Do you think the US electoral system should have proportional representation?
955273
Anything to get rid of the electoral college!
1158872
I think that is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.  Many presidents have won due to the electoral college rather than popular vote.\n\nWhat disgusts me is the attempt by my party (Democrats) to try to change the rules AFTER the vote.\n\nThat was about the most UNdemocratic thing I've seen in a long time.  This question points out that the same foolishness still lives, making a mockery of democratic process as people still think you can't "win" that way.\n\nWhat utter nonsense.\n\nMay I suggest you familiarize yourself with the rules of the game before you get involved, or change the rules with all of us in agreement before playing.\n\nPlaying Monopoly, losing, and then saying that everyone should have started with twice as much money and therefore you didn't go bankrupt makes you look stupid.\n\nClaiming Bush didn't win because of the electoral college is a silly idea (which it might be, but it was agreed to by all participants BEFORE the election, no complaints, since it might have benefitted them).\n\nSome of us are sick of it.  Show some political education and patriotic support, change the focus of the party onto the values we have made household words rather than special interests, and we'll take back the White House by 2008.\n\nDon't, and we deserve what we don't get.  GET OVER IT!  We're losing because of junk like this.
650037
YES, and it should be carried out by casting ballots. The rate of voters is really low, and it gets lower year by year. An armed revolution hardly ever has any positive result (Cuba, Mexico, Cambodia, China). The power in a democracy is in the People, but if these people don't vote or do so without being informed first, then Democracy is weak, and weak democracies always give off tyrants.
150821
the founding fathers designed this system because they thought that at the time the population was to uneducated to make such critical decisions as choosing the president. in fact the public couldn't choose senators either--they were chosen by the state legislatures. in any event the electoral college is a system that gives one vote per senator/representative that a state has. the electors are mainly chosen by the party that carried the state and when casting the ballots for the candidate that won the state the elector actually has no obligation to use his vote on that candidate other than the knowledge that should he vote for anyone else he would be committing political suicide
128353
our forefathers set forth in the Constitution how the government was to be run, and leaders selected, which is how we do it today.\n\nYou can't have a country run by everybody individually - leaders must be selected, and through the election process the majority of the population decides who those leaders are.\n\nIt's not a perfect system, but it's a lot better than most.
94069
The two party system is as old as the country itself.  actually, it is patterened after the house of commons in merry ole England.  If you think our party system is volitile, you should see and hear the antics used over there.  the two party system works as well as any other, probably better, given its longevity. I vote that we leave it alone except for one factor, that is popular vote.  I believe that we should still base our outcomes on the popular vote of this country.  In this way, the people have truly spoken! By the way, the hell with abroad.  We owe no other nation, or group of people, an explanation as to the domestic decisions of this country.
993923
Yes we should.  Liberal republicans and conservative democrats are almost the same thing, yet they vote for candidates that are far left or far right just because of party affiliation.  It's also ashame that third party candidates have no hope of winning when they have some of the best ideas.  The idea that your vote is wasted when you vote for the person you like best is terrible.  Every vote should count and we need to steer away from our current system.  Which incidentally put a theocracy into effect.  How can we attempt to bring democracy into other nations when our own leader claims to be led by god.
611292
Yeah, that'd be nice but whats "right for the people" can be seen differently by different people. Thats what parties are for, to bring different views to the situation so that there's always more choices for the people to vote on.
950465
there is too much confidence in american systems. experience shows that american elections should be monitored by independent outsidersas well. who cares. even poor countries benefit from good american government. having only two parties battling it out brings alot of mistrut. three is better to avoid marriage of convinience.
1064699
A two party system can't really represent a population as diverse and huge as the US.  There are other parties, but most people are creatures of habit and do not want to stop doing what they've always done, picking Dem or GOP at every election.  The major parties focus on important political issues because they want to gain seats in congress, but they don't necessarily focus on issues that really matter in the lives of Americans, because those might not get as many people to the voting booths come november.\n\nI hope that people will seize on any curiosity caused by this question and check out some third parties.  Even if you never vote for a third party member, it's good to get another perspective on the issues that face the US today.
