Is the Electoral College a Slaveholder Relic???

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
14,322
Reaction score
5,438
It is argued that the Electoral College is a slaveholder relic from our slavery past. In our founding, it tilted power towards the slave-holding states in presidential elections. I remember going to school and being told that the Electoral College worked by electing Jefferson over Burr... In the modern era, the Electoral College has been putting losers of the national election in the office of President, cheating millions of their vote twice in my lifetime... At least Jefferson won the popular vote in 1800... Did the 1800 election pick the right guy for I see no evidence that Burr would have been a bad President? His bad press came after his time as VP... I do not know why Burr chose to go West and get stupid... I think he believed his political ambitions were over after he killed Hamilton in 1804... It was in 1805 that he went West...

Burr lead the Senate well... Is it not Jefferson acting as a tyrant...


Burr was a judicial vice president. While Thomas Jefferson distrusted Burr and barred him from the politics of the White House, Burr presided over the Senate masterfully. Most notably in the impeachment trial of Federalist Justice Samuel Chase. Jefferson had grown weary of the power of the judiciary and sought to reduce Federalist influence on the Supreme Court by removing Samuel Chase by exploiting earlier failures of the justice. After the House voted to impeach Chase, Chase’s impeachment was to be decided by the Senate and presided over by Burr. Despite pressure from Jefferson, Burr handled the case as fair as possible. One Washington newspaper, typically critical of Burr, remarked, “He conducted (the hearings) with the dignity and impartiality of an angel, but with the rigor of a devil.” Because of the Vice President's impartiality in the trial, a Democratic-Republican majority voted to acquit Chase on all charges.

The Samuel Chase trial would be Burr’s last real success. After the trial, Jefferson made it clear that Burr would not be his running mate in the election of 1804. Burr turned his ambitions to running for Governor of New York in the same year, however Alexander Hamilton and fellow Federalists mounted a vicious campaign against Burr, even publishing Hamilton’s private remarks that Hamilton believed “Mr. Burr to be a dangerous man, and one who ought not be trusted with the reins of government.” After Burr read the remarks of his longtime rival, he sent a series of letters to Hamilton, eventually issuing a formal challenge to duel. Hamilton accepted the challenge, and on the morning of July 11, 1804, the two longtime rivals met in the Heights of Weehawken New Jersey. Much has been said and written about the duel, and history is still ambiguous on who shot first, whether Hamilton intended to waste his shot, and even who stood facing the sun. However, what is clear, from all accounts, is that two shots were fired, Hamilton missed, Burr did not. Burr’s shot entered Hamilton above his right hip, injuring his liver and spine. Hamilton died the next day. New York and New Jersey charged the Vice President with murder; however, neither went to trial and charges were later dropped.



The Burr conspiracy was a plot alleged to have been planned by Aaron Burr in the years during and after his term as Vice President of the United States under U.S. President Thomas Jefferson. According to the accusations against Burr, he attempted to use his international connections and support from a cabal of American planters, politicians, and army officers to establish an independent country in the Southwestern United States, parts of Mexico, and Florida. Burr's version was that he intended to farm 40,000 acres (160 km2) in the Texas Territory which had been leased to him by the Spanish Crown.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
14,322
Reaction score
5,438
Here is this... Electoral College wins...




You know Cleveland lost the Electoral College but won the popular vote...



 

rittmeister

trekkie in residence
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,610
Reaction score
3,731
The evidence at the time points Burr would have been an okay president The only question is would he have left office quietly...
that was supossed to be an answer to your thread title
Is the Electoral College a Slaveholder Relic???
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
14,322
Reaction score
5,438
More...


The result was the controversial “three-fifths compromise,” in which three-fifths of the enslaved Black population would be counted toward allocating representatives and electors and calculating federal taxes. The compromise ensured that Southern states would ratify the Constitution and gave Virginia, home to more than 200,000 slaves, a quarter (12) of the total electoral votes required to win the presidency (46).

