|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Popular Vote vs Electoral College | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2587 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.5 |
AZPaul3 writes:
The majority within those two voting blocks along the coasts determines the election. But if it was by Population, your vote in California would count just as much as your vote in South Dakota. So if you were Republican and lived in California or Massachusetts, your vote would still count in the national totals. IT IS the Winner Take All that is the problem. Get rid of that. But assigning electors proportionately - while a vast improvement - still has a screensize resolution problem. Maine (I think) divides their 5 electors by popular vote, which means that the voting population is divided by 5 to REPRESENT Maine, when they could just use the raw numbers. It may have made sense when the voting was reported back to D.C. on horseback and no one had a telephone, but now we can count right down to the 155 millionth vote. I know someone who actually moved to Maine from Massachusetts so his Republican vote would count. Now I vote BLUE BLUE BLUE, so I am okay for now. There is a good point about visiting these fly-over states to campaign, but that is all stemmed from another problem, the worst problem with the human species: advertising, even the shittiest kind, actually works."I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside." Death to #TzarVladimirtheCondemned! Enjoy every sandwich! - xongsmith, 5.7dawkins scale
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 8.7 |
According to Alexa, the CCP has 96 million members. How is it fair that a billion point four Chinese bow down to 96 million CCP members?
Phat you slack jawed yokel, fairness is not a common aspect of communist dictatorships. No one is advocating for a one party state.It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8546 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0
|
AZPaul3 writes:
The majority within those two voting blocks along the coasts determines the election. But if it was by Population, your vote in California would count just as much as your vote in South Dakota. I was talking about 'by population', I think? The two coasts of the United States, within 100 miles of each coast, if I have my numbers right, is where a super majority of people (voters) live. If the majority of those voters go for Sam then Sam will be president regardless of any votes in South Dakota. North Dakotans, South Dakotans and everyone south to the Mexico border have no say, no voice, in the presidential vote. The voters on the coasts are numerous enough to control the outcome of a popular vote. For appearances sake all votes cast are indeed to be counted across the country and a winner declared on the national totals and no one would care what regions the votes came from. But when a politician goes to ply his trade and do his influence pork barrel thing looking for votes, he can save a lot of money and time schmoozing the coastlines without any concerns for the interior.
Maine (I think) divides their 5 electors by popular vote I may have this wrong but I thought the Maine-Nebraska model of Electoral College was two at large votes to the state-wide winner then the remaining EC votes are apportioned to the winner of each congressional district. That makes sense when your district votes blue to give the 1 EC vote that represents that congressional district to the blue guy even, or especially, when in a red state.
... advertising, even the shittiest kind, actually works. I am constantly surprised at how effective negative political ads can be. I'm old enough to remember seeing the first and only airing of the Daisy Spot. I ran upstairs to ask my dad if he had seen it. He was upset, flabbergasted and POd to the max. He was a Goldwater fan. I don't remember his words just that he was not a happy camper. I was just a tweenager and I felt the raw power. Yeah, political ads can be very effective indeed. Edited by AZPaul3, . Edited by AZPaul3, . Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18332 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Daisy Spot Commercial
Wow. People don't fear nuclear war or nuclear weapons like they used to. And it was fear that helped preserve the peace. Nowadays, nobody is scared of anybody else. Which is fine as long as the henhouse has no disguised wolves in its midst.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18332 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Dr.Jones* writes: No one? No one is advocating for a one party state.All I can do is judge them by what they say. (just as they do me)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5949 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Which is fine as long as the henhouse has no disguised wolves in its midst. You mean fox. "The fox is in the henhouse." Wolves are too big to fit in a henhouse. That's why they infiltrate the herds of sheep.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5949 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
OK fine. The GQP is advocating for a one party state. Their party regardless of how much they have to rig the elections.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2587 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.5 |
