The 2016 United States Presidential Election

Diomedes posits: Couldn't Obama simply withdraw the nomination November 9th???"You had your chance, suckers..."

Taq writes, regarding the election process: Not TRUE, mon ami. My friend in Wisconsin will vote Oct. 22nd. I also know of someone in Georgia who as already voted.Then there is absentee voting, where ballots can come in after November 8th this year and be counted if they were post-marked in time. Mail in voting in Oregon & Washington are two more examples.Plus the Primary Season is VERY MUCH a part of the election process.

Taq writes way back on the 12th: This may belong in a new thread, but I just wanted to toss out this idea to eliminate gerrymandering completely:Suppose we have a state with 16 districts, like Ohio.How do we avoid gerrymandering of any kind?Part 1
--------------Suppose every seat is At Large. The General Election ballot will have maybe 40-50 candidates on it, with a letter beside, indicating party affiliation - R, D, L, I, G, and so on.In 2014 the Ohio popular vote split like this:R 51.2%
D 45.5
L 1.2
I 0.8
G 0.3
and so on.Apportion the 16 Representatives accordingly:16 * .512 = 8.19
16 * .455 = 7.28
16 * .012 = 0.19
16 * .008 = 0.13
16 * .003 = 0.05and so on.So the Republicans get 8 representives, the Democrats 7 and the Libertarians get 1, the rest not getting enough.Part 2
-------------The highest 8 R finishers are in.
The highest 7 D finishers are in.
The highest L finisher is in.Just as a note, Ohio is currently split 12 R and 4 D, which is EVIDENCE of R gerrymandering. By having ALL candidates running at large there are NO district lines to gerrymander.What do you think? There must be something wrong with this idea. Right?
Help me out?Edited by xongsmith, : general election (i.e. November 8th this year)Edited by xongsmith, : this

kjsimons asks: You don't. You decide which Representative candidate represents yourself the most, not what is best for where you live. You could live in the sticks of a rural farmland which will always vote redneck in overwhelming numbers, but align to a candidate in the inner city that is closer to your positions. Currently you are screwed by living where you live. I suppose you could decide to move into the inner city district where candidates align with you. Or vice versa - you could be stuck in the city but want to vote for Old McDonald on his farm and be unable to move out to the country. But why deal with that if it isn't necessary?It would a be paradigm shift and might take a few 2-year cycles to shake out.Edited by xongsmith, : added missing s on represents

Taq writes: Why?Isn't this just another fossil of the days of property owners being the only people allowed to vote?The down-river voters in the district below may not want a nuclear power plant upstream. Or a coal-fired power plant upwind.

kjsimons writes: Glad you brought up Texas. Lets see what my plan would have produced:Texas in 2014: 36 districtsPart 1
--------------In 2014 the Texas popular vote split like this:R 60.28%
D 33.10
L 5.06
G 1.39
I 0.18Apportion the 36 Representatives accordingly:R 36 * .6028 = 21.70
D 36 * .3310 = 11.92
L 36 * .0506 = 1.82
G 36 * .0139 = 0.50
I 36 * .0018 = 0.06
-------------------
36.00So the Republicans get 22 representives, the Democrats 12 and the Libertarians get 2, the rest not getting enough.Part 2
-------------The highest 22 R finishers are in.
The highest 12 D finishers are in.
The highest 2 L finishers are in.Just as a note, Texas is currently split 25 R and 11 D, which is EVIDENCE of R gerrymandering.Are you going to tell me that none of the 12 Highest D finishers might come from Austin?Also notice that a 3rd party got 2 Representatives!!

Let's look at the 1st district results:Texas's 1st Congressional District, 2014[4] Party Candidate Votes %Republican Louie Gohmert (Incumbent) 115,084 77.47%
Democratic Shirley McKellar 33,476 22.53%
Total votes 148,560 100%In the current system all 33,476 votes for Shirley McKellar are thrown away.In my system, the 33,476 are added to the D state-wide totals to help increase the apportioned Democratic share of the 36 Representatives. Now it may be true that McKellar may not have finished in the top 12 Democrats, but her votes still have contributed to the D share in congress. They are not wasted in her heavily R district anymore. 22.53% is better than none at all.Edited by xongsmith, : percentage signs

How is it that you are able to go to different polling places? I have only the Ward 4A place in town where my name is on their list. I have to go there to vote....Strange.

