Government

We need to either strengthen the Electoral College or strengthen the qualifications of American voters. Most Americans are not qualified to vote. ‼️

The electoral college has been controversial from the start and people have been looking for ways to remove it or circumvent it including the National Popular Vote Bill which destroys the role of the states in favor of the people.

The fact is the majority of founders did not want the President to be directly elected by the people; they feared that and in my opinion with good reason. They intended the Electoral College to be a buffer against potential abuses of democracy. They did not want an executive who would flatter the people for votes. Boy did they get that right.

George Mason argued that “it would be as unnatural to refer the choice of a proper charter for chief Magistrate to the people, as it would, to refer a trial of colors to a blind man. Charles Pinckney said “An election by the people being liable to the most obvious & striking objectives.”

The great majority of founders did not believe people were qualified to make the choice of president alone and that they would be subject to manipulation by those seeking votes.

Much has changed since then. The Electoral College has been watered down, most people don’t understand it and nearly all communication impediments that existed in the 18th century are gone. Virtually every American has the ability to learn about the candidates first hand and to learn the facts about vital issues … but they don’t bother.

Some things have not changed and perhaps gotten worse. Flattering, patronizing if not lying to get votes is the norm and extensive. And, while they have the ability to obtain facts and make sound judgements, I suggest the vast majority of voters make no effort to do so, know little about the person they vote for beyond what they are told by others and are easily swayed by promises while ignoring the practicality or consequences. You only have to look on social media, see the posts and read the comments to know this is true.

In other words, the concerns expressed in 1787 are no less a concern in 2018. We may have made it worse in the quest for fairness by avoiding any criteria whatsoever for voting under the assumption that was the intent of our founders.

Voting is a great privilege and a great responsibility so why isn’t it reasonable to require some minimal knowledge criteria at least once before obtaining the right to vote?

It’s simply the nature of us humans, we will vote for what appears in our best interest and we will reject what does not fit our view of things often despite any pertinent facts. So we do the best we can with our Republic, but the thing is, we need to a great deal better.

As many as 50% of Americans can’t find states on a map or name the states. In a National Geographic survey several years ago 30% of respondents thought the US population was 1-2 billion.

In one survey 70% of Americans didn’t know what the Constitution was.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1368482/How-ignorant-Americans-An-alarming-number-U-S-citizens-dont-know-basic-facts-country.html

“A 2012 ACTA survey found that less than 20 [percent] of American college graduates could accurately identify the effect of the Emancipation Proclamation, less than half could identify George Washington as the American general at Yorktown ((Virginia)), and only 42 [percent] knew that the Battle of the Bulge occurred during World War II.”

ACTA found in another recent survey that of over 1,100 liberal arts colleges and universities, only 18 percent require a course in American history or government.

“When surveys repeatedly show that college graduates do not understand the fundamental processes of our government and the historical forces that shaped it, the problem is much greater than a simple lack of factual knowledge,” said ACTA. “It is a dangerous sign of civic disempowerment.” Source: voanews.com

A survey by Xavier University in 2012 found that 30% of Americans could not pass the civic portion of the citizenship test.

85 percent could not define “the rule of law.”

75 percent did not know function of the judicial branch.

71 percent were unable to identify the Constitution as the “supreme law of the land.”

63 percent could not name one of their state’s Senators.

62 percent did not know the name the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.

62 percent could not identify the Governor of their state.

57 percent could not define an “amendment.”

In my opinion the lack of fundamental knowledge about our Country and our government is what makes so many voters subject to the propaganda and rhetoric from politicians thereby causing them to vote based on false promises and not facts.

Advertisements

Categories: Government, My Opinion, Politics

Tagged as: ,

15 replies »

  1. The National Popular Vote bill would replace state winner-take-all laws that award all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who get the most popular votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), in the enacting states, to guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes for, and the Presidency to, the candidate getting the most popular votes in the entire United States.

    The bill retains the constitutionally mandated Electoral College and state control of elections, and uses the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes. It ensures that every voter is equal, every voter will matter, in every state, in every presidential election, and the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

    Every voter, everywhere, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election.
    Every vote would matter equally in the state counts and national count.

    No more distorting, crude, and divisive and red and blue state maps of predictable outcomes, that don’t represent any minority party voters within each state.
    No more handful of ‘battleground’ states (where the two major political parties happen to have similar levels of support) where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 38+ predictable states that have just been ‘spectators’ and ignored after the conventions.

    The bill would take effect when enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—270 of 538.
    All of the presidential electors from the enacting states will be supporters of the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes among all 50 states (and DC)—thereby guaranteeing that candidate with an Electoral College majority.

