Electoral College - time for a change.

[shoxilla]

IMHO if a vote is held each vote should count and be worth the same. In this day and age the EC is extremely outdated. Yes, I know the history of the EC. But in today's modern world, why should a vote in Iowa be worth more than a vote in Maryland? It's a national contest.

2 US presidents, in my lifetime, have been sworn in after losing the popular vote. The first ended as one the most unpopular ever. The second is seemingly headed the same direction.

Want to know how much your vote is worth?

http://theconversation.com/whose-votes-count-the-least-in-the-electoral-college-74280

I was surprised, living in Texas, that mine was ranked a lowly 28 vs a robust 20 for Kansas.

You have more votes you win, what a concept?

[C0|dB|00ded]

I'm for whatever keeps a conservative in the White House. How about you?


T


...:cool:

[shoxilla]

uhhhh no

[Shockm]

IMHO if a vote is held each vote should count and be worth the same. In this day and age the EC is extremely outdated. Yes, I know the history of the EC. But in today's modern world, why should a vote in Iowa be worth more than a vote in Maryland? It's a national contest.

2 US presidents, in my lifetime, have been sworn in after losing the popular vote. The first ended as one the most unpopular ever. The second is seemingly headed the same direction.

Want to know how much your vote is worth?

http://theconversation.com/whose-votes-count-the-least-in-the-electoral-college-74280

I was surprised, living in Texas, that mine was ranked a lowly 28 vs a robust 20 for Kansas.

You have more votes you win, what a concept?

Wise up Shoxilla. A lib in Texas is just about as unimportant (vote wise) as a Lib in Kansas. If you want to be more respected (vote wise), you need to move to California or New York.

[shoxilla]

looks like wisdom is needed by more than just me

[SB Shock]

IMHO if a vote is held each vote should count and be worth the same. In this day and age the EC is extremely outdated. Yes, I know the history of the EC. But in today's modern world, why should a vote in Iowa be worth more than a vote in Maryland? It's a national contest.

2 US presidents, in my lifetime, have been sworn in after losing the popular vote. The first ended as one the most unpopular ever. The second is seemingly headed the same direction.

Want to know how much your vote is worth?
http://theconversation.com/whose-vot...-college-74280

I was surprised, living in Texas, that mine was ranked a lowly 28 vs a robust 20 for Kansas.

You have more votes you win, what a concept?

In the 2016 Election Hillary had a 6 million vote victory in NY and CA but lost by 3 million in the 48 remaining states. Seem to me the electoral college just worked fine.

The founder knew what they were doing. The U.S. is not a direct democracy but a constitutional republic. The electoral college protects the smaller states from the tyranny of the bigger states by weighting it so their voice actually matters. If you had a popular vote - then CA, NY, FL, Illinois, and Texas would be deciding the election.

Then there is an issue of plurality or majority? Do you have run-off elections or do you accept say somebody who wins 30% of the vote?

[shoxilla]

Yes, it worked - that's the problem. 3 million votes were meaningless

[ShockTalk]

In the 2016 Election Hillary had a 6 million vote victory in NY and CA but lost by 3 million in the 48 remaining states. Seem to me the electoral college just worked fine.

The founder knew what they were doing. The U.S. is not a direct democracy but a constitutional republic. The electoral college protects the smaller states from the tyranny of the bigger states by weighting it so their voice actually matters. If you had a popular vote - then CA, NY, FL, Illinois, and Texas would be deciding the election.

Then there is an issue of plurality or majority? Do you have run-off elections or do you accept say somebody who wins 30% of the vote?

To take this a little further, the states are not the problem, it is in pockets within those states. In Illinois, Cook County controls the state. It looked like Clinton won the state in a landslide winning by over 900,000 votes, however, she won Cook County in a landslide by 1,158,659 votes. Trump got only 21% of the vote in Cook, but won the rest of the state by over 200,000 votes.

In New York, the counties of New York, Bronx, Kings (Brooklyn), and Queens have the power. Trump averaged around only 15% of the votes in those counties. The rest of the state was basically a push.

Same in California. San Francisco surrounding counties, plus Los Angeles County averaged only about 20% for Trump. Taking those counties out, the almost 4,300,000 margin in California reduces to around 700,000.

Certain people talk about Clinton's 2.8 million vote margin. Take out the California and New York pockets mentioned above and Trump has a 2.4 million win. Take Cook County out and he wins by over 3.5 million.

I'm not saying these peoples' votes don't count, but am concerned about political powers / special interest controlling any highly populated areas to such an extent that they could control the national election.

Basically, Clinton won the San Francisco area counties, LA County, the 4 NY counties, and Cook County by 6.4 million while losing the rest of the nation by over 3.5 million.

[shoxilla]

The basic question is why one "true blue" American's vote counts less just because of where they live?

[im4wsu]

Shoxilla - some of those don't live -- check the cemeteries.

[WstateU]

To take this a little further, the states are not the problem, it is in pockets within those states. In Illinois, Cook County controls the state. It looked like Clinton won the state in a landslide winning by over 900,000 votes, however, she won Cook County in a landslide by 1,158,659 votes. Trump got only 21% of the vote in Cook, but won the rest of the state by over 200,000 votes.

In New York, the counties of New York, Bronx, Kings (Brooklyn), and Queens have the power. Trump averaged around only 15% of the votes in those counties. The rest of the state was basically a push.

