Leftist Zogby: It’s a 2 Point Race

[candycorn]

A final presidential debate -- what would have been the fourth overall on the schedule including the vice presidential debate and the scrapped town hall -- is currently slated for Thursday, Oct. 22. "

Don't worry, they'll cancel that one, too, because they won't have Trump off the Roids by then.

They essentially had the "rally" tonight in Florida under AF1 since the blob couldn't walk very far. He's supposedly going to be campaigning non stop until the 22nd... He may have to do it in an oxygen tent.

On the other hand, Joe could keel over at any second as well. Harris may be debating Ivanka at this rate.

 

[candycorn]

While many of the modern day Democrats agree with you, they don’t have the balls to come out and say that the cities should determine the President because of size. It is a radical idea that would get the Democrats in an election crushed.

Actually, no, it really isn't.

61% of Americans Support Abolishing Electoral College

Americans have become more supportive of abolishing the Electoral College since 2019, as 61% overall now hold this view, including 89% of Democrats and 23% of Republicans.

news.gallup.com

Abolishment sounds good until you get the same people who are for it to consider the consequences if we don't have it.

 

[JoeB131]

Abolishment sounds good until you get the same people who are for it to consider the consequences if we don't have it.

Okay, now, here's the thing. If there was no Electoral College, every election from 1900 to 2012 would have still ended up with the same result except for 2000. And 2000 might have had the same result if every vote counted.

It kind of depends what we replace it with. If it's just "guy who gets the most votes wins", I could see that as a problem if a third party candidate keeps everyone below 35%.

A better solution MIGHT be to have a system like France has, where you have a preliminary round, if no one gets over 50%, then you have a runoff with the top two. That way people can express their desire for an alternative to the duopoly...

 

[candycorn]

Abolishment sounds good until you get the same people who are for it to consider the consequences if we don't have it.

Okay, now, here's the thing. If there was no Electoral College, every election from 1900 to 2012 would have still ended up with the same result except for 2000. And 2000 might have had the same result if every vote counted.

It kind of depends what we replace it with. If it's just "guy who gets the most votes wins", I could see that as a problem if a third party candidate keeps everyone below 35%.

A better solution MIGHT be to have a system like France has, where you have a preliminary round, if no one gets over 50%, then you have a runoff with the top two. That way people can express their desire for an alternative to the duopoly...

We would have. You're correct. I think the only time it would have flipped differently is for Rutherford B Hayes.

The issue is this; this thing has to work in every condition. If you have 2 parties, a NPV works pretty well. If you have 5 or 6 viable parties with candidates getting 10-20 percent of the vote...then what? You may have a President elect who gets like 29% of the vote or less. We can barely get 6 out of 10 to vote now...how do you think it will work when you have runoffs?

You can do ranked choice to avoid the run off or any number of other things but I doubt you want to get too creative with a population that sees conspiracies as often as most of us see commercials for automobiles.

 

[LeftofLeft]

While many of the modern day Democrats agree with you, they don’t have the balls to come out and say that the cities should determine the President because of size. It is a radical idea that would get the Democrats in an election crushed.

Actually, no, it really isn't.

61% of Americans Support Abolishing Electoral College

Americans have become more supportive of abolishing the Electoral College since 2019, as 61% overall now hold this view, including 89% of Democrats and 23% of Republicans.

news.gallup.com

It is my opinion that abolishing the EC is a radical idea. Gallop is one source. Any other source? If it is so compelling, why didn’t the Democrats do away with it when Clinton win in ‘93 and Obama in ‘08?

 

[JoeB131]

It is my opinion that abolishing the EC is a radical idea. Gallop is one source. Any other source? If it is so compelling, why didn’t the Democrats do away with it when Clinton win in ‘93 and Obama in ‘08?

Probably because it wasn't a compelling issue then.

The only time in the modern era before 2016 a candidate failed to win the popular vote but still got selected by the EC was 2000, and that was just as much because of the courts as the EC. Bush somewhat vindicated himself by winning the popular vote in 2004. Remember, the margin in the PV in 2000 was less than half a million votes.

Not like 2016, where Trump was clearly rejected by the people, and got the job anyway, proceeded to do a horrible job. No one seriously thinks Trump is going to win the PV this time, either. He'll probably lose it by an even bigger margin.

The thing that is frightening is that because of Covid and mail in ballots, Republican legislatures in WI, MI, PA, FL and AZ COULD hypothetically appoint electors if there isn't a clear vote total by a certain date. The constitution actually allows for this, even though it hasn't been done in centuries.

 

[LeftofLeft]

It is my opinion that abolishing the EC is a radical idea. Gallop is one source. Any other source? If it is so compelling, why didn’t the Democrats do away with it when Clinton win in ‘93 and Obama in ‘08?

Probably because it wasn't a compelling issue then.

The only time in the modern era before 2016 a candidate failed to win the popular vote but still got selected by the EC was 2000, and that was just as much because of the courts as the EC. Bush somewhat vindicated himself by winning the popular vote in 2004. Remember, the margin in the PV in 2000 was less than half a million votes.

Not like 2016, where Trump was clearly rejected by the people, and got the job anyway, proceeded to do a horrible job. No one seriously thinks Trump is going to win the PV this time, either. He'll probably lose it by an even bigger margin.

The thing that is frightening is that because of Covid and mail in ballots, Republican legislatures in WI, MI, PA, FL and AZ COULD hypothetically appoint electors if there isn't a clear vote total by a certain date. The constitution actually allows for this, even though it hasn't been done in centuries.

“Compelling case?”. It only became compelling because “Democrats candidate lost”. Mail-in ballots is the cluster fuck pushed by the Democrats to create chaos and uncertainty around the Election so they can litigate their way into the White House. Absentee Ballots would address the COVID concerns.

 

[JoeB131]

“Compelling case?”. It only became compelling because “Democrats candidate lost”.

No, it's a compelling case because the American people chose someone else, and Trump has proven himself completely unfit for the job.

The ironic thing was the EC was meant to prevent someone like Trump from taking power... but instead, the safeguards didn't engage.

 

[LeftofLeft]

“Compelling case?”. It only became compelling because “Democrats candidate lost”.

No, it's a compelling case because the American people chose someone else, and Trump has proven himself completely unfit for the job.

The ironic thing was the EC was meant to prevent someone like Trump from taking power... but instead, the safeguards didn't engage.

If removal of the EC is so compelling, I defy the Democrats to push to have it removed.

 

[JoeB131]

If removal of the EC is so compelling, I defy the Democrats to push to have it removed.

I'm sure they will. If Republicans were smart, they'd be for it as well.

Once Texas and Arizona flip Blue, they'd be a distinct disadvantage.