2020 US Election Thread

[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]

Is there something inherently special about those particular states compared to people living everywhere else?

No. They should get an equally weighted vote as individuals same as anywhere.

Honestly I don’t even care but that’s the point.

[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.

[jwb]

Also there's severe irony in the talking point "NY and Cali would determine every election"when that's what currently happens except it's with completely ****ed states like Florida and Michigan and Ohio.

[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.

[OccultHawk]

Which is better for both society and the economy.

And the environment.

Good post.

[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.

[OccultHawk]

Would you support an amendment that said that everybody has to run as an independent?