(18) comments Back to story

Carlos Ponce

"That's an example of Orwellian." No, it's not.[rolleyes]

Jack Cross

Mr. Boor. I read your article to see what you meant about the Electoral College being an Orwellian Institution.

But, I’m not aware of any Radio jock who says two plus two equals five. The earth is flat, and if you look over the edge of our flat Earth into the fire and brimstone you will see Nancy Pelosi ordering a double cheese pizza from Hillary’s Pizza Parlor.

In fact, the only one I know who is making these weird statements is you.

But if you really want to have a serious discussion about the electoral, I will be glad to provide the reason the founding fathers and isn’t that what this forum is really all about?

Many, mostly on the left wonder why a democratic system simply wasn't established? The Founders rejected such a prospect. "They knew that, in a pure democracy, 51 percent of the people can rule over 49 percent all the time without question, no matter how ridiculous their demands,"

The left wonder electoral college system, forces candidates to "build national coalitions” otherwise candidate would ignore 90 percent of the country and only campaign in just a few large populated states.

Gary Miller

The electoral college gives every American a voice in choosing a president. Using the popular vote would limit the choice to only citizens in the five or six biggest population states. The majority of states would be excluded.The founders wanted presidents elected by states not a majority living in big states.

Jessie Brantley

Ignorance is bliss...

Amanda DeVries

The United States is not a democracy. Thank goodness.


Dan Freeman

The Electoral College is an anachronism dating from the early years of the Republic. Initially it gave the slave states a slight disadvantage as the enslaved only counted as 3/5s of a person for purposes of apportionment of Congress and the Electoral College. The process was significantly modified after the 1800 election turned into a debacle that nearly elected Aaron Burr over Thomas Jefferson. Today most states use a 100 percent allocation of delegate votes, with exceptions in Nebraska and Maine allocating by congressional district. The current system allows a Vermonter to cast three times the votes as a Texan. The small states that are supposedly protected, such as Wyoming, Idaho and Maine, in fact play little or no role in the Presidential election. It follows a simple majority would be a fairer way to elect the President of all the people.

As for the cities dominating, this cannot happen as long as every state receives two Senators. Thus Texas and California carry the same weight in the Senate as Wyoming and Vermont.

Carlos Ponce

As usual, Dan did not think this out.[rolleyes]

Dan Freeman

Brilliant retort full of the wisdom and insight of a misspent youth.

Carlos Ponce

Not misspent youth but word of knowledge.

Gary Miller

Dan> A simple majority is all Hitler needed. His Nazi party wasn't the majority of voters in Germany but they were the majority of votes that year.

Robert Braeking

I agree that the Electoral College needs to be revised. But not for a popular vote but by a majority vote of the states. The United States is a coalition of INDEPENDENT states. What is good for New York is not necessarily good for Iowa. The Federal Government has usurped too much power not enumerated in the Constitution. That is because the Electoral College is heavily weighted in favor of just a few states.

The purpose of the Electoral College is to give less populous states the same voice in Washington as the more populous. It doesn't take as many people to raise cows and corn as it does to make cars and computers so agricultural states are essential disenfranchised under the current system.

I would propose that each state have an equal number of electoral votes. Currently the northeast and California nearly decides a presidential election. It is nearly becoming a popular vote contest anyway.

Bailey Jones

The EC is a lot of things, but Orwellian isn't one of them.

Carlos Ponce

I have to agree with you on this one, Bailey.

Gary Miller

Many alternatives to the EC have been proposed but all have faults. Unworkable, dangerous or too easily gamed. All proposals of Democracy are dangerous. The Founders knew the danger of democracy and devised the EC to avoid it. The EC has worked well so far and until it doesn't no change is required. Some one some day may devise a better safer way but until then the EC will do. The better way will look a lot like the EC we use today.

Ted Gillis

I’m just tired of the term Orwellian being used for anything, well except for describing Tom Cotton.

Carlos Ponce

Liberals are very Orwellian. They refine words, rewrite history. The 1619 project is a fraud that Liberals have adopted.

Ted Gillis

Nobody on this comment board even knows what the heck you are talking about Carlos.

No liberal that I know of talks about the 1619 project, nor any other magazine stories that you think we read. I got news for you, we go to work everyday. We don’t have time to gather around and adopt stupid stuff written in magazines for click bait like you obviously do Carlos.

Carlos Ponce

"No liberal that I know of talks about the 1619 project" Isolated yourself, Ted? And such are the claims of the low information Liberal....

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.