- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Middle Ground regarding EC and Popular Vote
Posted on 12/26/16 at 8:49 am to Jake88
Posted on 12/26/16 at 8:49 am to Jake88
quote:
Thanks for the info. When did Va. begin to do that?
1800 if I remember correctly.
It does work as designed in one way: it puts a ceiling on the impact of each state. California can't decide more than 55/538. They were originally concerned about VA and PA lording it over everyone else. The smaller New England states wouldn't have come on board without the EC because of that.
0
Posted on 12/26/16 at 8:55 am to uway
quote:
Our two options are the electoral college and civil war. End of discussion as far as I'm concerned.
Who is arguing against the EC? Some of us just want it how it was originally set up.
Posted on 12/26/16 at 8:59 am to IndependentVoter
Ill bite.
If they were divided proportionally based off districts or counties, yes.
A split of the votes based off the overall states totals? NO. would be the exact same as using straight popular vote.
That being said, Democrats would never agree to the proportional based off counties and districts.
There are 59 Counties in California. Trump won 25/59. Hillary won the popular vote overall in the state by 4 million, because of counties like San Fran where He only got 9% of the vote.
CA being worth 55 EC votes, do you really think the left would be willing to hand over 20 of those?
Ca.gov
There is no appeasing these people. If we made the vote strictly popular and Trump won again with a 5 million lead they would complain that that wasn't fair either.
If they were divided proportionally based off districts or counties, yes.
A split of the votes based off the overall states totals? NO. would be the exact same as using straight popular vote.
That being said, Democrats would never agree to the proportional based off counties and districts.
There are 59 Counties in California. Trump won 25/59. Hillary won the popular vote overall in the state by 4 million, because of counties like San Fran where He only got 9% of the vote.
CA being worth 55 EC votes, do you really think the left would be willing to hand over 20 of those?
Ca.gov
There is no appeasing these people. If we made the vote strictly popular and Trump won again with a 5 million lead they would complain that that wasn't fair either.
This post was edited on 12/26/16 at 9:04 am
Posted on 12/26/16 at 9:00 am to IndependentVoter
Why don't we just make this not so relevant by reigning back in the power of the Executive Branch? Let California be California and Texas, Texas and then the President won't matter as much. I would say to all crying liberals, doesn't it suck that this election meant this much to you or anyone? How we pick isn't the problem. 
Posted on 12/26/16 at 11:11 am to IndependentVoter
The way the EC is set up now is the middle ground. We all know if it's by popular vote only, there will never be another Republican president. If we break the EC down to Congressional districts, there will never be another Democrat president. The system we have is not perfect; no system is. The fact that the forefathers could foresee these problems is a credit to their genius.
Posted on 12/26/16 at 11:15 am to Gusoline
Having the EC award votes proportionally rather than the current winner-take-all system would not simply be a do-over of the popular vote. The popular vote only counts those people who actually voted. A proportional EC would attempt to project what would happen if everyone voted, based on the relative populations of each state. It would be a superior system to what we have now because it would not serve to discourage people from voting the way the current system does. Everyone should want this because it would make it much, much easier for third-party candidates to compete, which means the two major parties would actually have to, you know, try in order to remain in their privileged positions.
Posted on 12/26/16 at 2:35 pm to IndependentVoter
Give the winner of the popular vote electoral votes, say 25 or so. Solves the problem of votes not counting in winner take all states. Even if you live in deep blue/red state, vote would be equally as important for pop vote. Gets rid of ties too.
Also give, American territories one vote apiece, as they are Americans and should be able to have their vote count for President.
Also give, American territories one vote apiece, as they are Americans and should be able to have their vote count for President.
Posted on 12/26/16 at 3:43 pm to 5thTiger
Variations already exist on a state by state basis. Maine isnt winner take all. You could have each congressional district worth 1 EV.
Clinton would have been slaughtered.
Clinton would have been slaughtered.
This post was edited on 12/26/16 at 3:44 pm
Posted on 12/26/16 at 3:46 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
Also give, American territories one vote apiece, as they are Americans and should be able to have their vote count for President.
Without paying income taxes? Hell no.
Posted on 12/26/16 at 3:49 pm to IndependentVoter
Your idea = the popular vote. There is no difference.
Posted on 12/26/16 at 6:43 pm to IndependentVoter
Anybody that argues against the electoral college is a moron. It's the glue that holds this country together. There's nothing to keep states or groups of states from splitting off if they feel underrepresented.
Posted on 12/26/16 at 7:44 pm to IndependentVoter
The United States doesn't get to make that decision. It is completely up to each individual state to do it.
Although I would love for California and New York to do it as a test case.
It would be the last time a Dem ever got elected President until they decided to change it back.
Posted on 12/26/16 at 9:05 pm to IndependentVoter
quote:
I started to think, why not just compromise and do a system in the middle.
To compromise on this is to give up a viable system that works as intended solely to appease its losers.
Posted on 12/27/16 at 6:49 am to IndependentVoter
The EC is not broken. It worked exactly as intended. There is nothing to 'fix.' False premise is false.
Posted on 12/27/16 at 7:19 am to IndependentVoter
the popular vote agenda is a leftist, feel good canard, designed to influence the weak minded, and mask the disaster known as the Clinton Campaign...there is absolutely no chance the Constitution would ever be amended to mollify bi-coastal liberals
Posted on 12/27/16 at 8:58 am to IndependentVoter
quote:It's a states' rights issue. States have that ability now.
The US could still keep the EC and even keep the same numbers, but make it more like the primaries where instead of winner take all it is proportional
Posted on 12/27/16 at 9:15 am to IndependentVoter
quote:
84 - 0 in the current EC
84 - 0? Really?? So the South is in play? Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi and Texas all equal 84...I'd say the score is basically tied
Posted on 12/27/16 at 9:39 am to dinner roll
quote:
The EC is not broken. It worked exactly as intended. There is nothing to 'fix.' False premise is false.
Posted on 12/27/16 at 9:41 am to Wolfhound45
I see you took your pills today. Not quite so "active shooter" on this silly topic today hehe.
Posted on 12/27/16 at 9:42 am to IndependentVoter
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News