Thu Aug 30, 2012, 11:58 PM

cal04 (36,975 posts)

Al Gore Calls for End of Electoral College

Source: National Journal

Many Americans are disenfranchised and some states are ignored because of the Electoral College, and it's time to abandon it, former Vice President Al Gore said on Thursday night as part of Current TV's coverage of the Republican National Convention.

"I really do now think it's time to change that. It's always tough to amend the Constitution and risky to do so, but there is a very interesting movement under way that takes it state by state, that may really have a chance of succeeding. I hope it does," Gore said.

Asked to describe the movement, Gore was vague, saying it "started in California and it's gained a lot of momentum."

(snip)
"I supported the idea of the Electoral College because the logic is, it knits the country together, prevents regional conflicts, and it goes back through our history with some legitimate concerns," he said. "But since, I've given a lot of thought to it and I've seen how these states are just written off."

Read more: http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/al-gore-calls-for-end-of-electoral-college-20120830

137 replies, 10344 views

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

137 replies	Author	Time	Post
Al Gore Calls for End of Electoral College (Original post)	cal04	Aug 2012	OP
It will never happen. The south won't let it /nt	still_one	Aug 2012	#1
For once I agree with the south	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#10
That was not the intent of the electoral college. That is why they have 2 senators from every state	still_one	Aug 2012	#14
You began with a completely unargued statement and ended with an unargued opinion...	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#21
No matter what my view is, the fact is it won't go away, it is here to stay /nt	still_one	Aug 2012	#22
Maybe, but anything can be changed..	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#24
In theory yes. Either way I hear you /nt	still_one	Aug 2012	#34
Look, Arkansas has slightly fewer people than Chicago, but Arkansas voters have more power	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#40
You are comparing a city to a state..	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#41
look it's not the way democracies do things	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#43
I'm not speaking in favor of EC, I'm advocating against popular vote.	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#44
I'm not arguing for pure democracy, but the voters should have equal power	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#48
There is more involved in changing the system than just getting rid of bad policies	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#45
the popular vote to elect the president and vice president	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#49
This is a republic not a democracy, like it or not...n/t	pipoman	Aug 2012	#119
A republic is a form of democracy.	tabasco	Sep 2012	#128
And I tire of people ascribing the dictionary definition of 'democracy'	pipoman	Sep 2012	#129
No,	tabasco	Sep 2012	#135
So you think it is a good	xxqqqzme	Aug 2012	#58
Then address the filibuster policies	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#59
No, it's about giving equal power to all voters	cpwm17	Aug 2012	#76
People in Arkansas have a tradition of voting only once	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#78
If we did away with the electoral college, then each voter in your state would have the	JDPriestly	Aug 2012	#47
Nothing wrong with that, each voter having the same power	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#51
Sounds reasonable...	onpatrol98	Aug 2012	#112
In a democracy, sheer numbers decide a lot of things like whether tax money goes to fund or	JDPriestly	Sep 2012	#120
not necessarily	DonCoquixote	Aug 2012	#64
You are confusing Congress with the EC	apnu	Aug 2012	#65
Yeah, why should more than half the goverment be based on voters	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#94
In a popular vote system, it would not be decided in any areas	treestar	Aug 2012	#74
They are already ignored	Floyd_Gondolli	Aug 2012	#81
I am 31 and Clinton carried AR in 1992 & 1996	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#97
I don't like...	GTurck	Aug 2012	#75
I agree that it will never happen, but the Southern states are not the issue	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#77
electoral college is a fraud	Dkc05	Aug 2012	#2
There are about 40 states that are either BLUE or RED	XemaSab	Aug 2012	#3
At the very least, we can push	Ken Burch	Aug 2012	#4
btw, is that an old file photo, or did Al grow another beard?	Ken Burch	Aug 2012	#5
He didn't say what solution he preferred. Popular vote is absulutely the wrong answer.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#6
Yes, Texas, Georgia, New York and California would be worth campaigning in	jeff47	Aug 2012	#8
No. I do not agree with your statement	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#11
Let me give a little example.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#17
Now do the math for the large cities.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#23
But the other side wants to win also.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#30
It's a zero sum game.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#32
The flaw is you're still thinking states.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#18
There's nothing wrong with that. My system would be an improvement.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#31
Wow are you wrong.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#35
That's why we have Congress	cpwm17	Aug 2012	#79
One house of Congress represents the states.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#88
California only gets attention as a place to get money.	JDPriestly	Aug 2012	#50
Exactly. There is no real incentive for EITHER Rs or Ds to vote	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#67
That's why they don't want proportional voting.	Sirveri	Aug 2012	#98
I think they would spend time here	JonLP24	Aug 2012	#71
Phoenix would get attention. The rest of the state would be ignored. (nt)	jeff47	Aug 2012	#87
California gets 55 EV and my state gets 6	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#16
And the problem with majority rule is ... ?	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#19
The problem would be that a person could be	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#29
Can you please illustrate that with a scenario?	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#33
Majority vote is about numbers.	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#37
To add some numbers to this	jeff47	Aug 2012	#39
Thank you.	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#42