AZPaul3 writes:
I was talking about 'by population', I think? The two coasts of the United States, within 100 miles of each coast, if I have my numbers right, is where a super majority of people (voters) live. Right. But I was talking about all the voters in solid Blue (or even solid Red states like my Dem friends in Arkansas) who also feel like it's a waste of time to vote. Probably more of them than in all the fly-over states, like South Dakota or Montana, all told. I am sure there are more, totalled on the coasts, that just don't vote because they always lose. For them, switching to a population vote makes their vote count just as much as a vote anywhere, so they would go vote. Right now they feel disenfranchised. Originally, to vote you had to be a male white owner of LAND. these fly-over states are sort of the last bastions of LAND power left. Your plan might be feasible, whereas the population plan might be too large a change to pass congress, so yay! let's go! on the other front we only need 75 more electoral combination of states to join in on the plan to cast all electoral votes to the general population winner. this would effectively make it the population winner. but this gives me a bad feeling: if a state votes overwhelmingly against the country-wide winner and then the state gives all it's EC votes to the country-wide winner. A sort of big Fuck You to their own citizens. So just get rid of the EC, go to population, explain that to all of your relatives in California who could then vote with their South Dakota relatives for their Republicans and it will count. Make it a team effort. If they still lose, well, have the Republican Party leaders actually do something for them instead of blocking my Progressive Democrats by any way they can. Edited by xongsmith, : clarity "I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside." Death to #TzarVladimirtheCondemned! Enjoy every sandwich! - xongsmith, 5.7dawkins scale
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2587 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.5
|
Phat writes:
All I can do is judge them by what they say. NO. You judge them by what they DO. Like when the Republican-dominated state legislatures close polling sites and make the poor and POC have to drive 50-70 miles to vote, while the white upper class neighborhoods vote only a couple of blocks away. Like when the Republicans vote unanimously NO to spending more money for veterans, or to investigate price gouging at the gas pump. This isn't your father's "Left Wing of the same bird as the Right Wing" joke any more. The GOP wants 90% or more of the country to be minimum wage slaves to their 1% super rich buddies in the Fossil Fuel Industry, in the Big Pharma Phuckers, yunno, as George Carlin put it, it's a rich club and _You_ aint in it. And before you cry "the Dems take money from them too!", well, you would rather have them bring a knife to a gunfight? Arent you a Union man? The Repugnants HATE Unions and want to end them all. Reagan dismantled the Flight Controller Union nearly on his Day One. You judge them by what they DO."I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside." Death to #TzarVladimirtheCondemned! Enjoy every sandwich! - xongsmith, 5.7dawkins scale
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18332 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
xongsmith writes: OK that explains my rancher. But what do we expect him to do? He best not bet the ranch! Gambling is for suckers. Should we expect him to grovel at the feet of the majority? He is doing us a favor by raising livestock. Or would you prefer the state do that? Originally, to vote you had to be a male white owner of LAND. these fly-over states are sort of the last bastions of LAND power left. *Phat drags out Mr.Dictionary, another dusty old book*
Oxford Languages writes: I always assumed that populists were uneducated blue collar workers, many of whom owned a small business. Trump called them something to the effect of "his forgotten people" who he promised would never be forgotten again. a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups."the question is whether he will tone down his fiery populism now that he has joined the political establishment" support for populist politicians or policies. "the government came to power on a wave of populism" the quality of appealing to or being aimed at ordinary people. "art museums did not gain bigger audiences through a new populism" IIRC, he appealed to them for some unknown reason...perhaps because he was a walking advertisement against "elitism". So now my next task in today's lesson is to look up elitism. But first... Populism In The United States Wikipedia:Im starting to understand. My conservative friend, (he loves Ben Shapiro) claims that "we" (see? He uses that word too! )need to kick the elitists out of political office. Now...
What Are Elitists Elitism quote:Comments?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10067 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
AZPaul3 writes: To address the imbalance in voting strength the smaller states required both the Senate membership and the electoral college. Else, no deal. The issue was the Southern states worrying that the Northern states would outlaw slavery.
