Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 22, 2014, 01:19:37 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Questions and Answers
| |-+  Presidential Election Process
| | |-+  Major campaign underway to nullify Electoral College
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 Print
Author Topic: Major campaign underway to nullify Electoral College  (Read 88682 times)
Хahar
Xahar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38863
Bangladesh


View Profile
« Reply #300 on: July 08, 2011, 01:08:07 am »
Ignore

If the NPVIC will requirers all states to sign on, why not just have an amendment?

It only requires enough states for a majority of electoral votes.
Logged

Update reading list

The idea of parodying the preceding Atlasian's postings is laughable, of course, but not for reasons one might expect.
Landslide Lyndon
px75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9167
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -5.22

View Profile
« Reply #301 on: July 15, 2011, 01:37:53 am »
Ignore

California legislature passed the NPVIC and sent it to Brown to sign it.

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/07/14/3769954/calif-senate-approves-change-to.html

Logged

Bob Findley: "You're a real dyed-in-the-wool son-of-a-bitch. Anyone ever told you that?"
Steve Everett: "Just close friends and family,"

Clint Eastwood's "True Crime", 1999.
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30943
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P

View Profile
« Reply #302 on: July 15, 2011, 03:13:01 am »
Ignore

Even though CA and NY are both democratic States, their entry in the compact would add a lot of EVs to it, and thus hopefully help it to gain some credibility.
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Teddy (IDS Legislator)
nickjbor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8319
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -1.91

View Profile WWW
« Reply #303 on: July 23, 2011, 04:52:51 am »
Ignore

I'm still not convinced this will work.

The whole "Any member state may withdraw from this agreement, except that blah blah blah" bit is useless.

Remember this is a state law. Therefore, what this really says is

ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF MARYLAND, LAW 5182 MEANS WE GIVE OUR ELECTORAL VOTES TO EBERYBODY SO WE KAN ALL SHARE MMMKAY

All you need to do is pass a new

ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF MARYLAND, LAW 5182 IS NOW VOID. HAHAHA SUCKERS.
Logged

TEDDY - ARKANSAS - IDS - Liberal Whip



Note to self: use brain more.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28254
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #304 on: July 23, 2011, 10:36:28 am »
Ignore

I'm still not convinced this will work.

The whole "Any member state may withdraw from this agreement, except that blah blah blah" bit is useless.

Remember this is a state law. Therefore, what this really says is

ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF MARYLAND, LAW 5182 MEANS WE GIVE OUR ELECTORAL VOTES TO EBERYBODY SO WE KAN ALL SHARE MMMKAY

All you need to do is pass a new

ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF MARYLAND, LAW 5182 IS NOW VOID. HAHAHA SUCKERS.


If this compact were to get Congressional approval there would be no question about whether the six month provision is enforceable.  Even without Congressional approval it probably would be.

But even if they were to be able to withdraw, after the six month deadline, it likely would not cause a suckerpunch moment at the government level.

If Maryland passes a new law after election day, then Maryland would lose the safe harbor status for its electors and they likely would suffer a challenge in the Congress.  (It's also possible that electors chosen in conformity to the compact would also suffer a challenge.)

If Maryland passes a new law before election day, then the other states would be able to assign electors on the basis of their previous law.

About the only impact that would be likely to occur from a late withdrawal would be upon campaigns that planned their strategy assuming that the compact is in force only to find that we were back to winner take all by state.
Logged

My November ballot:
Ervin(I) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
Yes: Amendment 1 (Gen. Assembly may allow and regulate charity raffles)
No: Amendment 2 (end election of the Adjutant General)
Teddy (IDS Legislator)
nickjbor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8319
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -1.91

View Profile WWW
« Reply #305 on: July 23, 2011, 11:44:12 pm »
Ignore

I actually tried to prepare a map of states that are considering this that'd add up to a majority, and then show an example of one party being able to pull this; but there are enough states for both parties that are looking at this that I was unable to do so.
Logged