    Like

    • How does it assures that virtual permanent control over the presidential election does not go to population centers in the northeast and west coast that at the moment are in liberal (Democratic) hands thereby disenfranchising other voters?

      Like

      • Under National Popular Vote, every voter, everywhere, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would matter equally in the state counts and national count.

        The bill would give a voice to the minority party voters for president in each state. Now they don’t matter to their candidate.

        In 2012, 56,256,178 (44%) of the 128,954,498 voters had their vote diverted by the winner-take-all rule to a candidate they opposed (namely, their state’s first-place candidate).

        And now votes, beyond the one needed to get the most votes in the state, for winning in a state, are wasted and don’t matter to presidential candidates.
        Utah (5 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 385,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004.
        Oklahoma (7 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 455,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004 — larger than the margin generated by the 9th and 10th largest states, namely New Jersey and North Carolina (each with 15 electoral votes).
        8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).

        Like

  2. “A 2012 ACTA survey found that less than 20 [percent] of American college graduates could accurately identify the effect of the Emancipation Proclamation, less than half could identify George Washington as the American general at Yorktown ((Virginia)), and only 42 [percent] knew that the Battle of the Bulge occurred during World War II.”

    It is called the dumbing down of America. I was taught all these things and more in High School 40 years ago. I had a great high school history teacher, that was friends of the Nixon family, we had many great conversations, as it was Watergate in the news every day.

    Now it is deemed more important to teach social justice and transgender crap.

    I have stopped voting, I will no longer support the corrupt political system, that it has now become, with my vote.

    I have been voting for Dummycrats and Ripoffagains for the last 44 years and they have done almost nothing to make things better. I think most of the things government does today make things worse.

    There is no fixing it, the only thing that might change things is a revolution, but that is against federal law and the federal government has become too powerful. . .

    “Just remember what Mark Twain said – “If voting made any real difference they would not let us do it”

    Like

    • The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States.

      Voters in the biggest cities in the US are almost exactly balanced out by rural areas in terms of population and partisan composition.

      16% of the U.S. population lives outside the nation’s Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Rural America has voted 60% Republican. None of the 10 most rural states matter now.

      16% of the U.S. population lives in the top 100 cities. They voted 63% Democratic in 2004.
      The population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 15% of the population of the United States.

      The rest of the U.S., in suburbs, divide almost exactly equally between Republicans and Democrats.

      Like

      • It’s not big cities, it’s the Northeast (NY,NJ,CT, MA, Pa and the west coast and possibly Ill that could control all elections.

        Like

    • No voter would be “disenfranchised.”

      All voters would be valued equally in presidential elections, no matter where they live.
      Candidates, as in other elections, would allocate their time, money, polling, organizing, and ad buys roughly in proportion to the population

      Every vote, everywhere, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election.
      No more distorting, crude, and divisive and red and blue state maps of predictable outcomes, that don’t represent any minority party voters within each state.
      No more handful of ‘battleground’ states (where the two major political parties happen to have similar levels of support) where voters and policies are more important than those of the voters in 38+ predictable states that have just been ‘spectators’ and ignored after the conventions.

      The National Popular Vote bill would give a voice to the minority party voters for president in each state. Now they don’t matter to their candidate.

      In 2012, 56,256,178 (44%) of the 128,954,498 voters had their vote diverted by the winner-take-all rule to a candidate they opposed (namely, their state’s first-place candidate).

      And now votes, beyond the one needed to get the most votes in the state, for winning in a state, are wasted and don’t matter to presidential candidates.
      Utah (5 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 385,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004.

      Like

      • Why would they allocate their time to low population areas of the country if they could easily win a majority by merely concentrating on a few large (currently Democratic) geographic areas? Much of Middle America and the south would not be needed at all to win.

        Like

      • A successful nationwide presidential campaign of polling, organizing, ad spending, and visits, with every voter equal, would be run the way presidential candidates campaign to win the electoral votes of closely divided battleground states, such as Ohio and Florida, under the state-by-state winner-take-all methods. The big cities in those battleground states do not receive all the attention, much less control the outcome. Cleveland and Miami do not receive all the attention or control the outcome in Ohio and Florida. In the 4 states that accounted for over two-thirds of all general-election activity in the 2012 presidential election, rural areas, suburbs, exurbs, and cities all received attention—roughly in proportion to their population.

        The itineraries of presidential candidates in battleground states (and their allocation of other campaign resources in battleground states, including polling, organizing, and ad spending) reflect the political reality that every gubernatorial or senatorial candidate knows. When and where every voter is equal, a campaign must be run everywhere.

        With National Popular Vote, when every voter is equal, everywhere, it makes sense for presidential candidates to try and elevate their votes where they are and aren’t so well liked. But, under the state-by-state winner-take-all laws, it makes no sense for a Democrat to try and do that in Vermont or Wyoming, or for a Republican to try it in Wyoming or Vermont.

