Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Orange

2/3ds of Americans think the EC should go

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

Yeah but what states do they live in? That’s what really matters.

Idk if you know this, but Wyoming residents are imminently more qualified to vote than California residents. That’s why their votes count for more. I am basically 3/5 of a person when it comes to voting, and that’s more than fair. 

In fact, midwesterners really know more about voting than just about anyone else. They should get to decide every election from here unto eternity. I bow before their superiority and wisdom.

You God damned right!  I don't know what the answer is but I don't want a bunch of twits in California running my life in Wyoming.  Fauck that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmm....Founding Fathers or Internet Slappy?.......Fathers or Slappy?....... Slappy... or Fathers?...... this is a tough one...

 

“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”

-Richard Feynman

"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators."

-P.J. O’Rourke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

I am basically 3/5 of a person when it comes to voting, and that’s more than fair. 

In fact, midwesterners really know more about voting than just about anyone else. They should get to decide every election from here unto eternity. I bow before their superiority and wisdom.

Lol — you give yourself a lot of credit SJSUMFER. Based on how you vote, my assessment is you’re barely 1/28 of a person. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sebasour said:

Care to give us a quick summary?

Sure...  TDS = Trump Derangement Syndrome.  It’s a debilitating mental illness that many suffer from post 2016.  

Symptoms include irrational thought, uncontrollable virtue signaling, chronic outrage, intermittent crying, desire to toss the EC, irresistible urge to call everyone a racist who disagrees with you, erectile dysfunction, and an unhealthy obsession with all things Russia.

25tz1l-1-jpg.323617

v0icAvfW.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

Until you try to find a comparable one with similar results.

 

Yeah, it's crazy that no one else has managed to make democracy work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, mugtang said:

Nowhere did I say that.  What I think is irrelevant.  The only way the EC goes away is if a Constitutional Amendment is passed.  

Personally I think it’s a waste of time as you’ll never get smaller states to agree to that.  There are other, easier ways to get around it and dilute the power of low population states like Wyoming and Vermont that don’t require amending the Constitution.  The easiest way would be to expand the number of representatives in the house from 435 to say 1,200. That would increase the number of electoral votes from 538 to 1303.  States like Wyoming and Vermont would likely still have 3-4 electoral votes while a State like California would probably g nearly double the electoral votes.  

Or we could just wait for the pendulum to start to swing in the other way, and the Dems would want the EC back. It kills me why either party doesn’t just come clean state their real agendas. And it would score good points with voters.

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, 415hawaiiboy said:

This compact does not abolish the electoral college system; rather, the compact awards all of the electoral votes from the member states to the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide.[1]

My idea is different in that the states don’t provide all their votes to the “national popular vote winner” but instead splits the specific state’s vote according to the specific state’s popular vote.  Of course, rounding could narrowly affect an election, I foresee, it gets rid of the clunky “winner takes all” scoring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im on the fence though with this idea, as the fear of the cons (fear of the unknown) currently slightly outweighs the pros in my mind.  I’ll bring up Erdogan again.  I think he won popular elections by less than a few percentage points, but enacted so much change catering to his slight majority. 

Im ok with slowly moving towards a popular vote on a state by state basis.  I feel having less clunky scoring would make the decision to appeal to a wider base of voters more frequent.  On the other hand, is having two parties with different views, taking turns at rule, ultimately a good thing?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 415hawaiiboy said:

My idea is different in that the states don’t provide all their votes to the “national popular vote winner” but instead splits the specific state’s vote according to the specific state’s popular vote.  Of course, rounding could narrowly affect an election, I foresee, it gets rid of the clunky “winner takes all” scoring.

Maine and Nebraska do this already.

People, not a fan.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, azgreg said:

Maine and Nebraska do this already.

Let’s start the State Popular Vote (SPV) campaign AZGreg.  

AZ would be a good Canidate to jump on board due to the partisan split.  Why wouldn’t the losing 45% want to have their vote count in national elections?  

So would be Hawaii.  The complaint is by the time our polls close Hawaii Time, the election is decided already.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, sebasour said:

 

Yeah, it's crazy that no one else has managed to make democracy work.

Yeah it's also crazy that we were never set up to be a direct democracy for many very good reasons. Don't like it? Organize, campaign, and fund a push to amend the Constitution. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, sean327 said:

Yeah it's also crazy that we were never set up to be a direct democracy for many very good reasons. Don't like it? Organize, campaign, and fund a push to amend the Constitution. 

You can still have a republic with a fair way of building that republic 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, MetropolitanCowboy said:

No one in the left wing would be chasing this windmill had their candidate won. Just facts.

 

And many right wingers would be bitching if it cost them 2 elections in 16 years, but let's not get hung up on personal biases.

 

Let's focus on the pros and cons of a system that gives 56,000 voters in Wyoming 3 electoral votes, while giving 4.5 million Republicans in California, 4 million Democrats in Texas, and 3 million Republicans in New York jack shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...