TEDDY - ARKANSAS - IDS - Liberal Whip



Note to self: use brain more.
beneficii
Full Member
***
Posts: 159


View Profile
« Reply #306 on: August 04, 2011, 10:55:31 am »
Ignore

The Republican National Committee is considering officially opposing the National Popular Vote:

http://www.ballot-access.org/2011/08/02/republican-national-committee-considers-taking-a-stand-on-national-popular-vote-plan/

This would officially make the National Popular Vote a partisan issue, and would IMO sink its chances in the medium term (next 10 to 20 years).
Logged
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2556


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #307 on: August 04, 2011, 05:28:17 pm »
Ignore

The Republican National Committee is considering officially opposing the National Popular Vote:

This would officially make the National Popular Vote a partisan issue, and would IMO sink its chances in the medium term (next 10 to 20 years).


Sigh. These guys are almost always against good ideas and for bad ones. Hope the resolution fails.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19396
United States


View Profile
« Reply #308 on: August 06, 2011, 12:22:24 am »
Ignore

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/aug/5/rnc-nixes-national-popular-vote-initiative/

Quote
A resolution opposing the National Popular Vote initiative won support of every voting RNC member but one who voted “present” instead of “yes.”
Logged

HOG & Blondie: A Tale of Atlas Future

What is your opinion of this thread?

Watch Dave being briefed by the mods.

Being a moderator is basically like one giant party.  Except you're the one ruining the party and everyone hates you.
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30943
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P

View Profile
« Reply #309 on: August 06, 2011, 03:19:55 am »
Ignore

What is their rationale for opposing this ? "Democrats support it, so it sucks" ? Or "Electoral college will always help us in close elections" ?
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Franzl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22123
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #310 on: August 06, 2011, 05:36:39 am »
Ignore

What is their rationale for opposing this ? "Democrats support it, so it sucks" ? Or "Electoral college will always help us in close elections" ?

More the default conservative position, IMO. Don't fix it if it ain't broke or something.
Logged
beneficii
Full Member
***
Posts: 159


View Profile
« Reply #311 on: August 06, 2011, 07:38:46 pm »
Ignore

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/aug/5/rnc-nixes-national-popular-vote-initiative/

Quote
A resolution opposing the National Popular Vote initiative won support of every voting RNC member but one who voted “present” instead of “yes.”


Though I am suspicious of the Washington Times, at this point I think the article is probably reliable.  This bodes poorly for the NPVIC in the medium term.
Logged
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28254
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #312 on: August 06, 2011, 10:55:30 pm »
Ignore

What is their rationale for opposing this ? "Democrats support it, so it sucks" ? Or "Electoral college will always help us in close elections" ?

Internal party politics could play a factor as well.  The delegate allocation rules for the two parties determine bonus delegates for how the party does in Presidential Politics differently.  The Democratic rules effectively allocate a bonus based on the percentage of the PV in the State during the last three Presidential elections.  The Republican rules give a straight up bonus based on whether the Republican got a majority of the EV in the last Presidential election. (Nebraska receives its full bonus since 4 of its 5 EVs were cast for McCain) That makes some sense under the current method of electing a President, but not if we switched to PV for electing Presidents.
Logged

My November ballot:
Ervin(I) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
Yes: Amendment 1 (Gen. Assembly may allow and regulate charity raffles)
No: Amendment 2 (end election of the Adjutant General)
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30943
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P

View Profile
« Reply #313 on: August 07, 2011, 04:18:13 am »
Ignore

What is their rationale for opposing this ? "Democrats support it, so it sucks" ? Or "Electoral college will always help us in close elections" ?

Internal party politics could play a factor as well.  The delegate allocation rules for the two parties determine bonus delegates for how the party does in Presidential Politics differently.  The Democratic rules effectively allocate a bonus based on the percentage of the PV in the State during the last three Presidential elections.  The Republican rules give a straight up bonus based on whether the Republican got a majority of the EV in the last Presidential election. (Nebraska receives its full bonus since 4 of its 5 EVs were cast for McCain) That makes some sense under the current method of electing a President, but not if we switched to PV for electing Presidents.

