I agree to the idea suggested by SallyDP one person and one vote, but how to monitor it?

In response to bernieforprez:I'll second that for sure!!! What a hideous idea.

In response to SallyDP:That's a neat idea, but it takes away a valuable check and balance. The electoral college helps ensure that we don't end up with a candidate who favors some states more than others. If you switch to one person one vote, a president could conceivable win by promising preferrential treatment to states like California, NY and Florida at the expense of smaller states like Rhode Island. So, before you could proceed, you'd need to get rid of the states.

In response to southboca:
But isn't that what senators and congresmen/women are for? to fight for their State?? I still think the whole electoral college was the result of the white men who owned land and slaves... they had as much influence as slaves and women were on their property... Don't you think it is time we have equal rights for everybody, and leave the EC as a historical institution that served its purpose already?

In response to SallyDP:It's a good idea, but as long as there are states, it won't be equal rights for all. A vote in a small state will be worth less than a vote in a large state.

In response to southboca:But shouldn't a smaller state have less of a voice than the larger states since the larger states represent more a share of the population. I like the idea of a one vote per person count.

In response to Black Widow:In 2004, about a 125 million people voted. California had about 13 million voters. Florida had about 7 million. NY another 7 million. Texas about 8 million. Place like Alaska had only 300,000; Delaware, 385,000; North Dakota, 330,000; Vermont 315,000; and Wyoming 247,000. At the low end, that only tallies up to 1.5 million people. A candidate could easily run on a platform that gave perks to bigger states (e.g. 2 percent federal tax cut) and penalties to smaller states (eg. cut back in federal services and increases in taxes.) On a one man, one vote ballot, there would be nothing the smaller states could do to protect themselves.

In response to bernieforprez: Maybe we don't want Clay but I'm in favor of a Katherine McPhee / Carrie Underwood ticket!

Is this a joke?

Actually who is going to decide about the American election?

The only good think about electing our president American Idol style is that eventually the whole process would be cancelled. I can't believe that the show has lasted this long.

In response to Thor:LOL!!!! I take it you aren't an American Idol fan. Maybe we could do it Survival style instead.

In response to Peter:That's a neat idea. All the presidential candidates roughing it and trying to make alliances. :)

In response to corinthians:Yes, and we could hold it in the Middle East. Then it would really be a reality show.

I think it is a relatively good idea. Political elections need to find a way to attract the younger audience and this could work. The younger population are the ones going to be around for the future and the current president is shaping this and elections need to consider this. It would be very difficult to do without it becoming corny though. The issue is still serious and needs to be kept that way.