514893
Not sure if that would help. But I would like to see the electoral colege go away so everybody's vote counts.\n\nIf there were no electoral college, bush would have lost his election and we wouldn't be in this mess.
845749
popular vote, let every vote REALLY count. We should abolish the electoral college.\n\nI am tired of hearing Texas Democrats, California Republicans, and Florida residents saying their vote doesn't count.
328917
the system is not representative and not democratic.it does not represent the diversity of the public and the spectrum of the minority's and leave out other alternatives that should have representation like in a parliamentary system.the system is no democratic because the differences between party's are posturing and more a matter of style than real differences.look at the way the elections are financed and how those moneys are spent in advertisement to grease the media.good luck america.
552061
Well, right off the bat, the US elects everybody by popular vote, right down to the local dogcatcher.\n\nThe confusion many people have is owing to our origins, where each individual colony of Great Britain was used to being separate from the others, and so when we formed the United States, each State had to have its concerns for Sovereignty [running its own local affairs] addressed.  So a system was devised to give the small states equal representation in the congress with the large ones, while also giving the people representation based on how many there are in each state [one representative per so many thousand].  So we have 2 senators from each state in the Senate.  And we have about 456 representatives in the House of Representatives.\n\nSenators and Representatives run for election based on membership in a party.  The people who want to run for office [British "stand" for office] for the Republican party have their names placed on the ballot by petition signed by a sufficient number of people.  Then there is an election to decide which of these Republicans will be the Republican candidate for the office in contest.  The same with the other parties.  This is called a primary election.  When that election decides who shall be the candidate from each party, then the people vote on the various condidates for the office in contest.\n\nWe do in fact have more than the 2 parties.  But the system is so old and our population is so much alike and our domestic issues are so continously the same that most people really are either Republicans or Democrats.\n\nAs far as the Presidential election goes, the Constitution does not provide for the direct election of the president.  It provides for the States [that old States' Right thing] to send Electors equal to the number of Representatives it has in Congress to vote on the candidates put forward, without mentioning how they are to be put forward.\n\nThe theory was that people would vote for Electors whose political views were known, and these Electors would gather together in a College and hash out who would be President among themselves, with the most populous states having the most votes because they have the most representatives in Congress.  \n\nBut rapidly, it fell out that parties would nominate a candidate and the people voted for the Electors who commmitted themselves to him, and then the Electors voted in the College for that person, even though they don't really have to.  \n\nWhat this results in is that candidates spend a lot of time in the most populous states because those states have the most Electors, and there is the rule that the candidate who gets the most votes, even if only 51%, gets ALL the Electors  from his state.\n\nThere is a lot of discussion about ditching this imperfect system in favor of absolute popular election.  Most people would go for it, but politicians like it because they can spout and posture in only a few states and win the election, even though they don't get the majority of the popular votes.
709192
Well, with our current system, your vote really doesn't count much. Especially in Presidential elections. The Electoral College is a huge disaster for MANY reasons, and has got to got. Evidence: George Bush is president.
768808
it prolly could not happen with our system of checks and balances.  \n\npeople do vote, just in small numbers (about 50%).  \n\nthe problem is that the rest of us know how those 50% will vote so it doesnot matter what we say  because of the electoral college.  \n\nthere is still a huge process of candidates within political parties running against each other.  a whole party would decide to allow a dictator to run for election.
274254
Most americans who dont vote do so because they either dont care or dont think their vote counts. One thing that i feel would make a difference in the number of voters in this country would change the system to be a direct election and get rid of the electoral college. Another thing that could be done is what some countrys like Australia do and fine those people who do not vote, another possibility would be to make election day a national holiday like Italy does and surprising ly Italy has the highest percentage of the national poulation of voting age that vote.