        The main media at the moment, TV, costs much more per impression in big cities than in smaller towns and rural area. Candidates get more bang for the buck in smaller towns and rural areas.

        Like

      • The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States.

        Voters in the biggest cities in the US are almost exactly balanced out by rural areas in terms of population and partisan composition.

        16% of the U.S. population lives outside the nation’s Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Rural America has voted 60% Republican. None of the 10 most rural states matter now.

        16% of the U.S. population lives in the top 100 cities. They voted 63% Democratic in 2004.
        The population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 15% of the population of the United States.

        The rest of the U.S., in suburbs, divide almost exactly equally between Republicans and Democrats.

        Like

      • Because of state-by-state winner-take-all laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution. . .

        Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker in 2015 was correct when he said
        “The nation as a whole is not going to elect the next president,”
        “The presidential election will not be decided by all states, but rather just 12 of them.

        Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind.

        With the end of the primaries, without the National Popular Vote bill in effect, the political relevance of 70% of all Americans was finished for the presidential election.

        In the 2016 general election campaign

        Over half (57%) of the campaign events were held in just 4 states (Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Ohio).

        Virtually all (94%) of the campaign events were in just 12 states (containing only 30% of the country’s population).

        Like

  3. “The best argu­ment against Democ­ra­cy is a five-minute con­ver­sa­tion with the aver­age voter.”(often attributed to Winston Churchill)

    How many people don’t even bother to exercise their franchise to vote?

    How many people vote for a candidate strictly because of their sex, color,creed or where they fall on the entertainment spectrum and not for their credentials or expertise?

    Like

    • Because of state-by-state winner-take-all laws, not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution. . .

      Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker in 2015 was correct when he said
      “The nation as a whole is not going to elect the next president,”
      “The presidential election will not be decided by all states, but rather just 12 of them.

      Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind.

      With the end of the primaries, without the National Popular Vote bill in effect, the political relevance of 70% of all Americans was finished for the presidential election.

      In the 2016 general election campaign

      Over half (57%) of the campaign events were held in just 4 states (Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Ohio).

      Virtually all (94%) of the campaign events were in just 12 states (containing only 30% of the country’s population).

      Like

      • More people register to vote and do vote when they know their vote matters.

        If you’re a Republican voter in a blue state or a Democratic voter in a red state, your vote for president doesn’t matter to your candidate.

        With the National Popular Vote bill in effect, presidential campaigns would poll, organize, visit, and appeal to more than 12 states. One would reasonably expect that voter turnout would rise in 70-80% of the country that is conceded months in advance by the minority parties in the states, taken for granted by the dominant party in the states, and ignored by all parties in presidential campaigns.

        A national popular vote could increase down-ballot turnout voters during presidential election years.

        Under National Popular Vote, every voter, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would matter in the state counts and national count.

        Voters in the minority in non-battleground states, red or blue, are cheated in every presidential election.

        National Popular Vote would give a voice to the minority party voters in presidential elections in each state. Now they don’t matter to their candidate.

        In 2012, 56,256,178 (44%) of the 128,954,498 voters had their vote diverted by the winner-take-all rule to a candidate they opposed (namely, their state’s first-place candidate).

        And now votes, beyond the one needed to get the most votes in the state, for winning in a state, are wasted and don’t matter to candidates.
        Oklahoma (7 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 455,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004 — larger than the margin generated by the 9th and 10th largest states, namely New Jersey and North Carolina (each with 15 electoral votes).
        Utah (5 electoral votes) alone generated a margin of 385,000 “wasted” votes for Bush in 2004.
        8 small western states, with less than a third of California’s population, provided Bush with a bigger margin (1,283,076) than California provided Kerry (1,235,659).

        In 2008, voter turnout in the then 15 battleground states averaged seven points higher than in the 35 non-battleground states.

        In 2012, voter turnout was 11% higher in the then 9 battleground states than in the remainder of the country.

        In 2016, in battleground states, turnout hit 65%, 5 points higher than in non-battleground states.

        Like

    • The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States.

      Voters in the biggest cities in the US are almost exactly balanced out by rural areas in terms of population and partisan composition.

      16% of the U.S. population lives outside the nation’s Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Rural America has voted 60% Republican. None of the 10 most rural states matter now.

      16% of the U.S. population lives in the top 100 cities. They voted 63% Democratic in 2004.
      The population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 15% of the population of the United States.

      The rest of the U.S., in suburbs, divide almost exactly equally between Republicans and Democrats.

      Like

What's your opinion on this post? Readers would like your point of view.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s