Not only was the creation of the Electoral College in part a political workaround for the persistence of slavery in the United States, but almost none of the Founding Fathers’ assumptions about the electoral system proved true.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
14,322
Reaction score
5,438
The Electoral College is political stagnation... need to change or die... We changed our Constitution many times but not the most but not our voting system... It promotes a two-party system... it is a good read...


Hello, Electoral College. How lovely would it be to say goodbye? In my opinion, immortality is the worst curse that could befall anything. How horrifying it is to see a voting system, as old as the small, racist, and confined founding of this country, still in place.

The Electoral College is a relic of the white-centric, oppressive, tiny colonial America that existed centuries ago. It’s riddled with issues that grow more and more prominent as the years pass and have yet to be remedied:

The structural system of the Electoral College makes it so that it is almost impossible for third-party candidates to be elected. The winner-take-all system means that third parties are essentially losing from the get-go as the larger, more prominent parties will most likely always win the larger number of votes. This then discourages people from voting for third parties at all, feeding into a loop that reinforces the existence of two partie
s.

Oppression in other communities also continues as the two-party system, bolstered by the Electoral College, dominates. Third-party candidates have virtually no chance of winning, and as such, voters are either forced to essentially waste their vote or vote for a lesser of two evils. Voices go unheard, constantly, continually, and will do so, under this system that some conceited white guys decided on 237 years ago.
 

Tom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
1,420
Reaction score
665
The Electoral College is political stagnation... need to change or die... We changed our Constitution many times....
Has to be approved by 3/4 of the states. Not likely to happen.

You would be expecting small states to voluntarily diminish their own power and influence.
 
Last edited:

Tom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
1,420
Reaction score
665
Something that might be more "fair"-

Win a congressional district - get one electoral vote.
Win a state - get two electoral votes.

This is how Maine and Nebraska divvy up their electoral votes, but it may take a lot longer to determine an overall winner. And there will be a lot more lawyers and poll-watchers.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
14,322
Reaction score
5,438
Has to be approved by 3/4 of the states. Not likely to happen.

You would be expecting small states to voluntarily diminish their own power and influence.
That is an argument that small states will not give up this suppose power... I do not think so. I think it's a red heron argument... People want the person with the most votes to win ..
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
14,322
Reaction score
5,438
Something that might be more "fair"-

Win a congressional district - get one electoral vote.
Win a state - get two electoral votes.

This is how Maine and Nebraska divvy up their electoral votes, but it may take a lot longer to determine an overall winner. And there will be a lot more lawyers and poll-watchers.
The vote in each Congressional district goes the presidential candidate is a Republican idea because if I remember rightly McCane and Romney would have won their presidential races had we do the electorial vote that way but lost the popular vote. The only fair way is to dump the electorial college and let the people's voice be heard...
 

rittmeister

trekkie in residence
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,610
Reaction score
3,731
That is an argument that small states will not give up this suppose power... I do not think so. I think it's a red heron argument... People want the person with the most votes to win ..
that's a red hering with red being the big word in it
 

Tom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
1,420
Reaction score
665
The vote in each Congressional district goes the presidential candidate is a Republican idea because if I remember rightly McCane and Romney would have won their presidential races had we do the electorial vote that way but lost the popular vote. The only fair way is to dump the electorial college and let the people's voice be heard...
As I said before- why would the small states voluntarily give up their own power and influence? And not all small states are Red - some are Blue.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
14,322
Reaction score
5,438
As I said before- why would the small states voluntarily give up their own power and influence? And not all small states are Red - some are Blue.
What is this power? If they not a swing state they get ignored like the rest of the none swing states... What power?
 

rittmeister

trekkie in residence
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,610
Reaction score
3,731
As I said before- why would the small states voluntarily give up their own power and influence? And not all small states are Red - some are Blue.
their special power lies in two senators per state not the electoral college - the ellectoral college empowers swing/purple states not red or blue ones
 
Top