Nebraska to eliminate Electoral Vote by CD?

[Stockdale for Veep]

Does anyone know if Obama would have won NE-2 in 2012 under the 2008 district map? Rig baby Rig.

[Virginiá]

In 2012, Obama only won 209 (48.0%) districts, but won 51.1% of the national popular vote.

Awarding electoral college votes in a winner-take-all fashion to the winner of each district is ludicrous. Republicans need to figure out how to win a national election first, not develop and implement new ways to circumvent actual votes cast.

Exactly. This whole idea is only being entertained by Republicans because they are having a hard time getting people to vote for their presidential candidates. So one of their solutions after Romney lost was to essentially gerrymander the electoral college by tying EV votes to CDs, of which so many are gerrymandered in their favor. Good thing that plan never came to fruition, despite even being endorsed by Priebus (iirc). The GOP was worried about significantly more competition in House districts that could make it harder to maintain a solid majority, so they scrapped the idea, at least temporarily. I think we can expect to see talk about it arise again if they lose in November.

The GOP has gotten so pathetic during the Obama era. They just keep going more and more to the right while thinking up new ways to game the system, rather than actually trying to appeal to a changing electorate. And to think, they are the ones constantly crying about voter/electoral fraud and yet they are the ones cheating the system.

[Kingpoleon]

Honestly, redistributing electoral vote by (frequently badly gerrymandered) congressional districts is hardly more representative than winner takes all.

The problem is with gerrymandering, otherwise it might make sense if all 50 states did this. I don't like winner take all. The problem with making it strictly by popular vote is that we don't have irv or approval voting or other more democratic type elections.

[Virginiá]

It was a much more potent threat prior to 2014 because of PA and VA.  Assuming OH continues voting right of the nation, the only places they could wreck significant havoc now would be WI and MI.  And they probably wouldn't do it to WI because they think they could win it in the near future.    

I'd personally like to see every state go proportional, with a 10% threshold to get EVs so we don't end up sending every 4th election to the House.

Not necessarily. PA and VA can send constitutional amendments to the ballot via votes in the legislature only, of which Republicans control both (albeit VA's is a razor-thin majority that they will likely lose in the not-so-distant future). For instance, Virginia Republicans got a Right To Work amendment on the 2016 ballot as McAuliffe would have vetoed a normal bill. Both states require the legislature to have a simple majority vote in 2 sessions, but I think at least in PA they could also do a single vote if deemed an "emergency". I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to spin the need to win the White House as an emergency

As far as I know, quite a lot of states don't give the Governor veto power over legislatively-referred amendments. Not sure of the number, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was most states.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

YES!

I hope Maine won't eliminate it, though.

Basically this.  And, get Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Virginia all on board.  Why not California, New York, and Illinois as well?

You're such a transparent partisan hack.

[OSR stands with Israel]

While the Electoral College is not a very democratic process of electing the president, I believe that the laws should be uniform across all 50 states.  Allocating votes by CD is bad because of gerrymandering, so I think WTA in all 50 states is better than mixed rules.

If the United States really must retain the electoral college, I'd prefer electoral votes being distributed proportionally to votes a candidate got statewide.

Agreed though I believe if you win 60 percent of the state or the opponent got under 40 percent the winner of that state should get all the electoral votes

[Mercenary]

CD would be okay if the CD were more sensible and not so gerrymandered.
But with the eay things are winner take all is preferable I suppose. States can do whatever they want though there is no need for it to be uniform. It is after all a state election just like a vote for senator is.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

While the Electoral College is not a very democratic process of electing the president, I believe that the laws should be uniform across all 50 states.  Allocating votes by CD is bad because of gerrymandering, so I think WTA in all 50 states is better than mixed rules.

If the United States really must retain the electoral college, I'd prefer electoral votes being distributed proportionally to votes a candidate got statewide.

Agreed though I believe if you win 60 percent of the state or the opponent got under 40 percent the winner of that state should get all the electoral votes

If you want a threshold, I'd rather have a 15% like in Democratic primaries. +30% is too high.

[Virginiá]

The PA Supreme Court (5/1 D and historically very partisan) will find something defective about it before it gets to the ballot.  Even if it did, it wouldn't pass.  Dem groups would spend $100M if necessary.  Having it pass in VA in an odd year, particularly in a state legislature only odd year, would be more of a concern.  But the guy in the Richmond district that was more McAuliffe/Herring than the state would still have to be the deciding vote for it.  

Well to be fair, I only meant to suggest that if they wanted to get it on the ballot, then they can as they currently have complete control of the process to do so in those states.

Is it possible for the PA Supreme Court to rule against a referred Constitutional amendment? Ideally the legislature should be able to amend the Constitution with anything they want, provided it is approved by the voters. I understand some states have restrictions on what citizens can propose for initiatives, but I don't see how the legislature can be handicapped like that.

But yeah, Democrats would surely scare up whatever money they need to fight such a plan, as it would hurt their current presidential advantage, which they desperately need in the face of overwhelmingly Republican control at the state/Congressional level.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Electoral vote by CD is terrible, even if was amazing to find out that Obama got a Nebraska elector in this thread.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=87663.0

[Virginiá]

The Illinois Supreme Court, which is also controlled by Democrats and known for being partisan, prevented an independent redistricting commission for congressional seats from getting to the ballot a couple years back, using what many saw as a technicality.