those 9 states have 18 senators, the other states have 82	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#53
You're looking at states as monolithic entities	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#56
How their EC votes are given is determined by the state.	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#60
Using a popular vote treats each citizen like an individual	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#66
Right, but that gives too much of an advantage to election-riggers	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#69
There's no advantage to a proportional EC	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#80
There is an advantage to a firewall.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#82
If a corrupt state alters, say, 10% of its individual votes	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#83
No. That is not "my system"	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#84
Right, using your example numbers	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#90
I don't follow your numbers, but it isn't about the numbers anyway.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#91
Your scenario is one in which the total vote is very close, but the electoral college is not	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#93
You don't seem to understand the concept of "firewall"	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#106
Ohio's electors are part of the election of the president	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#109
Cities would elect the candidates because most "individuals" live in them	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#99
Most individuals in the US are white; would you say it is white people who elect candidates?	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#107
Sometimes it is. Obviously you can win elections without the minority vote or repubs would never win	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#115
Exactly. Proportional electors REDUCES the dominance of the big states	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#68
The problem is that sometimes the majority tramples legitimate interests of minorities	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#85
so the minority should get the right to win elections with less votes than the majority?	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#108
A simple majority of ELECTORAL votes is required to elect the President	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#110
We were talking about what you think, not how it works	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#111
What I think doesn't matter. The EC is intended to protect the interests of small states.	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#113
"what I think doesn't matter"	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#114
I used to want to end the Electoral College	jeff47	Aug 2012	#7
Re: the empty state problem	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#9
I'm using 'state' as a convenient grouping mechanism.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#15
In my system, the non-urban areas get MORE of a voice	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#20
Only because you haven't done the math yet. (see my other reply)	jeff47	Aug 2012	#26
And remember the "empty states" get 2 Senators. That is a huge amount of power.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#25
Assuming the filibuster will remain is not a good idea.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#27
You do know, don't you, that NYC . . .	markpkessinger	Aug 2012	#117
Link? (nt)	jeff47	Sep 2012	#122
Here ...	markpkessinger	Sep 2012	#125
Ah, there's the problem	jeff47	Sep 2012	#134
Okay, but after this election	shawn703	Aug 2012	#12
I see that happening also	Freddie	Aug 2012	#62
Therein lies the key hypocrisy of many people who wish to end the Electoral College	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#86
The easy way to do is is proportionate delagations at the state level	bhikkhu	Aug 2012	#13
As a practical matter, it would have to be done nationally.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#28
If California abandoned the electoral college we could say goodbye to ever electing a Democrat again	cpwm17	Aug 2012	#95
I'm for a direct democracy. None of this republic shit. nt	Comrade_McKenzie	Aug 2012	#36
Yeah - why waste time with the Constitution - just do it like you want it...not! Direct Democracies	24601	Sep 2012	#123
My beef with the EC	TexasBushwhacker	Aug 2012	#38
It is a virtue of the EC to negate the factor of turnout	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#70
Not only does it not count, it goes to Rmoney	treestar	Aug 2012	#73
We in California don't count nearly as much as the voters in Rhode Island or Wyoming or	JDPriestly	Aug 2012	#46
That makes little sense.	JoePhilly	Sep 2012	#127
This just occurred to him now?	jberryhill	Aug 2012	#52
Oddly, the EC will probably benefit Obama this election season...	Drunken Irishman	Aug 2012	#54
Eventually, the EC may become Proportional But	LarryNM	Aug 2012	#55
Winning the popular vote and "losing" the election	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#61
It didn't start with California	karynnj	Aug 2012	#57
Well, now Republicans must support the electoral college, since they cannot ever agree with Al Gore.	tclambert	Aug 2012	#63
Popular vote makes more sense considering we are a democracy.	bamacrat	Aug 2012	#72
Thank you Al Gore n/t	librechik	Aug 2012	#89
One voter, one vote. What's not to like?	Throd	Aug 2012	#92
Exactly	TexasBushwhacker	Aug 2012	#100
No, I'd limit absentee ballots to legal voters, not just anyone who asks. I don't want 8 year olds	24601	Sep 2012	#124
Until we have a better way of counting votes	MurrayDelph	Aug 2012	#105
I think it should be abolished too!	Liberalynn	Aug 2012	#96
I'll second that.	Cleita	Aug 2012	#101
Or in other words	sgsmith	Aug 2012	#103
I don't think there would have been a majority nationwide.	Cleita	Aug 2012	#104
I agree	Auggie	Aug 2012	#102
The electoral College is fucking stupid...	and-justice-for-all	Aug 2012	#116
Just want to be careful what we change it to	Billy888	Aug 2012	#118
One person one vote. No taxation without equal representation.	Exultant Democracy	Sep 2012	#121
The Electorial College is a firewall against state-level election fraud.	w4rma	Sep 2012	#126
watch this video on the electoral college	wilt the stilt	Sep 2012	#130
Thank you wilt the stilt for the link	cal04	Sep 2012	#132
As long as the electoral college remains, your vote is merely a suggestion. Dump it.	humblebum	Sep 2012	#131
Generally, Californians hate the EC	taught_me_patience	Sep 2012	#133
I'd favor preference voting and getting rid of the EC.	roamer65	Sep 2012	#136
If you want to read about something very fraudulent and undemocratic about the EC...	roamer65	Sep 2012	#137

