“But delegates also had an anti-majoritarian concern in mind. At a time when many people were not well-educated, they wanted a body of wise men (women lacked the franchise) who would deliberate over leading contenders and choose the best man for the presidency. They explicitly rejected a popular vote for president because they did not trust voters to make a wise choice.“
This type attitude would normally be repulsive to conservatives, but again because the EC favors republicans, they support it.
“Hamilton, James Madison and the other designers of the electoral college never expected the emergence of organized political parties who would choose their candidates in competition with each other. By 1796, the Federalists and Republicans were rapidly being organized-- with leadership provided by Hamilton and Madison-- making the electoral college a minor adjunct of little importance.“
In Federalist 10, Alexander Hamilton writes on factions and majorities in the American populous. Hamilton defines factions as “a number of citizens whether amounting of a majority or minority of the whole who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate unrests of the community.” When opponents of the Electoral College say that a popular vote makes every vote equal, they forget the concept of sectionalism also predicted in this document. This phenomenon exists on a political and sociological level as individuals tend to have a proclivity for living around others that are similar racially and politically. One can take, for example, North Minneapolis and the suburb of Edina.
Hamilton feared in a popular vote that non-majoritarian interests, when closely clustered, might overpower the majority. As the policy needs of metropolitan cities across the country have become more and more similar, it is entirely possible for Democratic candidates to build coalitions that play only to these certain groups. Even Tim Ryan, the congressman who attempted to become the new Democratic Minority Leader, acknowledges that the Democratic Party has become a coastal party and needs to reach into middle America. In my view, a benefit of the Electoral College is that it forces candidates to build geographically diverse coalitions. A popular vote ultimately relieves this burden and gives more power to the counties out of touch with needs of rural America. Based on the Hamilton definition of factions as both majority and minority groups, it is clear that even though the Democrats may win the majority of the vote based in this population, Hamilton and the Founders believe that this is a dangerous way to win an election.
This phenomenon is easily displayed in a compelling way mathematically. Over 2,330,000 people voted for Hillary Clinton in Los Angeles County alone in the 2016 election. This county by itself accounts for vote totals equal to or more than that of many states across the midwest. This begs the question of why should the voters in a county, which has very specific policy needs that differ with, for example, Wisconsin, have a greater impact on the election than all the diverse needs of Wisconsin combined? The Electoral College protects the interests of Wisconsin from this faction. Whether we choose to agree with it or not, the United States is founded on the idea of states’ rights and the protection of small and large states in government. If the Founding Fathers were here today, they might be unhappy with the candidate we elected, but they would likely believe in the fundamental mechanism driving Trump’s electoral win.
In the 1888 election, Grover Clevelandof New York, the incumbent president and a Democrat, tried to secure a second term against the Republican nominee Benjamin Harrison, a former U.S. Senatorfrom Indiana. The economy was prosperous and the nation was at peace, but although Cleveland received 90,596 more votes than Harrison, he lost in the Electoral College. Harrison won 233 electoral votes, Cleveland only 168.
Doesn’t it all boil down to the way the cards are dealt & how the hand is played? We all know if it was reversed & Hillary ( I cringe at the name ) won, all would be well in Liberal Land. At least be honest. Sour grapes & sore losers. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, I’m telling my mom. If Hillary nailed the EV, she would be in office. The way it is. But she didn’t.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I expect mass liberal suicides when Trump wins the next election.
Not for me, I’ve opposed Clinton as long as they’ve been in national politics and looked forward to Trump locking her up. Unfortunately, before he could even be inaugurated he informed his base that he never intended such a thing, he simply viewed it as good campaign rhetoric to keep you guys wound up. And it worked, snicker.
As long as she’s out of the game is good enough for me. She will stumble through life trying to ride on whatever pathetic laurels she has. I hope she live a loooooooooooooooooooooooooong life of reflecting.
The “lock her up” chants have never ended at Trump Rally’s, obviously it’s not good enough for much of his base. Funny how they got duped on that one too…
No, Trump’s thinking on the issue “evolved” just as Obama’s did on same sex marriage and the power of executive orders to grant amnesty to illegal aliens.
No, it did not evolve. At the first rally after his election, before he was even inaugurated, when the rally goers started chanting, “lock her up”, he said no no, that was just for the campaign, we don’t care about that now.
It was all nothing more than campaign rhetoric to gin up votes and it worked…
