Disney Educational Productions: The Electoral College

[Rubix4Life]

the electors don't have to vote for who the states tells them to. they have voted for the other candidate around 87 times. but it has never swung an election. this is why i hate the electoral college

[1109n]

This makes learning Electoral College fun and easy.

[heavym3tal]

This video explains in 8 minutes what normally takes 1 week in a public school. The difference, I understand the electoral college now :)

[professornuclearbomb]

The Elector College System as much to do with the Holy Roman Empire as Rome.

[bruneyprskate]

And there was definitely no link between the judge - at the supreme court ruling or the Florida recount - and George W. Bush's Dad..... Hmm suspicious.

[bruneyprskate]

And there was definitely no link between the judge - at the supreme court ruling or the Florida recount - and George W. Bush's Dad..... Hmm suspicious

[MrPsychoassassin]

Thank You.

-a lot of info.

[ninjapwnsause21]

mcdonogh is cool

[Hello59239]

In 1992 Ross Perot received 19% of the vote and 0 electoral votes.

[Hello59239]

This is a lot more informative than the schoolhouse rock video

[Potts132]

Electoral collage is a good idea, but winner take all is the major flaw

[fagsaaaa]

Repeat after me. Election Fraud 2000 and 2004.

3 months ago

1 PERSON=1 VOTE!!

[fagsaaaa]

Can anyone say election fraud in 2000.

[b1gr1g]

@fagsaaaa

Evidence?

[ouluvme2]

does this college have a football team?

[tatomuck18]

So does this mean one persons vote in one state would be worth more than another persons vote in another state? How is that fair? Shouldnt everyones individual vote count equally?

[flylike1]

"They wanted the smaller states to have an equal voice"

That's what the Senate is for, Disney

[tatomuck18]

1 PERSON=1 VOTE!!

Thats the ONLY way the voting is fair and everyones votes actually COUNTS!

I want my vote to count. Everyones vote should count equally!

in 2000 over a half a MILLION more people voted for Gore and Bush won. That same thing already happened FOUR OTHER TIMES!

If something that screwed up is even possible, the electoral college is a FAILURE.

[mvymvymvy]

In 1789, only 3 states used the winner-take-all rule (awarding all of a state's electoral vote to the candidate who gets the most votes in the state). However, as a result of changes in state laws, the winner-take-all rule is now currently used by 48 of the 50 states. The fact that Maine and Nebraska do not use the winner-take-all rule is a reminder that the Constitution left the matter of awarding electoral votes to the states.

[mvymvymvy]

In 2008, candidates concentrated over 2/3rds of their campaign events and ad money in just 6 states, and 98% in just 15 states. The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states.

Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states.

NationalPopularVote

[kitten3babe]

UGH! THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!!!!!!!!! This dumbed it down enough for me to understand what they heck it was about and now I can hopefully pass my senior gov final tommarrow morning ^.^

[OnePeopleOneChina]

The founding fathers created an Electoral College because they really DIDN"T TRUST the masses! Therefore, the USA isn't really a Democracy - it's a Capitalistic Oligarchy (rule by a small clique).

[bjm325]

Congratulations, you're right. We're not a Democracy, and guess what, you're right again that the founders didn't trust the masses. THAT'S WHY THEY ESTABLISHED A REPUBLIC. But you probably never heard that, because either A) you're actually from China (KNEE-HOW) In which case, your English is beautiful, or B) You never had a social studies teacher like me.

Read Federalist 10. The End.

[Richgj]

I am sure congress commissioned Disney to do this video.  The problem with the electoral college is written in definition: Rather than directly voting for the President and Vice President, United States citizens vote for electors. Electors are technically free to vote for anyone eligible to be President, but in practice pledge to vote for specific candidates[2] and voters cast ballots for favored presidential and vice presidential candidates by voting for correspondingly pledged electors......

[CluppHead]

Winner take all makes no sense to me whatsoever. The electoral college sounds fine, as long as they vote for who they pledge to vote for. But, taking all of a state's votes because of a margin so small is pretty ridiculous. 51% to 49% isn't really a majority. And for them to get all the votes for something like that blows my mind.

[Nononsenseman]

Actually there is another Electoral Crisis. When Thomas Jefferson tied for electoral votes. The House then decided him president.

[893160007]

california 50 some electoral votes florida 20 some kansas like 3 sounds like small states have an equal voice to me

[IndyCovaHart]

@893160007 That's what I'm sayin', too.

Imagine if all the "BIG" electoral college states became traditional "blue" or "red" states one day. I can't really see Texas ever becoming a "blue" state, but if the above scenario ever did transpire, I would predict a very quick revision of the Electoral College. EVEN by strict constitutionalists/traditional­ists -- with not even the least bit concern about the hypocrisy of it.

[DarkHulk2000]

great for the exam tomorrow

[bigfilmhat]

4 good ideas for revising the electoral college.

Instant runoff voting at the Presidential level.

A slate of 11 electors (the average number of electoral votes per state) that go to the winner of the national vote.

The electors MUST vote for their pledged candidate who wins the popular vote.

Election Day is a federal holiday.

[vanessarogers1]

@bigfilmhat VERY GOOD IDEAS. You are a genius.

[WhiteCamry]

The real problem with the Florida recount in 2000 wasn't the hanging chads and butterfly ballots but something more abstract - the winner-take all rule which awarded all 25 Florida electors to Bush.

ME and NE choose their electors differently - only two statewide, the rest by congressional district. If FL had this in 2000 then any recount would have had only 3 electors at stake. Bush would have received only 14 electors when he needed 24 to win. Gore would have won the election.

[inkey2]

@WhiteCamry : hi....I saw your comments and thought you might be able to answer this ....if the popular vote takes the electoral votes in a given state....how is it that a candidate can win the election without the popular vote....IF.....the popular vote gets the electoral votes of a given state. I watched this video and i still can't understand it. Is there a way you can explain this to me like I am a total idiot or like you are talking to a 5 year old...lol

[WhiteCamry]

@inkey2,

Look at it this way - in the 1960 World Series the New York Yankees outscored the Pittsburgh Pirates, 55 runs to 27. But the World Series champion isn't who scores more runs throughout the Series; it's who wins four games. The Pirates won that Series, 4 games to 3. That Yankees' wins were blowouts but the Pirates' wins were close-calls.

So it is with the Electors. Wide-margin or narrow, winner-take-all means that, as Florida showed us in 2000.

[IndyCovaHart]

@WhiteCamry Please provide a credible source for that 2nd paragraph.

[FlyontheWallinFLA]

Very innovative and understandable - sticks to the facts and doesn't get into the emotions of the proponent's & detractor's positions. Certainly a tribute to the wise forefathers and drafters of the Constitution to have thought up a "solution" for their historic period that still works so well in our historic period. The EC has withstood over 200 attempts to "improve" or "modernize" it. Truly withstood the "test of time".

[kidkounselor]

awesome way to explain it! I'm passing along to my teachers...and my kids too. Now...if we could only get our gov't to not be so corrupt....