Yeah, but that was proposed by citizens. I believe the legislature can amend anything they want (it would be kind of silly in a way to create a Constitution that contains critical provisions that can't be altered). I could be wrong, though. Technically there isn't anything that should prohibit state Constitutions from having sections that can't be modified. Not anything that I am aware of, anyway.

muon2, where are you?! Atlas needs your wisdom!

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Electoral vote by CD is terrible, even if was amazing to find out that Obama got a Nebraska elector in this thread.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=87663.0

Actually, the thread seemed to come up with the decision that McCain had won NE-02.  When did it become clear that Obama had won it?

[This account no longer in use.]

ITT: People suggesting that gerrymandering be used to steal the Presidency as well as the House.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Electoral vote by CD is terrible, even if was amazing to find out that Obama got a Nebraska elector in this thread.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=87663.0

Actually, the thread seemed to come up with the decision that McCain had won NE-02.  When did it become clear that Obama had won it?

Here's a thread from 8 days later.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=88212.0

[Nyvin]

The PA Supreme Court (5/1 D and historically very partisan) will find something defective about it before it gets to the ballot.  Even if it did, it wouldn't pass.  Dem groups would spend $100M if necessary.  Having it pass in VA in an odd year, particularly in a state legislature only odd year, would be more of a concern.  But the guy in the Richmond district that was more McAuliffe/Herring than the state would still have to be the deciding vote for it.  

Well to be fair, I only meant to suggest that if they wanted to get it on the ballot, then they can as they currently have complete control of the process to do so in those states.

Is it possible for the PA Supreme Court to rule against a referred Constitutional amendment? Ideally the legislature should be able to amend the Constitution with anything they want, provided it is approved by the voters. I understand some states have restrictions on what citizens can propose for initiatives, but I don't see how the legislature can be handicapped like that.

But yeah, Democrats would surely scare up whatever money they need to fight such a plan, as it would hurt their current presidential advantage, which they desperately need in the face of overwhelmingly Republican control at the state/Congressional level.

I really doubt states like Virginia or Ohio will ever split up their EV's by district.   The simple reason is that the states actually really like all the ad spending and campaign dollars going into their state, and they also really love the influence being a swing state gives the local legislators and officials.    Even Pennsylvania gets quite a bit of attention by being a "semi" swing state.

The problem with by-district EV's is all the negatives fall on the local state party, and all the positives mostly fall on the national party.   Unless the national party gets downright tyrannical at some point, it'll mostly be a lost cause.

[Wisconsin+17]

WTA by state is the best way to do it, IMO. Popular vote would mean that Obama would have to campaign in maybe 2 counties. Cook, and Los Angeles.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

WTA by state is the best way to do it, IMO. Popular vote would mean that Obama would have to campaign in maybe 2 counties. Cook, and Los Angeles.

Total votes cast in the 2012 election: 129,237,642
Votes cast in Los Angeles County: 3,181,067
Votes cast in Cook County: 2,014,819

That's 5,195,886 votes, or about 4% of the total cast. So uh, no.

[Minnesota Mike]

Electoral vote by CD is terrible, even if was amazing to find out that Obama got a Nebraska elector in this thread.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=87663.0

I thought all election nerds knew about Obama winning NE-02.  I forget how young you Bernie Bots are

FWIW I also dislike electoral votes by CD. In Nebraska's case it really does not make a difference because if a Dem is doing well enough to win NE-02 they are well over 270 EV's.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Electoral vote by CD is terrible, even if was amazing to find out that Obama got a Nebraska elector in this thread.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=87663.0

I thought all election nerds knew about Obama winning NE-02.  I forget how young you Bernie Bots are

FWIW I also dislike electoral votes by CD. In Nebraska's case it really does not make a difference because if a Dem is doing well enough to win NE-02 they are well over 270 EV's.

He meant he learned about it in that thread in 2008

[Fuzzybigfoot]

Does anyone know if Obama would have won NE-2 in 2012 under the 2008 district map? Rig baby Rig.

Nope.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Proportional EV wouldn't change anything. O would just need to campaign in Cook and LA counties to win.

[Orser67]

Fully proportional allocation by statewide PV would encourage candidates to campaign a little just about everywhere, without the gerrymandering issues.  I think proportional EV is preferable to statewide WTA if adopted by every state with a 10%ish threshold to keep minor parties in CA/TX from throwing it to the House.

According to the site linked below, in 2012 a proportional system would have resulted in a 282-255 Obama victory. Interesting.

http://www.270towin.com/alternative-electoral-college-allocation-methods/

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I have a good idea. Split the entire country into 540 horizontal stripes of equal population, and the winner has to win the majority of the stripes.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Proportional EV wouldn't change anything. O would just need to campaign in Cook and LA counties to win.

Lol @this dumb argument. Maybe if the US was Canada, and one could conceivably win by traipsing around Montreal and GTA, but even so...

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mathwise the fierwall requires only 20 some counties in order to win the election even now. Proportional systems have the effect of reducing margins while at the same time, reducing the percentage needed to win. I'm not sure you get that Obama had a 2 million vote lead in just LA and Cook counties.