If you could choose how to reform the Presidential Elections, what would it be?

[defe07]

Considering the fact that most of us voters have talked about reforming the Presidential Elections, I was wondering what most of you would support. I support either having a modified IRV system where you rank your candidates in order of preference and if a candidate wins each head-to-head matchup, that candidate (or in this case ticket) would win the EV (if not, the EV would go to the candidate that wins an absolute majority of the votes) or by going to a 2 vote system where parties nominate 2 candidates and it's up for grabs and the voters would be given 2 votes and could vote for any 2 candidates they want (for example, if a Nader voter wants to help the Greens without hurting the Democrats, it could possibly vote for Nader and Kerry for Pres and VP or viceversa). How about you? Please explain which system and why. Thanks!

[Verily]

Two votes is just another prop for two parties; you could do approval voting, which is the equivalent of having any number of votes but can only vote for each candidate once, but that tends to result in unknown candidates doing well, which may or may not be a good thing.

Strict IRV is fine with me, but without electoral votes.

[Јas]

Nationwide IRV poll with a NOTA option.

Why?
A nationwide poll because all citizens should be equal in an election. The value of one's vote for the Presidency shouldn't depend on where in the Union one happens to reside.
IRV because it allows the voter to express his true preferences without concern for wasting his vote; and encourages a greater number of candidates to stand giving the voter greater choice.

[Хahar 🤔]

Nationwide IRV poll with a NOTA option.

Why?
A nationwide poll because all citizens should be equal in an election. The value of one's vote for the Presidency shouldn't depend on where in the Union one happens to reside.
IRV because it allows the voter to express his true preferences without concern for wasting his vote; and encourages a greater number of candidates to stand giving the voter greater choice.

What I was going to say, but in a much more eloquent form than I cold ever manage.

[defe07]

Nationwide IRV poll with a NOTA option.

Why?
A nationwide poll because all citizens should be equal in an election. The value of one's vote for the Presidency shouldn't depend on where in the Union one happens to reside.
IRV because it allows the voter to express his true preferences without concern for wasting his vote; and encourages a greater number of candidates to stand giving the voter greater choice.

Greetings to Ireland! I wanted to ask you if you could explain how the ballots are, voting counting (manual or machine) and is there some sort of fee or number of petition signatures candidates in Ireland need to get when they run for Pres? Thanks

[Verily]

Nationwide IRV poll with a NOTA option.

Why?
A nationwide poll because all citizens should be equal in an election. The value of one's vote for the Presidency shouldn't depend on where in the Union one happens to reside.
IRV because it allows the voter to express his true preferences without concern for wasting his vote; and encourages a greater number of candidates to stand giving the voter greater choice.

Greetings to Ireland! I wanted to ask you if you could explain how the ballots are, voting counting (manual or machine) and is there some sort of fee or number of petition signatures candidates in Ireland need to get when they run for Pres? Thanks

My impression is that Irish Presidential elections are only occasionally contested and never competitive, partially because the President has few powers.

[Lief 🗽]

Keep the electoral college, but increase it to 1000 and adjust the number of electors per state so that it's more closely proportional that it is currently. Then mandate that every state decide its electors with IRV.

[Јas]

Nationwide IRV poll with a NOTA option.

Why?
A nationwide poll because all citizens should be equal in an election. The value of one's vote for the Presidency shouldn't depend on where in the Union one happens to reside.
IRV because it allows the voter to express his true preferences without concern for wasting his vote; and encourages a greater number of candidates to stand giving the voter greater choice.

Greetings to Ireland!

Greetings warmly received!

I wanted to ask you if you could explain how the ballots are, voting counting (manual or machine) and is there some sort of fee or number of petition signatures candidates in Ireland need to get when they run for Pres? Thanks

No problem.
Presidential elections here are by a nationwide IRV poll (though there isn't a NOTA option).

On the ballot paper the candiates are listed in alphabetical order, stating their address; occupation and party affiliation together with a photograph of the candidate.
Candidates are ordered in accordance with voter preference.

Voting is counted manually (though the current government has tried to introduce electronic voting machines, they are widely opposed. It's unclear whether efforts will be made again to bring them into play.) An initial count is made, if any candidate has grater than 50% of the vote they are deemed elected. If not, then the lowest placed candidate's 2nd preferences are distributed and so on until someone gains 50% + of the vote or there are no more votes to distribute.

The Constitution sets out the process for Presidential nomnations. Candidates may be nominated by 3 methods:
1) Sitting Presidents can nominate themselves (though Presidents are limited to 2 terms, which are of 7 years duration);
2) Receieving the nominations of 20 members of the either of the 2 Irish Houses of Parliament.
3) Receiving the nominations of 4 Council Councils.

My impression is that Irish Presidential elections are only occasionally contested and never competitive, partially because the President has few powers.

The President is indeed largely a figurehead position. There are some limited but useful powers, for example, the power of reference of Bills to the Supreme Court to determine their constitutionality. Primarily though the President has a similar role to that of the British monarch, i.e., sign bills into law,  chief ambassador of the nation, etc.

Of the 12 occasions when the Presidency has been up for election or re-election, 6 have been uncontested, including most recently in 2004 when the sitting President, Mary McAleese, came to the end of her first term. (Polling suggested her approval rating at almost 90%, so opposing would have been a waste of time and money for what is largely an apolitical position.)

