You may disagree as you see fit. My goal is to eliminate the big out-of-state players like Bloomberg and Soros who come in with organized funding and disrupt local politics in which they should have no say just to press certain issue candidates. I believe that there should be no representation without taxation (and vice-versa). If that person doesn't represent you throughout the year, you shouldn't be able to disrupt the lives of the people who are represented - agree with them or not.

count me in on a new country. It would be under attack pretty quickly of course, as it excelled in a sea of socialist failure. A good TV series is on Netflix, called JERICHO. Between that and of all things, WALKING DEAD, we can get a pretty good idea of what civilization disintegrating would be like. JERICHO was because of an orchestrated nuclear conflagration, and WALKING DEAD from some sort of disease (forget the zombie thing- imagine them as the hordes of mindless, unthinking and civilization-less humans roaming around looking to take whatever they can to stay alive.

The presidential election is way down there in importance, but for most people it's not the result of philosophical choices -- it's shallow sound-bite thinking if they think about it at all. Most people don't even bother to think about philosophy, and that's unlikely to change.

And I doubt that even a collapse will change that, because it's so easy for politicians to blame someone else and be believed. Remember what happened after the German collapse of 1923. People believe what they want to believe.

This is why I believe the way to freedom is some kind of new-country project. The only whole population that will likely support liberty anytime soon is the self-selected group that starts a new country (or seastead, or space-stead, or something similar).

I disagree with #2. It would mean you're effectively silenced if you live in a district that's been gerrymandered so the other party controls it. I regularly give to candidates for Congress from elsewhere in my state that I agree with. Tom McClintock is one.

This Friend speaks my mind! I couldn't agree more with your thoughtful points!

The electoral college votes should be determined by how each district in the state votes. That would reduce the influence of the big population centers. The glitch there is that every state determines how its electoral votes are determined, so changes that undermine the dominant party in a state have little chance of happening.

Agree 100% with your demand for repeal of the 17th amendment and how campaign finance laws should be changed.

I personally don't have a problem with the Electoral College per se, but would like to see its vote distributions change from an all-or-nothing standpoint. The way this currently sits, it places those large counties in charge of the rest of us already!

Two other changes I would like to see with regard to elections:

1. Repeal of the 17th Amendment and revert Senate Elections back to State Legislatures rather than popular vote.
2. Campaign finance laws that dictate one can not donate money to a politician not within one's jurisdiction. Anyone would be able to donate to a Presidential election, but only members of a state would be able to donate toward a Representative or Senatorial election.

Well, the part about only certain, high-populated
places could work their will makes sense. But I
don't believe all the "climate change" propaganda.

There are some exceptions to this theme. The internal demographics of a State is also important. My State of Nevada has horrendously distorted demographics with almost all the population concentrated in the Las Vegas and the Reno-Carson area. And the rampant explosion of these populations have come from elsewhere - quite a mix politically. The balance between R vs D usually leans to the D side, but often can be close.

Where I am in the State in far northeastern Nevada is one of the nations largest and relatively unpopulated counties - Elko County. But it actually can serve as a tipping balance when the rest of the State is a wash. Elko County is a traditional conservative stronghold and is therefore an important, but rural swing area for a candidate to visit.

In 2008, during the campaign trail, I was living out by the end of the runway of the Elko Airport and personally witnessed Obubbleheads jetliner coming in to attempt to sway that balance in the D's favor. And apparently successful.

A notable low point in my life.

Just because you change the driver, does not change the bus route

Yikes! I didn't know about Ozonehead.
That idiot could well be the death of the economy.

With Shrillary's campaign circling the drain, I heard in the news last week that Ozone Al is thinking of running. A couple of terms of Al Gore pursuing global warming regulations ought to just about finish off the American economy.

I still remember Al Gore complaining, "I won the popular vote."
But what the hell? We're now nearing the smelly rear of 8 years under Presidebt O'Pinocchio.
I hope.

Which Adams, John or Sam?

I think it is a reach to suggest that a candidate would spend 100% the time in the heavily populated areas. Also, one must consider that currently the Republican nominee spends little or no time in New York or California since 100% of their electoral votes are destined for the Democrat candidate.

It really doesnt matter if there is an electoral college or not. The whole presidential election is pretty much irrelevant anyway. The president is a puppet put in there through the contributions of crony capitalists who expect payback if he is elected. Ayn Rand is right- politics is way down the line and the result of philosophical choices. Does it really matter which party the president is from. Nixon was republican and pulled out the underpinnings of the dollar by taking us off the gold standard. Reagan introduced more deficit spending than anyone up to that time. Bush got us into a dumb Iraq war, followed by the second Bush expanding the war into Afghanistan also. Obama is a real trip of course, spending us into oblivion and taking whatever foreign affairs respect we once had and tossing it out. We are headed to the end game of socialism at this point, and thats that. Any return to private property and individual rights will require a complete collapse before enough people will see where socialism ends up and change their thinking.

You'll have no argument from me about that map. The whole idea was to make sure the President would be more than the chief instigator (I do not dignify such a person with the term "leader") of a mob.

That's all Barack Obama is: a riot inciter. Not a leader. The Electoral College picks leaders.

Great Post. I wish we could have a forum with our Founding Fathers on todays elections...I would love to hear the take from Franklin, Jefferson and Adams in Particular.

Thanks, Brett!

Thanks for this. It's good to have a refresher course on these issues. I agree that the Electoral College exists for a reason, and too many people oppose the EC without realizing what problems it is intended to solve.

Thanks for the post, freedomforall. If you want the comprehensive authority book on where to be (and not be) when the SHTF I reccomend "Strategic Relocation" by Joel Skousen. A must-have resource for anyone who wants to create their own private Gulch!

This is confusing because the electoral college is by state and his population map is by county.

Also, I couldn't tell if the end was a parody: "I personally am hoping that the climate change stuff is all just propaganda put out there by Godless liberals who want to weaken America for the UN-lead introduction of sharia law, and not a real thing."