Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 63
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    2,303

    Electoral College Reform

    There's been so much talk about scrapping the Electoral College and just using Popular Vote.
    The biggest detraction to that is the loss of campaigning in all but a few states. Leaving as it is seems to be a losing proposition for some as it seems to give smaller states a larger vote.

    Here's my suggestion which makes a hybrid of both models. Use Popular vote plus one per state and split electoral votes among the top two candidates for each state/district.

    In Maine for 2016, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were the top two candidates vying for the four electoral votes. Using just the votes of the top two candidates, Hillary wins the popular vote 51.6% to 48.4% for Trump. This would mean they would split the electoral votes 2 to 2. However thanks to the popular vote win for Hillary, she wins three electoral votes and Trump wins 1.

    I believe this system would allow better will of the people and help states have a more equal vote.

    BTW, if it was done in 2016, Hillary wins 270-268. Of course that doesn't mean that is what would have happened because campaigning would be vastly different.
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    50,873
    Yeah thatís the thing. If it was done that way in 2016 it changes how they campaign and inspires new voters, so who knows.

    Like in the other thread we need instant runoff or ranked choice across the board. Iím a broken record but hereís what I think we need for full election reform:

    - Appropriate electoral votes by population of each state

    - If a candidate is second in a state but gets a meaningful number of votes (over 40% or something) they get at least some electoral votes from that state. Even if itís just one vote. This inspires more of the minority party voters to vote (and majority to defend) and puts every single state in play. It allows the voices of rural Californians and urban Texans to have a vote that matters.

    - A national unified system. Whatever it is we need every district unified. All paper ballots. Mail in and early voting to start a week before Election Day and make Election Day a national holiday (even in midterms). All states can start processing early ballots when they receive them. Not waiting until end of Election Day like we see in PA, GA, etc.

    - States canít publicly report their votes until all votes in the state are counted. The media will hate not having the ability to call states as they make their mathematical prediction and people will hate having to wait days after election day for all results, but tough. Sit there and wait for votes to be counted like other countries do.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    50,873
    And again my bigger issue is the senate. Itís so incredibly outdated and backwards. Itís a completely unrealistic representation of US citizens.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
    Posts
    16,265
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    There's been so much talk about scrapping the Electoral College and just using Popular Vote.
    The biggest detraction to that is the loss of campaigning in all but a few states. Leaving as it is seems to be a losing proposition for some as it seems to give smaller states a larger vote.

    Here's my suggestion which makes a hybrid of both models. Use Popular vote plus one per state and split electoral votes among the top two candidates for each state/district.

    In Maine for 2016, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were the top two candidates vying for the four electoral votes. Using just the votes of the top two candidates, Hillary wins the popular vote 51.6% to 48.4% for Trump. This would mean they would split the electoral votes 2 to 2. However thanks to the popular vote win for Hillary, she wins three electoral votes and Trump wins 1.

    I believe this system would allow better will of the people and help states have a more equal vote.

    BTW, if it was done in 2016, Hillary wins 270-268. Of course that doesn't mean that is what would have happened because campaigning would be vastly different.
    I agree there is something that needs to be discussed when it comes to the Electoral College. When you look at it, there is no real reason to waste time campaigning in states for 3 or 4 electoral votes. Those aren't deciding the election.

    However, when you talk the popular vote, I don't think that is the answer either, especially when you consider New York City has a larger population than over 75% of the states in the United States and Los Angeles has a larger population than 42 states.
    Eichel Tower

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    2,303
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    And again my bigger issue is the senate. Itís so incredibly outdated and backwards. Itís a completely unrealistic representation of US citizens.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The senate to me is very balanced. Each state gets the same vote. No matter what. It signifies United.

    I do think House reps need to be re-evaluated to say when a state gets the second candidate, etc.
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    2,303
    From the estimated census of 2019
    https://www.infoplease.com/us/states...lation-by-rank
    Here's what the reps should be.

    State Reps
    California 46
    Texas 34
    Florida 25
    New York 23
    Illinois 15
    Pennsylvania 15
    Ohio 14
    Georgia 12
    North Carolina 12
    Michigan 12
    New Jersey 10
    Virginia 10
    Washington 9
    Arizona 8
    Massachusetts 8
    Tennessee 8
    Indiana 8
    Missouri 7
    Maryland 7
    Wisconsin 7
    Colorado 7
    Minnesota 7
    South Carolina 6
    Alabama 6
    Louisiana 5
    Kentucky 5
    Oregon 5
    Oklahoma 5
    Connecticut 4
    Utah 4
    Iowa 4
    Nevada 4
    Arkansas 4
    Mississippi 3
    Kansas 3
    New Mexico 2
    Nebraska 2
    West Virginia 2
    Idaho 2
    Hawaii 2
    New Hampshire 2
    Maine 2
    Montana 1
    Rhode Island 1
    Delaware 1
    South Dakota 1
    North Dakota 1
    Alaska 1
    DC 1
    Vermont 1
    Wyoming 1

