2020 US Election Thread

[SGR]

Originally Posted by Frownland

Ja.

We'll have to disagree on that then.

Originally Posted by Frownland

The winner take all system should be done away with as well, I don't see that whatabouting any effectiveness into the electoral college.

I think you're right, not alone it wouldn't. Perhaps implement a winner-take-all system for electoral votes, implement ranked choice voting, and have viable third parties and you might have real alternatives to our political duopoly and said alternatives might have real solutions - or at least steps in the right direction.

(I know, I know, I'm dreaming)

[Psy-Fi]

Delaware State University denies Biden was a student after Biden claims he ‘got started’ there

[jwb]

Originally Posted by SoundgardenRocks

Sure, I'm not disagreeing that it undermines the concept of a pure majoritarian democracy, but is that a bad thing? Should two wolves and a sheep vote on what's for dinner (yes, yes, a gross simplification)?

Yes, the electoral college was designed to keep populists and unqualified candidates out of office, and to prevent tyranny of the majority - as you point out, the system is not perfect. But I think it'd be more productive to look at how most states award electors (a winner-take-all basis) and make improvements - perhaps implement ranked-choice voting like Maine did - rather than just throw the baby out with the bathwater and declare the electoral college to be worthless and ineffective.



How you gonna build them roads? You didn't build that.



Yeah, I'll do that, right after I put another baby into my girlfriend. And take my nice petrol-fuelled car to get me a cheeseburger.

what benefit does the electoral college offer? I understand it was originally intended to give smaller states more power but why is that even a good thing?

The end result is most people's vote literally doesn't matter. I'm not sure what practical reasons there are to keep it around.

[OccultHawk]

I was taught that they were there in case the masses made an absolutely idiotic choice they could just say nope sorry.

I actually thought they were probably going to reject Trump. I thought that they were a safeguard.

I used to think it was a pretty good idea to have two senators from each state

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

10th Amendment

I’m not really arguing anything in particular just that federalism isn’t working out very well these days.

[jwb]

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

I was taught that they were there in case the masses made an absolutely idiotic choice they could just say nope sorry.

I actually thought they were probably going to reject Trump. I thought that they were a safeguard.

That's the purpose of having electors who cast the votes for any given state. That's only one part of the electoral college, and a relatively irrelevant part in terms of how elections have historically been decided. Electors virtually always vote the way their state's population did.

The other part of the electoral college, and the truly relevant part to modern elections, is that states are given a certain number of electoral points based on population but scaled so that while more popular states have more electoral points, the difference between them and smaller states is less drastic than the difference in population. So in other words, it disproportionately gives smaller states more power relative to their population size.

The other aspect is most states use winner take all method of distributing their electoral points. So whichever party wins the popular vote in said state gets all of the electoral points, as opposed to the proportional method where if the Dems get 60% of the vote and the Reps get 40%, they split the electoral points 60/40. If every state adopted this proportional method then at the very least everyone's vote would count, though smaller state voters would still count more.

10th Amendment

I’m not really arguing anything in particular just that federalism isn’t working out very well these days.

No I get the states rights sentiment behind the logic of the electoral college - I just don't buy it

It applies specifically to federal elections which affect everyone equally. What the electoral college means is that basically your vote means less or even nothing in federal elections depending on which state you live in.

So this is priveledging the rights of some states over other states and some citizens over other citizens depending on which state they live in.

[OccultHawk]

I’m not trying to be defensive but I get that

From wiki

The number of electors in each state is equal to the sum of the state's membership in the Senate and House of Representatives.

That’s why I mentioned the senate. It’s the two senators whether you’re in Montana or California that kills things.

But it wouldn’t be so bad if we actually honored the 10th Amendment

[jwb]

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

I’m not trying to be defensive but I get that

From wiki


That’s why I mentioned the senate. It’s the two senators whether you’re in Montana or California that kills things.

But it wouldn’t be so bad if we actually honored the 10th Amendment

The Senate is actually a different but related question. I also think it's unfair but if I had to choose I'd rather get rid of the electoral college than reform the Senate.

What you quoted about the electors mirroring the representation in the house still doesn't quite factor in that both are structured to favor small states over large states. But only the electoral college has the confounding factor that in most states (the ones who are winner take all and vote either consistently red or blue) your vote for president literally doesn't matter. This means the vote of most Americans is utterly meaningless in presidential elections.

Also to be clear getting rid of the electoral college doesn't affect the 10th amendment, which only states that powers not specifically designated to the federal government are assumed by the states. This has nothing to do with the procedure of federal elections.

[Anteater]

Originally Posted by jwb

The other aspect is most states use winner take all method of distributing their electoral points. So whichever party wins the popular vote in said state gets all of the electoral points, as opposed to the proportional method where if the Dems get 60% of the vote and the Reps get 40%, they split the electoral points 60/40. If every state adopted this proportional method then at the very least everyone's vote would count, though smaller state voters would still count more.

I'm actually open to the idea of a more proportional method. Right now the only alternative to having the electoral college is basically just letting California and New York decide every election, so we need something more like a baby step in a different direction.

[OccultHawk]

What you quoted about the electors mirroring the representation in the house still doesn't quite factor in that both are structured to favor small states over large states.

It’s the senate plus the house. It’s the only two senators thing that causes the imbalance.

Also to be clear getting rid of the electoral college doesn't affect the 10th amendment

The relationship is the overreach of the federal government that wouldn’t be allowed if the 10th amendment was legit followed.

[OccultHawk]

Originally Posted by Anteater

I'm actually open to the idea of a more proportional method. Right now the only alternative to having the electoral college is basically just letting California and New York decide every election, so we need something more like a baby step in a different direction.

People should count less because they live in NY or Cali? Why?