There is also a problem in just ditching the EC. Without the dynamics of the EC, meaning you are going by popular vote alone, politicians have no reason to go to Michigan, or Texas or anywhere outside the voting blocks of the two narrow strips along the coasts. Why wouldn't they go to wherever the voters are? A Democratic vote picked up in deep red Utah would count as much as a vote anywhere else.
Unless you live on the coast ... no it won't ... and it doesn't matter if you vote Dem or Rep, it won't count. It would count a lot more than it does now as a Democratic voter in a deep red state. Right now, it counts for bupkus. If there were a popular vote, my vote would count just as much as someone voting in NY or LA.
Because democracy must always be tempered with minority protections. Voting Republican is a not a minority.
Without something like the EC, if going strictly by popular vote, then my sister's vote in New York City will help determine the election while your vote in Dallas does not even need to be registered as it will have no effect on the outcome. That's false. Those votes count the same.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10067 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
AZPaul3 writes: I was talking about 'by population', I think? The two coasts of the United States, within 100 miles of each coast, if I have my numbers right, is where a super majority of people (voters) live. If the majority of those voters go for Sam then Sam will be president regardless of any votes in South Dakota. North Dakotans, South Dakotans and everyone south to the Mexico border have no say, no voice, in the presidential vote. They have the same voice as each of those people along the coast.
For appearances sake all votes cast are indeed to be counted across the country and a winner declared on the national totals and no one would care what regions the votes came from. But when a politician goes to ply his trade and do his influence pork barrel thing looking for votes, he can save a lot of money and time schmoozing the coastlines without any concerns for the interior. Or you can schmooze both urban and rural areas and win an election.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 437 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
I, for one, think we should be allowed to eat vegetarians - but that's only one vote and the vegetarians get to vote too. And even if we democratically decide to eat vegetarians, there is still a moral argument that vegetarians are human.
If I am a rancher in Wyoming, for example, why must I bow to the demands of a bunch of elitist whiners in Berkley who think that selling steak is cruel to animals... Phat writes:
There's no debate. So does the electoral college have anything to do with the old debate regarding whether the US is a Republic or a Democracy? Faith tried to tell me once that the US is a "republic", not a "democracy". I pointed out to her that it is a democratic republic. Both of you make the same mistake, confusing the party names with the general terms. When I first took an interest in politics, I called our two main parties the "tight-fisted Liberals" and the "spendthrift Conservatives". Typically, the party in power spends money like water and the opposition questions every penny.Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 437 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
But you do not get to dictate how people decide how to vote. If somebody votes Republican because they like red ties, that's none of your business. If I vote emotionally because I don't like to watch homeless people die. that's none of your business. Most of us here think your voting decisions are stupid but that's none of our business. Stupid people get to vote too.
voting should not be steamrolled based on emotional ideology. Phat writes:
You may not have heard the news: Life is not fair.
That is unfair. Phat writes:
Nobody is suggesting that. All anybody would ask is that he BE a taxpayer.
Unless you propose that the government take his ranch and divvy it up to a bunch of homeless people at taxpayer expense. Phat writes:
China IS a republic, by the way. A strong Democracy (or Republic, take your pick) is not run by the CCP nor should it ever be. And you don't get to decide whom it "should" be run by.Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 437 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
It's not authoritarian. Please learn what that word means before you use it again. Don't you see how authoritarian that sounds? It's a social contract.
Phat writes:
It really does. Hypothetically, just because 5 friends always get together and vote and 4 of them vote for the same thing does not mean that the fifth guy always has to turn the other cheek. The best thing about our Western democracies is the fact that when our party doesn't win, we don't go up in the hills with our rifles and start a revolution. That happens in far too many places (and the US sometimes seems close). So yes, we do turn the other cheek and wait for the next election to have our say again.Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024