- 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: New Mexico National Popular Vote Bill Headed to Governer's Desk
Posted on 3/14/19 at 1:17 am to SammyTiger
Posted on 3/14/19 at 1:17 am to SammyTiger
quote:
How does the current system represent the people’s voice better? Wouldn’t a national vote lead to the following: People’s voices counting the same Candidates campaigning in non-swing states How does the current system more accurately represents the people’s voice?
Because who cares about Wyoming, who cares about Vermont, Montana, Idaho. All your candidates would focus on just winning NYC, LA, Chicago, Dallas, Houston. Since it’ll be based on popular vote, you don’t need to win states, you need to win cities, so the voices of the rest of the state is just ignored.
2
Posted on 3/14/19 at 1:29 am to SlickRickerz
yall keep acting like the Republican Party has never won a popular vote before.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 1:34 am to SammyTiger
quote:The current system does it, yes. Instead of a national popular vote, we essentially have a lot of state-wide popular votes. The California Republicans are outnumbered which is why they feel like they don’t matter. If we continue with open borders and move to a NPV, Republicans across the country will feel the same way as those in California when Democrats win every time.
And does the current system even do that? Ask over 4 million California conservatives.
This post was edited on 3/14/19 at 10:56 am
Posted on 3/14/19 at 2:18 am to SlickRickerz
You probably couldn’t do it just on cities either sinceall votes now count even mintority votes in a heavily populated areas
Candidates could also try and speak (shock) to people
Candidates could also try and speak (shock) to people
Posted on 3/14/19 at 2:56 am to Green Chili Tiger
They should just push for allowing illegals to get voter rights.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 2:57 am to kbmaverick
quote:You mean a google education like the one you got just before you posted that?
The founding fathers created the Electoral College as a compromise between electing the president by popular vote and electing the president by Congressional vote. Specifically stated by Jefferson, Madison etc. they did not want rule by MOB.
Do yourself a favor and get an education.
What a pompous arse.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 7:51 am to SammyTiger
quote:
Wyoming has less than a million people living there.
New your has over 19 million people.
Each vote represents 673,869 people roughly
wyoming has 577,737 people living there.
Every electoral vote for New York represents more people than live in the entire state of Wyoming.
And then Wyoming gets 2 more votes.
How is that equal representation? They’re getting over 3xs the representations. That’s basic math.
This same arguement was had when our forefathers were deciding on how the legislature would be decided, and they just went with the bicameral house.
The EC splits the baby, but why? And should it?
Some other extreme exacmoles
Montana has almost double Wyoming’s populations and the same # of votes.
Do you know or understand why the Senate exists?
Posted on 3/14/19 at 8:15 am to Green Chili Tiger
So you're telling me, if a republican is leading with votes on the eastern half of the US, NM will make their electoral votes in favor of the person leading at the time the polls close, or they will wait a few days and see who's leading then and just push their chips in the pile like a bunch of followers? I would be suing the state in federal court if I lived in one of these cuckholded states.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 9:58 am to stelly1025
I do Understand why the senate exists.
You understand the President is a separate branch of government.
You understand the President is a separate branch of government.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 10:00 am to SammyTiger
quote:
yall keep acting like the Republican Party has never won a popular vote before.
Why is this relevant? This would be a bad idea if Republicans were pushing it too. It's going to be awesome to watch it blow up in the Dems' faces.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 10:27 am to SammyTiger
quote:
You understand the President is a separate branch of government.
Are you stupid or something?
Posted on 3/14/19 at 10:46 am to imjustafatkid
Because half the responses divorce into “dems control the big cities and would dominate elections and communism, fall of society”
Posted on 3/14/19 at 10:58 am to SammyTiger
The best analogy I have, to support the EC, is the World Series.
If the Reds are playing the Yankees in the WS and the Yankees win the first 3 games, 20-0. However, the Reds win the last 4 games, 1-0. The Reds are the WS champs even though they were outscored 60-4, overall.
Each state is a game in the WS with proportion EC votes. The EC makes each state important to some degree.
If the Reds are playing the Yankees in the WS and the Yankees win the first 3 games, 20-0. However, the Reds win the last 4 games, 1-0. The Reds are the WS champs even though they were outscored 60-4, overall.
Each state is a game in the WS with proportion EC votes. The EC makes each state important to some degree.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 11:29 am to SammyTiger
quote:
And a follow up: when picking 1 person, why does drawing diversity of geography matter more than quantity of voters?
Because the geographical interests of functional government vary to a much greater degree than the interests of small population centers.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 11:34 am to SammyTiger
quote:
Because half the responses divorce into “dems control the big cities and would dominate elections and communism, fall of society”
It's because you started he entire conversation with a faulty premise - that popular vote/democracy is the goal of the Republic. It's not.
The EC is not a popular election because it was specifically set up as such. The Madisons, Jeffersons etc. of the early founding despised classic democracy because it is inherently unstable and ineffective.
There is a reason that, at the time of its creation, only one half of one branch of the federal government employed democratic elections.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 11:38 am to upgrayedd
quote:
New York – 29 electoral votes
Incredibly stupid given it is an electoral powerhouse in addition to a population powerhouse. How would this benefit New York at all?
This post was edited on 3/14/19 at 11:41 am
Posted on 3/14/19 at 11:55 am to therick711
quote:
Incredibly stupid given it is an electoral powerhouse in addition to a population powerhouse. How would this benefit New York at all?
It definitely benefits states with larger populations. Their effective voting power increases in a straight popular vote because the protection of state equality (2 votes per state based on Senate representation) is removed.
Without even taking into account the rule that all states gets one vote for population regardless of how small:
Current: NY has 29 votes out of 538 (5.39% effective power)
When you use whole population figures:
Total Votes Cast - 136,669,237
Total NY Votes Cast - 7,721,453
Total effective power - 5.60%
This post was edited on 3/14/19 at 11:57 am
Posted on 3/14/19 at 12:05 pm to Antonio Moss
IMO, "voting power" is irrelevant to the purpose of the EC. The EC was created as a balance to allow states, not individuals, determine who the President is. "Voting power" and the national popular vote in general is about influence the individual person has in selecting the President, which is a different way of selecting than what the EC was intended to provide.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 12:28 pm to Antonio Moss
Madison was actually in favor of a popular vote, but was willing to compromise to get the constitution passed.
And again, what was right then may not be right now.
We’ve come a long way jn population, means of communication, and equity among citizens.
Originally states just sent delegates who decided the president amongst themselves and there was no popular vote at all even st a state level.
And again, what was right then may not be right now.
We’ve come a long way jn population, means of communication, and equity among citizens.
Originally states just sent delegates who decided the president amongst themselves and there was no popular vote at all even st a state level.
Posted on 3/14/19 at 12:33 pm to FredBear
quote:
The people who are supporting this are utter fools. They are willingly surrendering their vote and voice and that is retarded as hell.
God I will laugh so hard at the fools if Trump wins the popular vote yet lost in their state. I bet they would do some serious backpedaling then
The door swings both ways which is the important part
reducing emphasis on swing states is a great objective
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News