Search Form
First, enter a politician or zip code
Now, choose a category

Public Statements

Electoral College

Issue Position

Location: Unknown


Do you realize that a candidate for President of the United States can be elected by an electoral vote of as few as 11 (the most populous) of the 50 states? Though it may seem unlikely, it is true. Though a candidate may win the actual popular vote (your vote) by millions of votes, perhaps tens of millions nationwide, he or she could lose the election to the vote of the electoral college. In fact, it has happened, in the election of 1876 to cite one example.

In this 1876 election, Samuel J. Tilden received 4,284,885 popular votes, which was 250,935 more than the number received by Rutherford B. Hayes, who received 4,033,95 popular votes. Yet, Hayes received one more electoral vote than the minimum required for majority and was granted the Presidency. Tilden actually received 6% more of the popular vote, which was 8,318,835 total in 1876.

The Electoral College is a true dinosaur and must be dissolved in the long term interest of fairness to the citizens. Is it any wonder that voters are apathetic? If you live and vote in a state, which is traditionally democratic for example, what is the value of the millions of republican votes cast in said state, should the entire electoral vote be pledged to the democratic candidate? I feel that many registered voters simply stay home because they are convinced that their votes do not and will not matter. This is a shame!

This relic needs to be abolished immediately and will be a priority of mine and should be of yours. In the late 1790's and early 1800's, there may have been a justifiable need to elect a President in this manner. Most citizens could neither read nor write. Most of the citizenry lived in remote areas, where schools and newspapers were poor, few and far between. The educated, prominent and informed aristocracy felt that they were in the best position to decide the leader of the country. They were likely correct in making this assumption at that time.

News flash! The American public is no longer uneducated, ignorant and uninformed! We read, we write, we listen and we understand. We have access to radio, television, newspapers, telephone and computers, which were not available in the early days. Anyone, who would test today's American citizen's ability to choose his President, will be making a grave mistake.

It requires a 2/3 majority vote of the 50 states to ratify an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It takes a 2/3 vote by congress to over-ride any presidential veto of a bill produced by congress, so that said bill may become law. How and why is it then that we belittle the office of President by permitting his or her election by as little as a one or two vote electoral college margin, especially if the other candidate achieved an overwhelming popular vote margin of victory?

Do we not elect by direct popular vote our mayors, our councilmen, our state senators, our state representatives, our governors and our U.S. senators and representatives? Why is it then that we must endure hokis-pokis in the election of our President? As Yul Brenner spoke in the movie "Ten Commandments", "So let it be said, so let it be written". As the people vote, so let it stand. That is my position.

The above proposal will have no effect on my personal situation, my personal campaign for the presidency in 2008. I must collect a minimum of 270 electoral votes to be elected to the presidency of a total of 538 electoral votes possible. Remember that ½ of 538 total electoral votes would be 269 votes, which would create a tie. In 1804, the 12th Amendment provided for separate electoral votes for the President and Vice President for tiebreaking purposes if necessary. Other wise, it is necessary to win by 2 votes minimum, or 270 to 268. This I will only achieve with your full support. I will need your signature on a petition, your financial assistance and of course your vote, when crunch time comes.

Our congress designs the legislation for our society. Then, the congress votes whether or not to pass the laws that it just concocted itself. This just may be a case of the fox guarding the henhouse. I believe that our congress has enough to do, proposing law, voting on its own proposals and policing itself. Congress need have no involvement in the election of our top representative, the President. The total electoral vote of a given state is equal to the sum of said state's senators (two in every state, based upon equal level) and its number of representatives (varies according to population). In the case of Ohio, for example, the total number of electoral votes is 20, but in Alaska, the total number is only 3.

I do not know a single person, who will not vote, so long as he or she feels that said vote is meaningful. Low numbers of registrants and low voter turn-out by registered voters indicates an alarmingly high degree of - why bother, who cares, what does it matter, my vote does not count, I am a democrat in a traditionally republican state and occasionally, the machines are inaccurate anyway.

Folks, affirmative steps must be taken to eliminate this inadequate and antiquated system of electing your President. It will be an absolute tragedy and travesty, should a candidate win your popular vote and lose the presidency due to a condition, which can and should be prevented.

Thank you very much.

Skip to top

Help us stay free for all your Fellow Americans

Just $5 from everyone reading this would do it.

Back to top