Response to cal04 (Original post)

Fri Aug 31, 2012, 12:05 AM

still_one (31,072 posts)

Al Gore Calls for End of Electoral College

1. It will never happen. The south won't let it /nt

10. For once I agree with the south

14. That was not the intent of the electoral college. That is why they have 2 senators from every state

21. You began with a completely unargued statement and ended with an unargued opinion...

22. No matter what my view is, the fact is it won't go away, it is here to stay /nt

24. Maybe, but anything can be changed..

34. In theory yes. Either way I hear you /nt

40. Look, Arkansas has slightly fewer people than Chicago, but Arkansas voters have more power

41. You are comparing a city to a state..

43. look it's not the way democracies do things

44. I'm not speaking in favor of EC, I'm advocating against popular vote.

48. I'm not arguing for pure democracy, but the voters should have equal power

45. There is more involved in changing the system than just getting rid of bad policies

49. the popular vote to elect the president and vice president

119. This is a republic not a democracy, like it or not...n/t

128. A republic is a form of democracy.

129. And I tire of people ascribing the dictionary definition of 'democracy'

135. No,

58. So you think it is a good

59. Then address the filibuster policies

76. No, it's about giving equal power to all voters

78. People in Arkansas have a tradition of voting only once

47. If we did away with the electoral college, then each voter in your state would have the

51. Nothing wrong with that, each voter having the same power

112. Sounds reasonable...

120. In a democracy, sheer numbers decide a lot of things like whether tax money goes to fund or

64. not necessarily

65. You are confusing Congress with the EC

94. Yeah, why should more than half the goverment be based on voters

74. In a popular vote system, it would not be decided in any areas

81. They are already ignored

97. I am 31 and Clinton carried AR in 1992 & 1996

75. I don't like...

77. I agree that it will never happen, but the Southern states are not the issue

2. electoral college is a fraud

3. There are about 40 states that are either BLUE or RED

4. At the very least, we can push

5. btw, is that an old file photo, or did Al grow another beard?

6. He didn't say what solution he preferred. Popular vote is absulutely the wrong answer.

8. Yes, Texas, Georgia, New York and California would be worth campaigning in

11. No. I do not agree with your statement

17. Let me give a little example.

23. Now do the math for the large cities.

30. But the other side wants to win also.

32. It's a zero sum game.

18. The flaw is you're still thinking states.

31. There's nothing wrong with that. My system would be an improvement.

35. Wow are you wrong.

79. That's why we have Congress

88. One house of Congress represents the states.

50. California only gets attention as a place to get money.

67. Exactly. There is no real incentive for EITHER Rs or Ds to vote

98. That's why they don't want proportional voting.

71. I think they would spend time here

87. Phoenix would get attention. The rest of the state would be ignored. (nt)

16. California gets 55 EV and my state gets 6

19. And the problem with majority rule is ... ?

29. The problem would be that a person could be

33. Can you please illustrate that with a scenario?

37. Majority vote is about numbers.

39. To add some numbers to this

42. Thank you.

53. those 9 states have 18 senators, the other states have 82

56. You're looking at states as monolithic entities

60. How their EC votes are given is determined by the state.

66. Using a popular vote treats each citizen like an individual

69. Right, but that gives too much of an advantage to election-riggers

80. There's no advantage to a proportional EC

82. There is an advantage to a firewall.

83. If a corrupt state alters, say, 10% of its individual votes

84. No. That is not "my system"

90. Right, using your example numbers

91. I don't follow your numbers, but it isn't about the numbers anyway.

93. Your scenario is one in which the total vote is very close, but the electoral college is not

106. You don't seem to understand the concept of "firewall"

109. Ohio's electors are part of the election of the president

99. Cities would elect the candidates because most "individuals" live in them

107. Most individuals in the US are white; would you say it is white people who elect candidates?

115. Sometimes it is. Obviously you can win elections without the minority vote or repubs would never win