Can't they just change such a silly rule ?

Rhetorical question of course : the GOP is an awesome party so its rules are all perfect and shall never be changed.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2011, 04:20:12 am by Senator Antonio V »Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
muon2
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8649


View Profile
« Reply #314 on: August 07, 2011, 10:33:39 am »
Ignore

What is their rationale for opposing this ? "Democrats support it, so it sucks" ? Or "Electoral college will always help us in close elections" ?

There were two frequent rationales cited by the RNC members. One was that the system is not so broken that it needs this fix, which will likely have unintended consequences. The other was the recognition that the founders intended to provide an additional boost to smaller states in the republic, and NPVIC would alter that balance.

The Electoral College does not always help the GOP in close elections. OH was quite close in 2004, and if it had gone for Kerry then he would have won the EC with a larger PV deficit to Bush than Bush had to Gore.

One consequence I worry about is the emergence of a fringe candidate who can win with less than a majority. There was a PV Amendment floated in Congress 40 years ago, and it had a runoff provision to protect against this possibility. The NPVIC entirely lacks a runoff provision for candidates with less than a majority. Parliamentary systems require a majority to run the government. The EC system has a runoff in the House, and countries such as France have a direct runoff for president.
Logged


Lunar Eclipse of April 15, 2014 with the star Spica.
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30943
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P

View Profile
« Reply #315 on: August 07, 2011, 11:12:10 am »
Ignore

Candidates can win the EV with a minority in the PV, too. Actually, it happened 3 times in the last 5 elections.
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28254
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #316 on: August 07, 2011, 09:49:36 pm »
Ignore

What is their rationale for opposing this ? "Democrats support it, so it sucks" ? Or "Electoral college will always help us in close elections" ?

Internal party politics could play a factor as well.  The delegate allocation rules for the two parties determine bonus delegates for how the party does in Presidential Politics differently.  The Democratic rules effectively allocate a bonus based on the percentage of the PV in the State during the last three Presidential elections.  The Republican rules give a straight up bonus based on whether the Republican got a majority of the EV in the last Presidential election. (Nebraska receives its full bonus since 4 of its 5 EVs were cast for McCain) That makes some sense under the current method of electing a President, but not if we switched to PV for electing Presidents.

Can't they just change such a silly rule ?

Rhetorical question of course : the GOP is an awesome party so its rules are all perfect and shall never be changed.

Of course they could change it, but it would mean that Republicans from highly Democratic states such as California and New York would gain influence at the expense of those who currently have it in the party.  Still, I expect this factor is of less importance than the perception that the Republicans by and large have the advantage in the small population States that have a greater influence in the EV than they would in the PV.
Logged

My November ballot:
Ervin(I) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
Yes: Amendment 1 (Gen. Assembly may allow and regulate charity raffles)
No: Amendment 2 (end election of the Adjutant General)
Mr. Morden
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19396
United States


View Profile
« Reply #317 on: August 07, 2011, 10:00:54 pm »
Ignore

Of course they could change it, but it would mean that Republicans from highly Democratic states such as California and New York would gain influence at the expense of those who currently have it in the party.  Still, I expect this factor is of less importance than the perception that the Republicans by and large have the advantage in the small population States that have a greater influence in the EV than they would in the PV.

There are many ways to measure "party strength" in a state besides the presidential vote.  It's reasonable for the GOP to grant more delegates to Florida than New York, since, despite having nearly equal populations, there are more Republicans in Florida than New York.......but there are much smarter ways of measuring that than their current formula.
Logged

HOG & Blondie: A Tale of Atlas Future

What is your opinion of this thread?

Watch Dave being briefed by the mods.

