Democrat Presidential Nominee

[Tom]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

The problem with a lot of posters arguing in favor of the electoral college right now is they aren't getting the point.

I don't care about past results or even wish to re-litigate them.

The fact is the EC, if we're all being honest here, is pretty undemocratic and a national popular vote or something like Tom suggested makes a lot more sense.

Any argument to the contrary is absurd.

A Wyoming voter's vote is worth 1.5x that of Fast in NH, 3x that of California, etc. etc.

Plus nobody looks at how changing the rules would change how the populace votes... if suddenly your vote actually counted for something; A Republican in California or a Democrat in Mississippi might actually show up at the polls who otherwise wouldn't.

And in NY, my vote is worthless.

If a candidate beats his opponent by 1 vote in NY, the gets ALL the EC votes.
Meaning half the votes cast count for nothing.

No EC would definitely change both voting and campaigning practices.
If every vote counted, then more people would vote,and candidate would have to consider every state.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Tom

And in NY, my vote is worthless.

If a candidate beats his opponent by 1 vote in NY, the gets ALL the EC votes.
Meaning half the votes cast count for nothing.

No EC would definitely change both voting and campaigning practices.
If every vote counted, then more people would vote,and candidate would have to consider every state.

Preach...

I don't disagree at all.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Sure lets ban the Electoral College.

Then every Presidential election would simply come down to Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York.

Then again, people are leaving those tax heavy shitholes in droves, so in 20 years it very well could come down to Texas and Florida as long as the Blueies don't mess up those states as well.

We lost, so lets change all the rules so that we'll never lose again.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Lemon Drop Husker

Sure lets ban the Electoral College.

Then every Presidential election would simply come down to Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York.

Then again, people are leaving those tax heavy shitholes in droves, so in 20 years it very well could come down to Texas and Florida as long as the Blueies don't mess up those states as well.

We lost, so lets change all the rules so that we'll never lose again.

How many otherwise GOP voters in the Deep Red south do you think stay at home on elections because... why bother?

I'd gather a lot.

At the end of the day you're basically arguing that if we made the system more Democratic my side might lose and I don't want that...

It makes the point that the Electoral College isn't really the best system.

If you removed partisanship from the discussion... an honest defense of the EC is pretty hard to do.

[Tom]

I won twice like that and I want to change them.
How many people don't vote now?
What percentage did not vote in 2016?
Anyone know?

What happens with no EC is many people who do not bother to vote will be motivated to do so. Many people I know don't vote because we live in a democratic shit hole. No EC, they would be voting.

[ReplayRandall]

As long as they are legal US citizens who are registered to vote, showing proper ID, of course, I'm all for improving our voting system....Make it mandatory to vote.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

How many otherwise GOP voters in the Deep Red south do you think stay at home on elections because... why bother?

I'd gather a lot.

At the end of the day you're basically arguing that if we made the system more Democratic my side might lose and I don't want that...

It makes the point that the Electoral College isn't really the best system.

If you removed partisanship from the discussion... an honest defense of the EC is pretty hard to do.

We don't live in a Democracy.

Twitter

8158171504641

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

As long as they are legal US citizens who are registered to vote, showing proper ID, of course, I'm all for improving our voting system....Make it mandatory to vote.

Even though it used to be a big no-no among conservatives a National ID system or Passport for All program makes a lot of sense to address a lot of issues we have.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

Actually, if you base electoral votes on just population, CA comes in at just under 40 million and WY comes in at just under 600,000. The ratio is approx. 66 to 1, thus CA is underrepresented vs WY in electoral votes.

That is one side of the extreme to look at it, the other side would be that California itself, nullifies the EC votes of 13 other states.



A Presidential candidate only has to win 12 states to be elected President:


California-55
Texas - 38
New York - 29
Florida - 29
Pennsylvania - 20
Illinois - 20
Ohio - 18
Michigan - 16
Georgia - 16
North Carolina - 15
New Jersey - 14

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Lemon Drop Husker

That is one side of the extreme to look at it, the other side would be that California itself, nullifies the EC votes of 13 other states.



A Presidential candidate only has to win 12 states to be elected President:


California-55
Texas - 38
New York - 29
Florida - 29
Pennsylvania - 20
Illinois - 20
Ohio - 18
Michigan - 16
Georgia - 16
North Carolina - 15
New Jersey - 14

Another reason why the electoral college is stupid...

The Federal Government and the Presidency are also MASSIVELY more powerful than states... the case was the opposite when the Constitution was written.

In today's age the electoral college is a pretty hair-brained way to do things. When we vote its proxy and my vote is my own... it doesn't speak for anyone else. The EC is a way of watering down the votes of some and juicing that of others...

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

Another reason why the electoral college is stupid...

The Federal Government and the Presidency are also MASSIVELY more powerful than states... the case was the opposite when the Constitution was written.

In today's age the electoral college is a pretty hair-brained way to do things. When we vote its proxy and my vote is my own... it doesn't speak for anyone else. The EC is a way of watering down the votes of some and juicing that of others...

Mob rule is what should be the answer, right? Whether that mob is actually right or wrong, it doesn't matter, right?

Read the tweet with multiple entries I posted above. It lays out the dangers of mob rule and eloquently states why our Founding Fathers did as such. The elite and politicians can be corrupted (we all know that), and incorrect/poor decisions can undoubtedly be made by a majority for the absolute detriment of the other 48% of the public.

It isn't such a great idea to have 2 wolves and 1 sheep at a table making a majority decision on what's for dinner.

Having millions that live in a concrete jungle making all the decisions for millions who would never care for that lifestyle is beyond absurdity.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Lemon Drop Husker

A Presidential candidate only has to win 12 states to be elected President:


California-55- Hillary
Texas - 38- Trump
New York - 29- Hillary
Florida - 29- Trump
Pennsylvania - 20- Trump
Illinois - 20- Hillary
Ohio - 18- Trump
Michigan - 16- Trump
Georgia - 16- Trump
North Carolina - 15- Trump
New Jersey - 14- Hillary

Totals-

Trump- 152

Hillary- 118

The rest of the country-

Trump- 154

Hillary- 114


No matter how you slice and dice the totals, Hillary had no path to victory...

[delayjf]

OK Fine,

But on another note, consider the situation where a states popular vote for a candidate is effectively cancelled out when another candidate wins the national popular vote?

I don't see the SC allowing that to happen.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by Lemon Drop Husker

Majority rule is what should be the answer, right?

FTFY... and yes...

I feel like we're talking past eachother...

The EC is not Democratic... its outdated... if we wanted better participation in our elections we would get rid of it.

Here is the rub though... the flaws in the system have benefited you twice so you don't want to let it go. If the roles were reversed I think you would be singing a different tune.

I don't really care who it benefits... I just think, on paper, its dumb in general.

To be perfectly honest I'd be fine with going to a more parliamentary system where the House elects the President every other cycle... even that would be more Democratic than our current configuration.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

The rest of the country-

Trump- 154

Hillary- 114


No matter how you slice and dice the totals, Hillary had no path to victory...

I think the biggest item I recall, is 3 states worth 46 EC votes (WI, MI, PA) that came down to 80-90K votes or something crazy like that?

Switch those states and Hillary is President.

The 3 million popular vote difference total can all be found in 5 counties of LA, Chicago, and New York. The rest of the country was pretty well split.

If we simply look at California alone, they accounted for a 4.3 million vote difference for Hillary. Take away California and she loses the popular vote by nearly 1.5 million. Does anybody honestly want California deciding our POTUS every 4 years?