    Rounding errors leaves me short three. This would be balanced based on population. (I think the math is right)
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Mile High
    Posts
    17,881
    Im not interested in continuing any kind of convoluted system. Just popular vote please
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
    <><><><><><><>
    <><><><>

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,738
    For the record ó though we all know this already ó any discussion about revamping the Electoral College on a nationwide basis is a massive waste of time and energy. There is no way an amendment passes muster, just like there is never going to be anything other than the Senate as we know it today (unless the entire experiment collapses, which is, of course, imminently possible).

    The only chance for reform is only going to happen state by state, and I frankly donít see any of that happening either.

    The two parties are simply too entrenched in their joint mission.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    2,303
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    Im not interested in continuing any kind of convoluted system. Just popular vote please
    feel free to leave as this discussion isn't about that system.
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    2,303
    Quote Originally Posted by Crovash View Post
    For the record ó though we all know this already ó any discussion about revamping the Electoral College on a nationwide basis is a massive waste of time and energy. There is no way an amendment passes muster, just like there is never going to be anything other than the Senate as we know it today (unless the entire experiment collapses, which is, of course, imminently possible).

    The only chance for reform is only going to happen state by state, and I frankly donít see any of that happening either.

    The two parties are simply too entrenched in their joint mission.
    If it's reasonable reform I think it could happen
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    29,113
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    From the estimated census of 2019
    https://www.infoplease.com/us/states...lation-by-rank
    Here's what the reps should be.

    StateReps
    California46
    Texas34
    Florida25
    New York23
    Illinois15
    Pennsylvania15
    Ohio14
    Georgia12
    North Carolina12
    Michigan12
    New Jersey10
    Virginia10
    Washington9
    Arizona8
    Massachusetts8
    Tennessee8
    Indiana8
    Missouri7
    Maryland7
    Wisconsin7
    Colorado7
    Minnesota7
    South Carolina6
    Alabama6
    Louisiana5
    Kentucky5
    Oregon5
    Oklahoma5
    Connecticut4
    Utah4
    Iowa4
    Nevada4
    Arkansas4
    Mississippi3
    Kansas3
    New Mexico2
    Nebraska2
    West Virginia2
    Idaho2
    Hawaii2
    New Hampshire2
    Maine2
    Montana1
    Rhode Island1
    Delaware1
    South Dakota1
    North Dakota1
    Alaska1
    DC1
    Vermont1
    Wyoming1

    Rounding errors leaves me short three. This would be balanced based on population. (I think the math is right)
    I'd prefer popular vote , but this would be much improved.

    Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

    Click here to register!

    Hope to see some new posters around here soon.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    born and raised on the south side of Chicago.
    Posts
    15,240
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    There's been so much talk about scrapping the Electoral College and just using Popular Vote.
    The biggest detraction to that is the loss of campaigning in all but a few states. Leaving as it is seems to be a losing proposition for some as it seems to give smaller states a larger vote.

    Here's my suggestion which makes a hybrid of both models. Use Popular vote plus one per state and split electoral votes among the top two candidates for each state/district.

    In Maine for 2016, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were the top two candidates vying for the four electoral votes. Using just the votes of the top two candidates, Hillary wins the popular vote 51.6% to 48.4% for Trump. This would mean they would split the electoral votes 2 to 2. However thanks to the popular vote win for Hillary, she wins three electoral votes and Trump wins 1.

    I believe this system would allow better will of the people and help states have a more equal vote.

    BTW, if it was done in 2016, Hillary wins 270-268. Of course that doesn't mean that is what would have happened because campaigning would be vastly different.
    they already only do that. And where people are matters very little today. It's not like I can't see a politician speak if I am not in front of them... it's not 1842. your basic premise is wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by MrPoon
    man with hair like fire can destroy souls with a twitch of his thighs.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,738
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    If it's reasonable reform I think it could happen
    Yes, it may be reasonable reform, which is exactly why it is NOT going to happen.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    7,221
    Popular Vote
    Mandatory to vote
    Limit Mail in Voting
    Positively ID any and all mail in and absentee ballots
    Identified Voting
    Get everyone identifiedÖfree if they cannot afford it
    30 days of early voting
    Some sort of law dictating the number of early voting places based on population
    No debates after the start of early voting

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    56,953
    Skip the convoluted BS and just do a popular vote with tallying beginning well before election day.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •