Alternative To The Electoral College

[eagle1462010]

WTF?

Why do Republicans think voting should be an ordeal?

To make sure no cheating.

Open more voting places

 

[rightwinger]

To make sure no cheating.

Open more voting places

But you can’t show any actual cheating

 

[eagle1462010]

But you can’t show any actual cheating

STFU.

Your side goes to court for years atbl great costs TO NOT UPDATE VOTER ROLLS

You are nothing but a Lying Troll

 

[Independent thinker]

Why are you afraid of just going straight popular vote like every other elected office?

But that's not what we do. When we vote for US Senators people in California do not vote for Wyoming's Senators. When we vote for US representatives people in New York don't vote for representatives in Montana. Each area holds their own local elections without interference from other states and localities. And, each state holds it's own popular vote for the presidency. So, why should people in California and New York decide who is going to be president for the entire country?

 

[WorldWatcher]

So, why should people in California and New York decide who is going to be president for the entire country?

They don't. People in all 50 states decide who is going to be President for the entire country.

WW

 

[Foxfyre]

Am I correct that in 1992 Bill Clinton didn't get 50% of the popular vote either?

Suppose that the presidency was decided by Popular Vote. What is the likelihood that future presidents would favor the most populous areas in his executive decisions? Congress authorizes the money but the Executive Branch spends it in ways that benefit them politically. Certain cities and states would benefit more than they do now while Podunk USA gets virtually ignored.

Bill Clinton got 43% of the popular vote in 1992 and 49.2%T of the popular vote in 1996. Bob Dole did better in 1996 with roughly 41% of the popular vote in 1996 to Bush 43's roughly 37% of the popular vote in 1992.

But since the 1990's more conservatives than progressives have been leaving heavily populated urban areas and the largest cities are more blue now than they were then. That is why there are so many incompetent and destructive mayors in the bluest big cities. That is why only a few heavy population centers with a disproportionate number of people dependent on big government would be able to elect a President via popular vote every time, disenfranchising all the rest of the country. Nobody else would get a presidential visit. They would see no ads and get little information. Their concerns could be largely ignored by any President without consequence.

We have already seen the Democrats argue passionately for it to be 'easier to register and vote' with less verification and they strongly object to any effort to ensure the integrity of the vote or increase confidence in the vote. If enough people are able to cheat they win the popular vote. Every single time.

Take Los Angeles County and San Francisco County out of the equation and Trump wins the popular vote in 2016. California should not be the deciding factor of who will be the President of 50 states. Certainly fewer than a half dozen California counties should not be the determining factor of who will be President of 50 states.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Take Los Angeles County and San Francisco County out of the equation and Trump wins the popular vote in 2016. California should not be the deciding factor of who will be the President of 50 states. Certainly fewer than a half dozen California counties should not be the determining factor of who will be President of 50 states.

So I guess we could amend the Constitution to disenfranchise the top counties in the nation based on the previous census?

How many should that be? 6? 10? 25? 500?

And when the state then splits those counties into smaller units to evade the amendment, what then?

WW

 

[Foxfyre]

So I guess we could amend the Constitution to disenfranchise the top counties in the nation based on the previous census?

How many should that be? 6? 10? 25? 500?

And when the state then splits those counties into smaller units to evade the amendment, what then?

WW

Could I suggest you join the remedial reading comprehension course I have suggested to so many here? The argument is for the EC, not disenfranchising counties.

 

[Independent thinker]

They don't. People in all 50 states decide who is going to be President for the entire country.

WW

Great. Then it's just the way we want it then.

 

[Crepitus]

But that's not what we do. When we vote for US Senators people in California do not vote for Wyoming's Senators. When we vote for US representatives people in New York don't vote for representatives in Montana. Each area holds their own local elections without interference from other states and localities. And, each state holds it's own popular vote for the presidency. So, why should people in California and New York decide who is going to be president for the entire country?

Because Democracy.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Could I suggest you join the remedial reading comprehension course I have suggested to so many here? The argument is for the EC, not disenfranchising counties.

