Can someone clarify about American Election?

[Realeo]

I am having hard time parsing this. Either this is because each state is having their own rule or whatever.

So American don't exactly vote for president, but they vote for representative called electoral, then the electoral votes for the guy he want. I understand that each electoral already stated who will they vote and some state guarantees that the electoral in question may not break his promise (aka faithless elector).

So I was expecting a huge array of electoral name instead of president name?







Am I missing something? Am I misreading something?

[Vi]

The person who actually casts the vote does not matter, so much as who they are bound to vote for. It really doesn't matter who they are as long as they vote the right way (only one election a long time ago messed with this).

More bluntly, we vote for tools.

[zoraster]

People vote for candidates on the ballot. The candidate with the most votes in the state get all of the electoral college electors the state is assigned (other than Maine and Nebraska, which allow for the splitting of electors). The parties generally select the electors. It's not constitutionally required that the elector votes for the candidate people voted for, but many states make it mandatory by law. In any case, it's very infrequent that there's a "faithless" elector (See Here).

What Vi says generally is right. Electors are just tools to elect presidents. I think some states list electors under candidate names, but this is pointless and just adds confusion. No one is voting because they like the elector.

[inte]

The person who actually casts the vote does not matter

Xd nobody who casts a vote matters

[Vi]

The person who actually casts the vote does not matter

Xd nobody who casts a vote matters

I live in a swing state, so I disagree. It even comes with no downside since I don't watch TV or listen to talk radio.

[Equinox]

A lot of people get this wrong, which is frustrating when their vote actually matters.

In California, a state that has consistently gone to the Democrat candidate since 1988, a vote for Donald Trump is not going to have much impact. The same is not true for a more contested state, such as Pennsylvania, where one's vote suddenly carries a lot more meaning.

That doesn't mean Californians shouldn't vote, though.

[GreyICE]

The electoral college, or more specifically the electors, is a holdover from a time when people would literally have a guy on a horse go ride down to Washington to cast a vote for them.

As I've explained before, it's very similar to the way that the power to call or dismiss a government in Canada is theoretically held by the Governor-General appointed by the Queen, but the fact is that he doesn't actually have that power. In the same way about 10 minutes after the electors overturned the popular will the popular will would abolish the electors.

[zoraster]

Well, theoretically the electors overthrew the popular will in 2000. But they overthrew it in the way that the House of Representatives and Senate don't reflect the total popular vote of Democrats vs. Republicans -- and adherence to political boundaries.

[GreyICE]

Well, theoretically the electors overthrew the popular will in 2000. But they overthrew it in the way that the House of Representatives and Senate don't reflect the total popular vote of Democrats vs. Republicans -- and adherence to political boundaries.

The electoral college did. But that's different, the college exists for a specific reason. The electors themselves didn't.

[Realeo]

Some of my friend are speculating about 2k16 faithless elector--due to Donald Trump. I mean, if the John Will is out--what else can happen?

The electoral college, or more specifically the electors, is a holdover from a time when people would literally have a guy on a horse go ride down to Washington to cast a vote for them.

Oh, that has something to do with the electoral? I thought this only have something to do with the Tuesday election.

[Vi]

Speculating about people defecting from Donald Trump is fascinating for all the reasons it won't happen. Most of these reasons involve "second amendment protections for our democracy" to aid in persuasion.

I did read an article about the Rules Committee tripping Trump into, say, releasing his tax returns before allowing him to be the nominee, but that's probably as far as the boat's going to sail.

Oh, that has something to do with the electoral? I thought this only have something to do with the Tuesday election.

The primaries each party holds to determine their nominee operate on their own rules that are basically whatever they say they are. The Electoral College is only for the final vote for President.

[zoraster]

Some of my friend are speculating about 2k16 faithless elector--due to Donald Trump. I mean, if the John Will is out--what else can happen?

The electoral college, or more specifically the electors, is a holdover from a time when people would literally have a guy on a horse go ride down to Washington to cast a vote for them.

Oh, that has something to do with the electoral? I thought this only have something to do with the Tuesday election.

Yeah, they're probably not referring to the electoral college. They're probably talking about the republican convention. Those are called delegates, and it's a different process.

[Flubbernugget]

My understanding is that the electoral college was basically a "bandaid and bubblegum" method to allow the American people to vote for the president, though I disagree that we should be voting for the president.