FOWC with Fandango – Paradigm

Fandango from 
This, That, and The Other asks us to write a post using his word of the day. Today the word is Paradigm.

Our country established a paradigm long ago on how to run an election for the president.  There are a multitude of questions as to they why and how things are the way they are. I found this answer online and it clears up some misconceptions about the electoral college. I am not knowledgeable enough to know for sure if the electoral college is a benefit or hindrance to political sanity in these days.

It would be hard to do away with the electoral college for two interrelated reasons.
One, if there were a “direct popular vote” system, then a dozen or so large urban areas would be sufficient to elect the President (so presidential candidates would curry favor from those few large urban areas and ignore the remainder of the States/people).
Second to have a “direct popular vote” system you would have to amend the Constitution, which (under Article V), means that (i) you have to have 2/3rds of the Senate AND Representatives agree to the change, AND (ii) you would have to get 3/4ths of the States to ratify the amendment.
In neither case ((i) or (ii)) would this happen because of the prior point.…  

At the Constitutional Convention, the Virginia Plan used as the basis for discussions called for the Executive [i.e., President] to be elected by the Legislature. Delegates from a majority of states agreed to this mode of election. However, a committee formed to work out various details, including the mode of election of the President, recommended instead that the election be by a group of people apportioned among the states in the same numbers as their representatives in Congress…, but chosen by each state “in such manner as its Legislature may direct.” Committee member Gouverneur Morris explained the reasons for the change; among others, there were fears of “intrigue” if the President was chosen by a small group of men who met together regularly, as well as concerns for the independence of the Office of the President. Though some delegates preferred popular election, the committee’s proposal was approved, with minor modifications, on September 6, 1787.
In the Federalist Papers No. 39, James Madison argued that the Constitution was designed to be a mixture of state-based and population-based government. The Congress would have two houses, one state-based (Senate) and the other population-based (House of Representatives) in character, while the President would be elected by a mixture of the two modes, giving some electoral power to the states and some to the people in general. Both the Congress and the President would be elected by mixed state-based and population-based means.

As the election has now taken place, you would think that the outgoing president would abide with the existing paradigm. But that is not happening, as we all know.  A terrific explanation of all that SHOULD be taking place can be found here:

Instead, we are presented with a whiny, complaining, immature man/child who wants to do away with anyone and anything that doesn’t promote his evilness. He wants to put people in office who will forgive/pardon him for all his illegal activities before he concedes the election. (If he ever does) Can you imagine the horrors of tRump being arrested for trespassing in the White House once Biden is sworn in? I can see that happening. 

What Happens If Trump Refuses to Leave?



11 thoughts on “FOWC with Fandango – Paradigm

  1. that second argument is an argument regarding why it is difficult, not why it should not be done.
    The first argument holds that it is okay for the vote of n in one state to carry more weight than the vote of a person in another.
    At the end of the day, should the constitution work for you, or the other way around?

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.