Electoral College Reform

[brett05]

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.

[GGGGG-Men]

Yeah that’s 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. I’m a broken record but here’s 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 it’s 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 can’t 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.

[GGGGG-Men]

And again my bigger issue is the senate. It’s so incredibly outdated and backwards. It’s a completely unrealistic representation of US citizens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ccugrad1]

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.

[brett05]

And again my bigger issue is the senate. It’s so incredibly outdated and backwards. It’s 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.

[brett05]

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)

[rhino17]

Im not interested in continuing any kind of convoluted system. Just popular vote please

[Crovash]

For the record — though we all know this already — 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 don’t see any of that happening either.

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

[brett05]

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.

[brett05]

For the record — though we all know this already — 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 don’t 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

[blams]

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

[flips333]

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.

[Crovash]

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.

[Sluggo1]

Popular Vote
Mandatory to vote
Limit Mail in Voting
Positively ID any and all mail in and absentee ballots
Identified Voting
Get everyone identified…free 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

[spliff(TONE)]

Skip the convoluted BS and just do a popular vote with tallying beginning well before election day.