It is necessary in order to protect competing interests, and to preserve the sovereignty of states. Without it, our country would degenerate into one big New York City…complete with twinky cops and soda police…and government would continue to grow unchecked. Citizens would be prisoners with no alternative, as there would be just a huge and dysfunctional “one size fits all” government. Montana and Wyoming would never get a fair hearing for their interests on any subject. The country would be run by mobs of the ignorant, herded from place to place by promises of “Obamaphones” or something equally silly.

Let’s fight to keep the Electoral College and, with it, our Union of Sovereign States.

The Electoral College NY Times remains a deeply defective political mechanism no matter whom it benefits, and it needs to be abolished.

Fixed it.

Don’t fear the Reaper.

The Electoral College remains a deeply defective political mechanism no matter whom it benefits, and it needs to be abolished.

Those who don’t understand the concept are too stupid to vote. This should be a prerequisite to voting eligibility.

I think the NYT — along with the rest of the legacy media/Hollywood — needs to be shuttered. They are a tarnish on our republic and sow the seeds of hate, resentment, envy, and division.

Punchenko on November 16, 2012 at 4:16 PM

But that’s their job. Who’s going to do it if they don’t.

Frank Enstine on November 16, 2012 at 4:28 PM

No one will do it if they go under and the $$$ dries up. There is no reason why the right shouldn’t organize and start targeting the legacy media and the advertisers who keep them alive. It’s time to get even and pull the plug on these shameless propagandists.

I think the NYT — along with the rest of the legacy media/Hollywood — needs to be shuttered. They are a tarnish on our republic and sow the seeds of hate, resentment, envy, and division.

Punchenko on November 16, 2012 at 4:16 PM

But that’s their job. Who’s going to do it if they don’t.

The problems with the Electoral College — born in appeasement to slave states — have been on display for two centuries; this page called it a “cumbrous and useless piece of old governmental machinery” in 1936, when Alf Landon won 36 percent of the popular vote against Franklin Roosevelt but received only 8 of the 531 electoral votes.

No, it was not in appeasement to the slave states. The slave states wanted electors apportioned by population alone and blacks counted toward that even though they could not vote. It was just the opposite. And who cares how many electoral votes the loser gets. If you lost, you lost. Would Landon feel better if he got 80 instead of 8?