- 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
0
Posted on 1/26/17 at 7:14 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Land doesn't vote buddy
No, but the people that occupy that land vote and through the brilliance of the Constitution, these people serve as a counterweight against the potential hegemony of population centers.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 7:16 pm to Scoop
quote:This is a little overstated. It is designed so that population centers have more day, they're just offset a bit by the EC.
No, but the people that occupy that land vote and through the brilliance of the Constitution, these people serve as a counterweight against the potential hegemony of population centers.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 7:24 pm to buckeye_vol
That's what I said.
I don't get your point.
Without the EC, the country would look like the Hunger Games.
I don't get your point.
Without the EC, the country would look like the Hunger Games.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 7:27 pm to Scoop
quote:I think it safeguards against this, but I think people overrate the extent of it happening. There is a reason the EC and PV correlate well overall.
That's what I said.
I don't get your point.
Without the EC, the country would look like the Hunger Games.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 7:28 pm to buckeye_vol
Without the EC and equal representation in the Senate, our system wouldn't work as all resources would pour into the population centers.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 7:47 pm to Scoop
quote:You're right and the EC is an important safeguard; however, the winner take all format of the EC has created a flaw with resources primarily poured into a few select swing states, and between & within those states, more resources are poured into the population centers.
Without the EC and equal representation in the Senate, our system wouldn't work as all resources would pour into the population centers.
Frankly I wish the EC was set up like congress: a vote given to the winner of each district and 2 votes given to the winner of the state. This maintains the same principles of the EC, and may even strengthen, but it also decreases the disproportionate power of a single vote in Ohio or Florida compared to Alabama or California.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 7:57 pm to buckeye_vol
Swing states are fluid.
Election to election, what constitutes swing states organically shifts.
That fluidity is part of the inherent brilliance of the system.
It isn't set in stone. Demographic changes can easily change a state from blue or red to contested.
It all seems to even out and capture the general mood of the country over all.
That's the brilliance of it.
Election to election, what constitutes swing states organically shifts.
That fluidity is part of the inherent brilliance of the system.
It isn't set in stone. Demographic changes can easily change a state from blue or red to contested.
It all seems to even out and capture the general mood of the country over all.
That's the brilliance of it.
This post was edited on 1/26/17 at 7:58 pm
Posted on 1/26/17 at 8:00 pm to Scoop
quote:
No, but the people that occupy that land vote and through the brilliance of the Constitution, these people serve as a counterweight against the potential hegemony of population centers.
i don't even have a problem with that. But to say the people who live on the coasts aren't "Real Americans" is utter horseshite.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 8:05 pm to Draconian Sanctions
I didn't get that memo.
My vote in a smaller state counts more than someone's vote in California or New York.
This is true.
However, without the EC, my vote wouldn't count at all.
My vote in a smaller state counts more than someone's vote in California or New York.
This is true.
However, without the EC, my vote wouldn't count at all.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 8:11 pm to Contra
Posted on 1/26/17 at 8:12 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:And no reach around.
Wow he went in dry.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 9:01 pm to Scoop
quote:Some are but 8 or so have been remarkably consistent, at least relative to the overall margins.
Swing states are fluid.
quote:But they don't typically shift election to election. They may shift, but the shift is much more gradual.
Election to election, what constitutes swing states organically shifts.
quote:I think that given the disproportionate power of these states, this is an inherent flaw, one that may not have been expected.
That fluidity is part of the inherent brilliance of the system.
quote:Typically sure. But the winner-take-all nature can actually do just the opposite. For example, if Nader can obtain 20% of the popular vote, but not a single EC vote, then it fails to capture the nation's mood and preference for a third party.
It all seems to even out and capture the general mood of the country over all.
In fact, I think this highlights the worst flaw of the system; it reinforces the two-party system.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 9:01 pm to Scoop
quote:Now this makes absolutely no sense.
However, without the EC, my vote wouldn't count at all.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 9:02 pm to buckeye_vol
The electoral college works fine, but I can't think of a reason why winner take all is better than a proportional split (or by congressional district).
Posted on 1/26/17 at 9:02 pm to TJGator1215
quote:
TJGator1215
Says the retarded obamba/shitlary voter.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 9:03 pm to 31TIGERS
I remember when pointless personal insults like this didn't seem to be 80% of the board.
Posted on 1/26/17 at 9:12 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:I like the idea of proportional, but with many states having say 3 to 6 EC votes, it's hard to reflect to proportion without increasing the EC vote (say quadruple them). It wouldn't change the weighting of the EC, but I think that may be a tough sell.
The electoral college works fine, but I can't think of a reason why winner take all is better than a proportional split (or by congressional district).
I like the congressional district vote; however, I wish states districts were determined by some algorithm that creates districts (clusters) that are as equal in size and population as possible. There are some interesting examples out there, especially compared to the nonsensical district boundaries and gerrymandering. Unfortunately, I doubt states would agree to this. Regardless, I support the district votes.
Posted on 1/27/17 at 8:31 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Land doesn't vote buddy
Um the coasts pretty much only voted for Clinton. The vast majority of the remainder of the country voted for Trump.
The land did vote, and Clinton lost. This is what happens when your electorate becomes consolidated in a few urban centers and a few coastal states. The Democrats are on the verge of becoming a regional party. Let's hope the land continues to vote for them there at least.
Posted on 1/27/17 at 8:37 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
But to say the people who live on the coasts aren't "Real Americans" is utter horseshite.
There's more voters per EC vote. That reduces the value of their vote. That's not the fault of the voter, but of the party's state strategy. They thought they didn't have to campaign in the Midwest. They were wrong.
Like I said, they turned into a regional party this election and I imagine you'll be angry about it for a while. But be angry with your party, not the Republicans who exploited them.
Or you can continue to whine about it. I'll be here all day.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News