2020 US Election Thread

[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]

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?

[Anteater]

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

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

Cause the U.S. is a big place and Hollywood can't hire everybody. Is there something inherently special about those particular states compared to people living everywhere else?

[OccultHawk]

Originally Posted by Anteater

Cause the U.S. is a big place and Hollywood can't hire everybody.

One vote in Montana would still be an entire vote just not greater than one.

[jwb]

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.

That wouldn't happen lol. The parties shape themselves based on popular opinion. If the electoral college disappeared then both parties would be forced to change their electoral strategies, especially the Republicans. Or else they would be replaced by another party that could compete. The idea it would lead to a one party state is completely unfounded. Last time we lost a political party they were replaced immediately by the Republican party.

Very likely our national politics would move somewhat to the left, as a reflection of our actual population. But most likely the rural/urban split would remain. Except in this case the Republicans or their replacements would be competing not just for red or purple states but red or purple populations... Including many people living in blue states currently ignored by Republicans in the national elections. And the same would be true for Democrats in red states. I fail to see how this isn't an improvement.

[OccultHawk]

Originally Posted by jwb

That wouldn't happen lol. The parties shape themselves based on popular opinion. If the electoral college disappeared then both parties would be forced to change their electoral strategies, especially the Republicans. Or else they would be replaced by another party that could compete. The idea it would lead to a one party state is completely unfounded. Last time we lost a political party they were replaced immediately by the Republican party.

Very likely our national politics would move somewhat to the left, as a reflection of our actual population. But most likely the rural/urban split would remain. Except in this case the Republicans or their replacements would be competing not just for red or purple states but red or purple populations... Including many people living in blue states currently ignored by Republicans in the national elections. And the same would be true for Democrats in red states. I fail to see how this isn't an improvement.

Even in Oregon you go 50 miles outside of Portland or Eugene and it might as well be Alabama.

[Anteater]

Originally Posted by jwb

That wouldn't happen lol. The parties shape themselves based on popular opinion. If the electoral college disappeared then both parties would be forced to change their electoral strategies, especially the Republicans. Or else they would be replaced by another party that could compete. The idea it would lead to a one party state is completely unfounded. Last time we lost a political party they were replaced immediately by the Republican party.

Very likely our national politics would move somewhat to the left, as a reflection of our actual population. But most likely the rural/urban split would remain. Except in this case the Republicans or their replacements would be competing not just for red or purple states but red or purple populations... Including many people living in blue states currently ignored by Republicans in the national elections. And the same would be true for Democrats in red states. I fail to see how this isn't an improvement.

I'd be fine with the electoral college going away if it led to the proliferation of other parties besides some variation of red versus blue at every turn. Maybe that's what it would actually take.

[TheBig3]

Originally Posted by Anteater

I'd be fine with the electoral college going away if it led to the proliferation of other parties besides some variation of red versus blue at every turn. Maybe that's what it would actually take.

I will never see the appeal of new labels.

[jwb]

Originally Posted by TheBig3

The only upshot to the popular vote is that it would force people to restructure in more major urban areas. Which is better for both society and the economy.

I'm tired of politicians throwing on a barn jacket, standing in front of a shut-down factory in Akron, and talking about bringing jobs back. The problem isn't policies. The problem is major factories only work in the suburbs if the rest of the globe is too nuked to function.

the other upshot being a closer approximation to democracy...

Originally Posted by Anteater

I'd be fine with the electoral college going away if it led to the proliferation of other parties besides some variation of red versus blue at every turn. Maybe that's what it would actually take.

most likely not. When I said they could be replaced by another party I meant just that... Two parties with one of them switched. Our style of government lends itself to two party rule.

[TheBig3]

Originally Posted by jwb

the other upshot being a closer approximation to democracy...

Is democracy good? The shaven apes that drive around this country in cars they don't need, eating food they largely waste, and screaming at televisions are given to emotional swings. You should have a few barries in the way to slow down those emotional knee-jerks.

The electoral college is supposed to give weight to geography, at a time where that mattered more. We didn't account for the shrinking of the nation. Direct democracy doesn't solve for that (imo).