NoNukes also misses the paradigm shift: The Representatives should represent what YOU want, not some area of the state. You are essentially arguing for Government by the land owners. "Your representative"??? My Representatives (note the plural) are all from my party, all over the state, as a TEAM. You are still thinking of where I particularly live within Texas (or whatever). If my party's 12 guys can't address my concerns, then I will campaign within my party for those that do next time. Or switch parties, if it comes to that.So a few of my 12 Democrats in Texas might have no idea of my "urban" concerns? Certainly the 22 Republicans wont either. Neither will the 2 Libertarians. The point is to get a fair representation. My 12 guys WILL be better for my concerns than a gerrymandered 8-10 guys, true? Remember which party started "gerrymandering". Who's to say, years from now, as long as they draw lines, which "neutral" agency will be fair? True, but so open to betrayal later, by bribes and other corruptible forces. You have to get rid of the concept of "districts". Whenever you draw lines, you have a monster of a job making sure there are no discriminating lines. Think of the money this would save. How do you define "no political gerrymandering"? How do others? Who is right?Consider the 33,476 D votes for the loser in the 2014 Texas 1st District race. In today's system these are all wasted votes. In my system they all go into the accumulation of D votes which helps towards the D Representation tally that will apportion out the 36 Representatives accordingly*. People won't stay at home so much anymore, thinking their vote won't count. Also the population discrepancies of each district, which leads some to having more power in their vote as opposed to other districts, is nullified. It isn't land, it's the people remember?Remember, when you take the ballot and go into the booth, there will be maybe some 80-160 qualified names listed, clearly labelled by party, and you can vote for no more than 36, for Texas in 2014. Today you can only vote for a name in your district. Often some asshole is running unopposed. Well, you won't have to skip that part or write in Mickey Mouse there any more.Paradigm shift.* of course the nearest integer algorithm will be needed. Edited by xongsmith, : is/areEdited by xongsmith, : more tidying upsEdited by xongsmith, : No reason given.Edited by xongsmith, : Forget the 2 LibertariansEdited by xongsmith, : more detailEdited by xongsmith, : asshole fix

ringo responds: We're talking within one state, not the other side of the ocean. You are using hyperbole beyond it being useful. What USA state is 1000 miles across? Possibly Alaska. As for the duty to represent you, who really does that these days? If you'd rather be represented by your neighbour instead of a politician who aligns with your views, then VOTE FOR YOUR NEIGHBOUR. It's really that simple. But if I have NO NEIGHBOUR I LIKE, and I live in Texas' 1st District, why shouldn't I be able to vote for VaLinda Hathcox who was redistricted to District 4, next to District 1, instead of Shirley McKellar - Shirley may stand for something I don't want.

NoNukes writes: Then enough people who share the concerns of Richmond, VA will elect a Rep who shares their concerns. The Rep will get enough votes to fall into the top N needed to make it.You don't have to live in Richmond to vote for someone who shares your concerns there. You could actually live in Woodbridge.

ringo asks: Indeed! If the Hawaiian gets enough votes to fall into the top N needed....There may be an issue within the US Constitution, however...i dunno.

Percy writes: and give her a Senate too! In New Hampshire you can vote for Maggie Hassan down ticket.

RAZD writes: ...and get a receipt of your own ballot (like a carbon copy) with your same ballot's long serial number you take home. Ballots are serial-numbered randomly. Later you can look up on the website and see how they counted the ballot with your serial number, which no one but you, yourself, knows.This could also help understand how your IRV ballot wound up being counted. I seem to recall that Lani Guinier of the Clinton Administration wanted the IRV system.

RAZD writes: Indeed, look at this: There are 2 mathematical concepts that may come into play here - 1. fence efficiency, which is the area divided by the square of the perimeter length - and 2. convex hull, which is the smallest polygon that encloses the area, being able to connect, with a straight line, any 2 points in the polygon without leaving the polygon.Clearly these are not the case above, but there are difficulties in holding to 1 and 2. They should only be a guideline. Look at the boundary of District 8, perhaps the most egregious.Edited by xongsmith, : swap FE math around to make efficiency measure higher for better fencesEdited by xongsmith, : straight lines!