Why the Popular Vote should not Count!

Join Teachers.Net

Chatboards

Recent Groups

Politics

MEMBERS

8 Members

+ Join Group

Pinned Posts

ALLAll Teachers

Teachers.Net LIVE CHAT Support group - Tues eve!

Featured Jobs

Full-timeMontessori Teacher

Maple Ridge, British Columbia, Canada

TemporaryTeachers, rural schools

Peace River North School District

Full-timeHead Teacher: 2nd/3rd Grades – Mills College Children’s School

Mills College

Teaching Jobs on Teachers.Net

Featured Job special only $39!

https://teachers.net/jobs

Become a Teachers.Net sponsor!

Politics Chatboard

Why the Popular Vote should not Count!

by T.E.C. - Iowa

Jan 21, 2017

We are now hearing that Hillary won the popular vote and thus our system did not work. I would argue the system did work.

The founding fathers understood what is called the "tyranny of pure democracy" or "tyranny by the majority." Years ago, I noticed this in environmental studies of third world countries that acquired democracy. The city people wanted cheap food, and had the vast majority of the votes. This meant their governments often did awful things to their farmers. They would even destroy their agriculture industry with cheap imports - which is short sighted. Yet, no politician was interested in improving the lot of the farmers.

Additionally, some scholars think the founding fathers were influenced by the recent French revolution and its fairly rapid degeneration into dictatorship. This had given the populists some pause to reflect on the wisdom of too direct a democracy.

Thus, the founding fathers knew; in a healthy democracy, mino...See MoreWe are now hearing that Hillary won the popular vote and thus our system did not work. I would argue the system did work.

The founding fathers understood what is called the "tyranny of pure democracy" or "tyranny by the majority." Years ago, I noticed this in environmental studies of third world countries that acquired democracy. The city people wanted cheap food, and had the vast majority of the votes. This meant their governments often did awful things to their farmers. They would even destroy their agriculture industry with cheap imports - which is short sighted. Yet, no politician was interested in improving the lot of the farmers.

Additionally, some scholars think the founding fathers were influenced by the recent French revolution and its fairly rapid degeneration into dictatorship. This had given the populists some pause to reflect on the wisdom of too direct a democracy.

Thus, the founding fathers knew; in a healthy democracy, minorities need some kind of veto power, and that is the function of our electoral college (and the Senate). This country has been pursuing an economic strategy that was devastating the "rust belt" and these people wanted to tell us how upset they were.

Now mind you, they have been telling us for sometime. However, in this election, several of the states - enough of the states - got together and simultaneously used their veto power in an otherwise close election. What they were vetoing was Hillary's promise to keep doing what this country has been doing since Ronald Reagan - that is, destroying jobs, unions, the middle class, and more all for the sake of making the rich richer. It was economic!!!!

My point, I think the Electoral College system worked exactly the way the founding fathers planned. And yes, when states get together to exercise their veto on what is happening, you should expect the Electoral College result to be different from the popular vote. That is not a flaw! That is the system working correctly!

PS: This post is not to be construed as support for Pres. Trump! Honestly, had the rest of us demanded an end to the devastation in the rust belt, this Trump thing would not have happened. But we didn't, so it did!

PPS: James Madison wrote in the Federalist Paper pg. 51:

(Quote)

It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure.

(Snip)

In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

(End quote)

Comment

(2)

report post