Same in California. San Francisco surrounding counties, plus Los Angeles County averaged only about 20% for Trump. Taking those counties out, the almost 4,300,000 margin in California reduces to around 700,000.

Certain people talk about Clinton's 2.8 million vote margin. Take out the California and New York pockets mentioned above and Trump has a 2.4 million win. Take Cook County out and he wins by over 3.5 million.

I'm not saying these peoples' votes don't count, but am concerned about political powers / special interest controlling any highly populated areas to such an extent that they could control the national election.

Basically, Clinton won the San Francisco area counties, LA County, the 4 NY counties, and Cook County by 6.4 million while losing the rest of the nation by over 3.5 million.

five-star-rating.jpg

[shoxilla]

5 Star Topic

[WuDrWu]

The real point is that the founders created a system where by it's complicated. No one person can or does have the ability to rule with impunity. You've got different subsections everywhere that keep things balanced for the most part. Everyone has a say. Your vote does in fact count. I know you're trying, but as @SBShock said, we are NOT a democracy. You may not like it, but that's not our country. We are a Constitutional Republic. And the rules set up make sure that the likelihood is that it will never change. It would take 2/3s of the House and Senate (not anytime soon) and then 3/4s of the states (38) which will never happen in our lifetime, and likely ever. You can't look at things in a fish bowl. Our system works beautifully, sometimes against our own interest, but still beautifully.

[jdshock]

I think the even more obvious change that people should push for post-Trump is ranked choice voting. I think we'd probably have Rubio in charge today with ranked choice voting.

[SB Shock]

I think the even more obvious change that people should push for post-Trump is ranked choice voting. I think we'd probably have Rubio in charge today with ranked choice voting.

Democrats cheated to get who they wanted, the Conservatives in the Republican Party should have cheated to get who they wanted. In the end, it was a lose-lose.

[C0|dB|00ded]

https://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-conte..._anchorman.gif


T


...:cool:

[pinstripers]

I think the even more obvious change that people should push for post-Trump is ranked choice voting. I think we'd probably have Rubio in charge today with ranked choice voting.

Rubio was my choice, but I cannot imagine in my wildest dreams that he would have accomplished as much as this guy has.

[Kung Wu]

Not. Even. Close.

[C0|dB|00ded]

Clarify. Please.


T


...:cool:

[Kung Wu]

No career politician would have come close to accomplishing what Trump has. Not. Even. Close.

[WuShock16]

The real point is that the founders created a system where by it's complicated. No one person can or does have the ability to rule with impunity. You've got different subsections everywhere that keep things balanced for the most part. Everyone has a say. Your vote does in fact count. I know you're trying, but as @SBShock said, we are NOT a democracy. You may not like it, but that's not our country. We are a Constitutional Republic. And the rules set up make sure that the likelihood is that it will never change. It would take 2/3s of the House and Senate (not anytime soon) and then 3/4s of the states (38) which will never happen in our lifetime, and likely ever. You can't look at things in a fish bowl. Our system works beautifully, sometimes against our own interest, but still beautifully.

Slightly off-topic but your post made me think of something. It has been 26 years since there has been a successful amendment to the U.S. Constitution. With as polarized as our system is, what would it take to get a 28th Amendment passed? Will it happen in my lifetime...roughly the next 50 years? What kind of issue might said Amendment address?

[im4wsu]

shoxilla[/URL] commented Yes, it worked - that's the problem. 3 million votes were meaningless

Had there been no EC, 60+ million votes would have been meaningless, by your reasoning.

If no EC, the entire nation might starve because the CA, NY voters would never give farmers any assistance.

[C0|dB|00ded]

To take this a little further, the states are not the problem, it is in pockets within those states. In Illinois, Cook County controls the state. It looked like Clinton won the state in a landslide winning by over 900,000 votes, however, she won Cook County in a landslide by 1,158,659 votes. Trump got only 21% of the vote in Cook, but won the rest of the state by over 200,000 votes.

In New York, the counties of New York, Bronx, Kings (Brooklyn), and Queens have the power. Trump averaged around only 15% of the votes in those counties. The rest of the state was basically a push.

Same in California. San Francisco surrounding counties, plus Los Angeles County averaged only about 20% for Trump. Taking those counties out, the almost 4,300,000 margin in California reduces to around 700,000.

Certain people talk about Clinton's 2.8 million vote margin. Take out the California and New York pockets mentioned above and Trump has a 2.4 million win. Take Cook County out and he wins by over 3.5 million.

I'm not saying these peoples' votes don't count, but am concerned about political powers / special interest controlling any highly populated areas to such an extent that they could control the national election.

Basically, Clinton won the San Francisco area counties, LA County, the 4 NY counties, and Cook County by 6.4 million while losing the rest of the nation by over 3.5 million.

Pretty shocking analysis really. Basically the crime-ridden sewers of America are all Democrat. Draw your own conclusions.


T


...:cool:

[pinstripers]

Slightly off-topic but your post made me think of something. It has been 26 years since there has been a successful amendment to the U.S. Constitution. With as polarized as our system is, what would it take to get a 28th Amendment passed? Will it happen in my lifetime...roughly the next 50 years? What kind of issue might said Amendment address?

plastic straws

[SHOCKvalue]

House of Representatives = Popular Vote

Senate = Electoral College

It is not a perfect analogy, but close in effect.

Too bad there is not some way to hybrid-ize the voting process too.