Electoral college poll by party

[°Leprechaun]

If each state chose its electors by CD instead of having winner take all, it would improve the system a great deal. The reason is that candidates would have to visit more states. The direction in which we are headed is very bad, we could get closer and closer to the point in time where one party has a lock on the electoral college (probably the Republicans). Not that a CD system would be all that great, it would just be a step in the right direction and could be enacted without the lengthly process of amending the Constitution. In 2000 it was Florida. In 2004 it was Ohio.
Do you really want to give so much power to only one state??
I can't fathom how anyone could support the status quo.

[°Leprechaun]

Plus we are in a position where whole regions are all but ignored.
Democrats are ignoring the South more and more and Republicans are ignoring all but two or three 'blue' states, thus they are pretty much ignoring the Northeast.

[Bacon King]

If each state chose its electors by CD instead of having winner take all, it would improve the system a great deal. The reason is that candidates would have to visit more states. The direction in which we are headed is very bad, we could get closer and closer to the point in time where one party has a lock on the electoral college (probably the Republicans). Not that a CD system would be all that great, it would just be a step in the right direction and could be enacted without the lengthly process of amending the Constitution.

A CD system would be a step in the wrong direction. It would cause gerrymandering to be that much more harmful, and would give state legislatures a huge amount of leverage in determining how their state's EVs will be cast.

[minionofmidas]

If each state chose its electors by CD instead of having winner take all, it would improve the system a great deal. The reason is that candidates would have to visit more states. The direction in which we are headed is very bad, we could get closer and closer to the point in time where one party has a lock on the electoral college (probably the Republicans). Not that a CD system would be all that great, it would just be a step in the right direction and could be enacted without the lengthly process of amending the Constitution.

A CD system would be a step in the wrong direction. It would cause gerrymandering to be that much more harmful, and would give state legislatures a huge amount of leverage in determining how their state's EVs will be cast.

It would create a huge incentive to take redistricting out of the states' hands, where it really does not belong.

[Gustaf]

Historically, having the CDs appoint electors actually makes the result less fair, rather than more. So I doubt it's the right way to go.

[adam]

No. (R)

For starters, this would eliminate the concept of "swing states" entirely. This not only makes for a unenthusiastic campaign, but a rather boring election night. Also, do think about it, who the hell would go to Iowa to campaign if it weren't a valuable swing state? Or really, any state that isn't Texas, Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, or California? The EC keeps these states and other smaller states involved.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Move to a parliamentary system and scrap the idea of an independent popularly elected executive.

[Nym90]

This forum appears to be much more in favor of keeping the electoral college than the country as a whole.

Remember, Republicans, a uniform swing of 2.1% to Kerry from Bush would have won the electoral college for Kerry.

Check this thread out on the 1860 election.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=24045.0

Very good point about 2004. The Electoral College actually benefited the Democrats in the last election, as Kerry had a better chance of winning Ohio than he did the national popular vote.

Likewise in 1996, when the critical state for victory in the EC was Pennsylvania, which voted for Clinton by more than his national margin.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I like the EC, but there may be a way to modify it.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

I like the EC, but there may be a way to modify it.

Sure. Trash it.

[Хahar 🤔]

Move to a parliamentary system and scrap the idea of an independent popularly elected executive.

Bingo.

[Harry Hayfield]

I like the EC, but there may be a way to modify it.

Allow me to make a suggestion then

Each state has an electoral college vote made up of the number of congressional districts + two senators. Therefore why not remove the link from the state to the congressional district. So that in somewhere like CA instead of the Dems winning 55 ECV's, you would have the GOP winning 20 something, the Dems 30 something. As to the remaning two senate votes, that can still be allocated by the total state vote. So that CA would be GOP 25 Dem 32 instead of GOP 0 Dem 55.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I like the EC, but there may be a way to modify it.

Allow me to make a suggestion then

Each state has an electoral college vote made up of the number of congressional districts + two senators. Therefore why not remove the link from the state to the congressional district. So that in somewhere like CA instead of the Dems winning 55 ECV's, you would have the GOP winning 20 something, the Dems 30 something. As to the remaning two senate votes, that can still be allocated by the total state vote. So that CA would be GOP 25 Dem 32 instead of GOP 0 Dem 55.

Only if it happens in every state