You said: "Certainly fewer than a half dozen California counties should not be the determining factor of who will be President of 50 states."

So how do you solve your California problem?

Split it into two states such as Northern Claifornia and Sourthern California (of about 24 each)? Wouldn't that just keep the same voting patterns and then give the current California two more Senate seats?

WW

 

[Foxfyre]

You said: "Certainly fewer than a half dozen California counties should not be the determining factor of who will be President of 50 states."

So how do you solve your California problem?

Split it into two states such as Northern Claifornia and Sourthern California (of about 24 each)? Wouldn't that just keep the same voting patterns and then give the current California two more Senate seats?

WW

I do not have any power to split California. Nor do you. Do do Californians for that matter. The point is the EC is brilliant in its conception that neither a minority nor a majority has total power in this country but ensures that an HONEST vote will have the best chance to represent the entire country instead of one demographic.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I do not have any power to split California. Nor do you. Do do Californians for that matter. The point is the EC is brilliant in its conception that neither a minority nor a majority has total power in this country but ensures that an HONEST vote will have the best chance to represent the entire country instead of one demographic.

As I said up thread, I don't have a problem with the concept of the EC.

What I'd like to see is states award EC electors based on congressional districts instead of winner take all with the two additional representing the Senate going to the overall state winner. In the end it would benefit the GOP (IMHO) but I think it would be fairer, that's just how the cookie crumbles.

WW

 

[Foxfyre]

As I said up thread, I don't have a problem with the concept of the EC.

What I'd like to see is states award EC electors based on congressional districts instead of winner take all with the two additional representing the Senate going to the overall state winner. In the end it would benefit the GOP (IMHO) but I think it would be fairer, that's just how the cookie crumbles.

WW

Maybe but I see that as a recipe for even more unethical manipulation of results. In NM it is amazing how many times when the Democrat is behind by only a very few votes, an 'overlooked' ballot box is found with just enough votes to put him/her over the top with just enough over the 1/4% margin that by state law doesn't require an automatic recount. The loser can request a recount but he/she has to pay all the expense of that recount. And since it will be people chosen by Democrats to do the recount. . .

 

[DudleySmith]

One man, one vote

So you're going against your own Party? What about your 50 mail in ballots each?

 

[DudleySmith]

First thing is just quit letting illiterates and people who can't pass simple civics tests vote.

 

[Foxfyre]

So you're going against your own Party? What about your 50 mail in ballots each?

I would bet a pretty large sum that if those huge population concentrations were mostly Republicans, the Democrats would think the EC was just great.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Maybe but I see that as a recipe for even more unethical manipulation of results. In NM it is amazing how many times when the Democrat is behind by only a very few votes, an 'overlooked' ballot box is found with just enough votes to put him/her over the top with just enough over the 1/4% margin that by state law doesn't require an automatic recount. The loser can request a recount but he/she has to pay all the expense of that recount. And since it will be people chosen by Democrats to do the recount. . .

This is a variation of the boxes of ballots in the trunk canard.

You seem not to understand that Nevada is one of the states where work on mail-in ballots can't start until election day when most of the man power is focused on in-person voting. So the mail-in ballots are processed late.

Also, part of the quality assurance process in all voting precints is to compare the number of vote counted with the number of voters that cast their votes. The votes in the trunk canard of just finding enough ballots would throw the tally's off and stick out like a sore thumb.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

First thing is just quit letting illiterates and people who can't pass simple civics tests vote.

Well that would wipe out a lot of Trump supporters as research shows that higher education levels typically skew toward the DEMs.

WW

 

[Foxfyre]

This is a variation of the boxes of ballots in the trunk canard.

You seem not to understand that Nevada is one of the states where work on mail-in ballots can't start until election day when most of the man power is focused on in-person voting. So the mail-in ballots are processed late.

Also, part of the quality assurance process in all voting precints is to compare the number of vote counted with the number of voters that cast their votes. The votes in the trunk canard of just finding enough ballots would throw the tally's off and stick out like a sore thumb.

WW

But it happens. It happens here a lot.