Shaun King Quotes

In my view what you can't argue for is a system that is neither decisive nor proportional and can be indecisive and disproportionate at the same time.

The Electoral College is an antidemocratic relic.

The Electoral College needs to go, because it's made our society less and less democratic.

Despite its flaws, the American electoral system has produced Lincoln, the two Roosevelts, and Harry Truman.

In America you elect the electoral college and they select the President. In Russia, the people select the President directly. This is more democratic.

The U. S. Presidency could be decided by a system Americans would find unacceptable abroad…. U. S. officials, working in newly democratic countries don’t spend much time encouraging laws that would allow the second place candidate for national office to triumph.

If the Election be made by the People in large Districts, there will be no danger of Demagogues.

The Electoral College is the ink blot on the Constitution

The debate is ended. Fifty percent plus one vote is all we need to govern this country.

In a democracy, you can be right and still lose power.

What is the purpose of the electoral college? It has a few purposes. One, it's to restrain pure democracy. Very good, very important, that's a wonderful thing.

I used to be a fan of proportional representation, but I am not at all now I have seen it in action.

Did I end up finding a little blue pill to cure America's electoral dysfunction? Unfortunately, it's not that simple.

Your political system is actually too democratic. The fact that Americans vote on every bill and proposition can prolong bigotry indefinitely, especially where it is aimed at minority groups.

If we go by the National Popular Vote, we'll get more people voting.

Last I looked - and I'm not a candidate - but last time I checked reading about the Constitution, the Electoral College has nothing to do with parties, has absolutely nothing to do with parties. It's most states are winners take all.

The conception of political equality can mean only one thing—one person–one vote.

Proportional representation, I think, is fundamentally counter-democratic.

I've lived in New York state almost my entire life, so my votes never count.

I've never understood multi-party democracy. It's hard enough with two parties.

Since 2000, Republican policies have suppressed Democratic voting; since 2010, Republican gerrymandering has given the Republicans a heavy systematic advantage in Congress; and the last two Republican presidents have won the White House while losing the popular vote to their opponents.

One person, one vote sounds so reasonable and - dare I say it - democratic. But the voting process in America is anything but fair and balanced.

The very foundation of our democracy depends on the integrity of our elections.

Consider this: The United States held its first presidential election in 1789. It marked the first peaceful transfer of executive power between parties in the fourth presidential election in 1801, and it took another 200 years' worth of presidential elections before the courts had to settle an election.

We live in a representative democracy, characterized by free and fair elections and peaceful transfers of power. After most elections, roughly half of Americans are thrilled with the results; the other half are profoundly disappointed.