2008 | 4:22 PM

By the way... this is NOT a Democracy.... this is a "Democratic Republic." You look up the differences. I'm too tired & sad for all of that Cr@p!
LambChopSushi read my blog view my photos
Nov 6, 2008 | 4:33 PM

I don't personally believe our votes counted. The decision was made in 2000 0r 2004, maybe earlier, who knows.

Do you honestly believe ppl would vote for someone who's friends were Jeremiah Wright, Father Pfleger and Louis Farrakahn? Surely ppl were not THAT stupid, right? It had to be fixed, I mean, surely Americans aren't THAT stupid!!
ChangeOfFate read my blog view my photos
Nov 6, 2008 | 4:35 PM

The Electoral College is antiquated. It really is, it was a great system that our founding fathers created during the time of our country's infancy.

It worked in the 18th century, 19th, and the 20th. This is the 21st century now. It's time to remove the electoral college and give REAL power to the voter with a popular election.

Texas Democrats who voted for Obama were silenced because of the majority of Republican voters who gave our state to McCain. Is that a democracy?

Just imagine, if this was a popular vote election how much power that would give every voter. Then all of our votes in Texas would count as it would in every other state.

The Electoral College was great for a time but I'd rather have the people deciding who the next president is rather than 538 politicians.

The power is supposed to belong to the people, remember? Without an electoral college our vote becomes that much more powerful.
northton read my blog view my photos
Nov 6, 2008 | 6:18 PM

Great comments. I'm not complaining. I voted for Obama, but I find it distressing that, several times, the real winner of the popular vote lost, and third party candidates had their votes taken from them and given to another candidate! That doesn't seem right at all. I believe our individual votes should count, period.
Samhain_Disciple read my blog
Nov 7, 2008 | 2:16 AM

I would like to see the Electoral college abolished. I don't think it makes any sense at all.

I'd also like to see us break out of our current two party system. I don't think it accurately represents the majority of voters (hence the large numbers of independents and undecideds.)

I don't know if a third party candidate will every be president, but it's a cause I believe in and one I plan to contribute to in the future.
northton read my blog view my photos
Nov 7, 2008 | 7:34 PM

I agree with those that say let the people vote instead of the states.

If someone, like Ron Paul, runs as an independent he has no chance of winning in our electoral system, and he won't make it past the primaries as a Dem or Rep because he doesn't fit their mold. So how, in the current system, could someone like Ron Paul get elected?

After 1872 almost every independent candidate was given zero electoral votes. Is that really a good thing, that no one can get out from under the rule of Democrats and Republicans? I mean, instead of furthering freedom, doesn't that just make us slaves to a select few and their way of doing things, as they keep passing the baton back and forth without regard for anyone else?
Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




northton

I like sharing ideas and ideals in an open forum. I may not like what you have to say but you can still say it here. Whatever you think, join the blog! Come and debate on an open forum like mine where free speech cannot be denied!* *Except by TOS, applicable copyright laws, and the whims of FOX.

Member Since: 1/23/2007


 

View All Photos


RSS: XMLWhat is RSS?