[Platypus]

A highly secure Pencil and Paper. After that, its not as important. Maybe a spending cap.

[Medvedev]

I'd do it via The Apprentice!
You're fired.

[jimrtex]

Apportion electoral votes among the states the District of Columbia and any incorporated territories on the basis of the number of citizens over 18, with the provisio that there not be more than 1000 voters per electoral vote.   Give Congress time-place-manner authority over selection of electors and how they cast their electoral votes, including the case in which no candidate obtains a majority of electoral votes.

[zorkpolitics]

I like the Electoral College it emphasizes that we are a Federal Government and a mix of State and Federal power.  As long as States are important, the Electoral College has a purpose and should be retained.

I would do the following:
1) Assign Electoral Votes according to the number of citizens per state, not persons
2) Award a double Electors to the state winner, 4 instead of 2
3) Elect 1 elector by the winner of each Congressional district
4) Make Federal Electors a 4 yr assignment, in which Electors act as "Citizen Representatives" of the candidate then, President collecting ideas, emailing results, talking to local civic groups.  Let them act as a conduit, independent of the Media and without the overwhelming spin of the parties, for policies, and provide a way for ideas and feedback to go up to the President.

[Хahar 🤔]

I like the Electoral College it emphasizes that we are a Federal Government and a mix of State and Federal power.  As long as States are important, the Electoral College has a purpose and should be retained.

I would do the following:
1) Assign Electoral Votes according to the number of citizens per state, not persons

OK.

2) Award a double Electors to the state winner, 4 instead of 2

Making it even more unfair?

3) Elect 1 elector by the winner of each Congressional district

You're asking for Gerrymandering.

4) Make Federal Electors a 4 yr assignment, in which Electors act as "Citizen Representatives" of the candidate then, President collecting ideas, emailing results, talking to local civic groups.  Let them act as a conduit, independent of the Media and without the overwhelming spin of the parties, for policies, and provide a way for ideas and feedback to go up to the President.

What?

[Padfoot]

1. Increase the size of the House so that the average Congressional district never exceeds 500k (thus also increasing the size of the Electoral College)
2. Implement IRV for all elections (aside from proportional primaries)
3. Grant each incorporated territory 1 electoral vote (in addition to one full member in the House, DC should also have a full member in the House)
5. Forbid campaigning for president or raising funds before January 1st of the election year
6. Outlaw caucusing
7. End the NH-IA monopoly on early voting and implement a regionally balanced lottery for primaries.  Primary season would start until March or April.

[jimrtex]

3) Elect 1 elector by the winner of each Congressional district

You're asking for Gerrymandering.

After the 1800 Jefferson-Burr election contest, Congress seriously considered an alternative to the 12th Amendment that would have provided for popular election of presidential electors from electoral districts (eg Nebraska would have 5 electoral districts).  One of the provisions of the proposed amendments was that EDs only be changed once per census.  And of course, Congress has the authority to prevent gerrymandering.

4) Make Federal Electors a 4 yr assignment, in which Electors act as "Citizen Representatives" of the candidate then, President collecting ideas, emailing results, talking to local civic groups.  Let them act as a conduit, independent of the Media and without the overwhelming spin of the parties, for policies, and provide a way for ideas and feedback to go up to the President.

What?

Congress has authority to  set the time for choosing of electors, and the day on which they meet and cast their votes.  It is only the day for the meeting in each state and casting of votes which must be uniform throughout the United States.  The distinction between time and day in Article III is deliberate, and Congress originally provided a time window of several weeks or even months during which electors might be chosen.

Currently Congress has chosen a particular day in November for the time of choosing, and a day in December for casting votes.  As was seen in Florida in 2000, the electors hardly had been determinitively elected prior to them having to travel to Tallahassee and vote.  Hardly an opportunity for the somber and reflective deliberation intended by the Founding Fathers.

But Congress could set 2009 as the month for choosing and day for 2012 for the date of casting electoral votes.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Direct popular vote with a runoff if no candidate reaches 45%.

1. Increase the size of the House so that the average Congressional district never exceeds 500k (thus also increasing the size of the Electoral College)
2. Implement IRV for all elections (aside from proportional primaries)
3. Grant each incorporated territory 1 electoral vote (in addition to one full member in the House, DC should also have a full member in the House)
5. Forbid campaigning for president or raising funds before January 1st of the election year (the only one here I disagree with)
6. Outlaw caucusing
7. End the NH-IA monopoly on early voting and implement a regionally balanced lottery for primaries.  Primary season would start until March or April.

unfortunately options 6 and 7 make too much sense to ever be implemented.

[defe07]

Would any of you favor implementing IRV for the primaries?

[Хahar 🤔]

3) Elect 1 elector by the winner of each Congressional district

You're asking for Gerrymandering.

After the 1800 Jefferson-Burr election contest, Congress seriously considered an alternative to the 12th Amendment that would have provided for popular election of presidential electors from electoral districts (eg Nebraska would have 5 electoral districts).  One of the provisions of the proposed amendments was that EDs only be changed once per census.  And of course, Congress has the authority to prevent gerrymandering.

Possibly, but why would Congress take the high road?