Instigator / Pro
55
1485
rating
91
debates
46.15%
won
Topic
#809

Resolved: The United States ought to replace the Electoral College with a direct national popular vote

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
24
0
Better sources
16
8
Better legibility
8
5
Better conduct
7
2

After 8 votes and with 40 points ahead, the winner is...

David
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
15,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
15
1687
rating
555
debates
68.11%
won
Description

Intro

The 2020 presidential election is well underway and this is a perennial issue.

Definitions

Electoral College - a body of electors established by the United States Constitution, constituted every four years for the sole purpose of electing the president and vice president of the United States.

Popular Vote - an election in which people vote directly for the candidate that they want

Rules

1. No forfeits
2. Citations must be provided in the text of the debate
3. No new arguments in the final speeches
4. Observe good sportsmanship and maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere
5. No trolling
6. No "kritiks" of the topic (challenging assumptions in the resolution)
7. For all resolutional terms, individuals should use commonplace understandings that fit within the logical context of the resolution, the reality of the US political landscape, and this debate
8. The BOP is evenly shared
9. Pro must post their arguments in R1 and waive in R4
10. Rebuttals of new points raised in an adversary's immediately preceding speech may be permissible at the judges' discretion even in the final round (debaters may debate their appropriateness)
11. Violation of any of these rules, or of any of the R1 set-up, merits a loss

Structure

1. Opening
2. Rebuttal
3. Defense
4. Closing

-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Our_Boat_is_Right // Mod action: Not Removed

>Points Awarded: 7 points to Pro

>Reason for Mod Action: Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless the voter voted for the forfeiting side, per the site voting policy guidelines. No moderation action is appropriate on this vote. And yeah, there isn't really a COC violation here.
************************************************************************

I am definitely attracted to women though, just saying. I can't help that I'm a manly straight-leaning bicurious fucker but I was just wired this way.

-->
@David
@bsh1
@Ramshutu

Our_Boat_Is_Right is using gay in a derogatory way. Basically saying the contenders defeat is down to his homosexuality.

-->
@Alec

"How would you respond to the tyranny of the majority argument that happens with a national popular vote?"

Three ways:

First, the "tyranny of the majority" is protected by the constitution and the Bill of Rights;
Second, congress is set up in such a way that gives the "smaller states" a bigger voice in the Senate.
Last, the EC actually enables this "tyranny" because it requires a plurality of the vote in a state. If you vote Republican in California, your vote is automatically silenced by the EC.

RM accepting 14 debates at once is more then what I can do.

-->
@David

How would you respond to the tyranny of the majority argument that happens with a national popular vote?

-->
@RationalMadman

Less than an hr.

-->
@RationalMadman

Fair enough! Good luck! It’s nice to debate you again. Hopefully we will see this through the end.

-->
@David

the hardest part of the case is elaborating on what 'informed voters' are and why that matters more than 'many voters' despite many also mattering.

The impact of those less informed of the suffering or needs of thos ein rural areas is going to be a heavy hitter for my case. I just need some time to think.

-->
@RationalMadman

You have less than a day to post.

-->
@David

Wrong. It is in the constitution and they are not the same things. They are both combined. (http://factmyth.com/why-did-the-founding-fathers-choose-a-republic/)

-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right

Because semantically they’re essentially the same thing. They were used interchangeably a in our earliest documents.

-->
@David

Dang. expanding my vocabulary. I still am confused. Explain wym.

-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right

False dichotomy.

-->
@David

Our country was never founded on a democracy. Our country was and always has been a democratic-republic.

-->
@David

lol we already have that in crazy AOC and her 96 trillion$ green new deal

-->
@David

Greens should have a turn in the white house too.

-->
@Alec

I agree. I’d also like to see some Greens in Congress

We need to abolish the 2 party system. Libertarians deserve a shot at the white house.

-->
@Speedrace

lol ikr RM just floods all the debates, it's very annoying .

Except for RM of course, what won’t he accept

-->
@Speedrace

because the EC keeps power in check and let's minority voices be heard. It protects from mob rule which just gets corrupt.

-->
@Speedrace

Lol

-->
@David

I’d distance myself from them if I were you

(Jk)

-->
@Speedrace

This is actually quite controversial. I know many people who are against abolishing the EC.

WHy would anyone challenge this