Being a moderator is basically like one giant party.  Except you're the one ruining the party and everyone hates you.
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30943
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P

View Profile
« Reply #318 on: August 08, 2011, 04:26:45 am »
Ignore

Of course they could change it, but it would mean that Republicans from highly Democratic states such as California and New York would gain influence at the expense of those who currently have it in the party.  Still, I expect this factor is of less importance than the perception that the Republicans by and large have the advantage in the small population States that have a greater influence in the EV than they would in the PV.

There are many ways to measure "party strength" in a state besides the presidential vote.  It's reasonable for the GOP to grant more delegates to Florida than New York, since, despite having nearly equal populations, there are more Republicans in Florida than New York.......but there are much smarter ways of measuring that than their current formula.

Indeed. Why don't they simply apportion delegates according to the number of votes get by their presidential candidates ?
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Landslide Lyndon
px75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9167
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -5.22

View Profile
« Reply #319 on: August 08, 2011, 07:12:59 pm »
Ignore

Jerry Brown signed the NPVIC bill.

http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2011/08/jerry-brown-signs-popular-vote.html
Logged

Bob Findley: "You're a real dyed-in-the-wool son-of-a-bitch. Anyone ever told you that?"
Steve Everett: "Just close friends and family,"

Clint Eastwood's "True Crime", 1999.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28254
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #320 on: August 08, 2011, 09:48:35 pm »
Ignore

Indeed. Why don't they simply apportion delegates according to the number of votes get by their presidential candidates ?

They are doing that.  They just apportion the bonus delegates for the presidential vote by the votes that count at present, the electoral votes, not the popular votes.
Logged

My November ballot:
Ervin(I) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
Yes: Amendment 1 (Gen. Assembly may allow and regulate charity raffles)
No: Amendment 2 (end election of the Adjutant General)
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30943
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

P P

View Profile
« Reply #321 on: August 09, 2011, 03:58:48 am »
Ignore

Indeed. Why don't they simply apportion delegates according to the number of votes get by their presidential candidates ?

They are doing that.  They just apportion the bonus delegates for the presidential vote by the votes that count at present, the electoral votes, not the popular votes.

Well, that's moronic. It doesn't produce a proportional representation of Republican voters.
Logged

Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

It really is.



"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Mr. Morden
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19396
United States


View Profile
« Reply #322 on: August 13, 2011, 07:41:28 am »
Ignore

With it now seemingly becoming a partisan issue, I wonder if the more realistic way forward for the NPV is to try to convince Republicans in strongly GOP states to sign on (making the case to them that they're getting screwed by the electoral college), or if it would actually be more realistic to try to get swing states to sign on during a period when the Democrats control the state legislature (which is not the case in nearly any of the swing state legislatures at the moment).

All of the states to sign onto the NPV so far are states that have gone to the Dems in recent presidential elections, and have not been seriously contested in the last few cycles.  If the NPV cannot expand beyond that base, then it's dead.
Logged

HOG & Blondie: A Tale of Atlas Future

What is your opinion of this thread?

Watch Dave being briefed by the mods.

Being a moderator is basically like one giant party.  Except you're the one ruining the party and everyone hates you.
Mr. Morden
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19396
United States


View Profile
« Reply #323 on: May 09, 2012, 06:11:13 am »
Ignore

So there's talk now about how Obama is doing better in statewide polls than he is in national polls.  While it's quite a longshot, what do you think would be the impact on the NPV's prospects if Obama ends up winning reelection via the electoral college despite losing the national popular vote?  Would enough Republicans suddenly become supporters that it would start passing in heavily GOP states, and actually manage to reach 270 EV and be enacted by the end of the decade?
Logged

HOG & Blondie: A Tale of Atlas Future

What is your opinion of this thread?

Watch Dave being briefed by the mods.

Being a moderator is basically like one giant party.  Except you're the one ruining the party and everyone hates you.
muon2
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8649


View Profile
« Reply #324 on: May 09, 2012, 09:06:48 am »
Ignore

So there's talk now about how Obama is doing better in statewide polls than he is in national polls.  While it's quite a longshot, what do you think would be the impact on the NPV's prospects if Obama ends up winning reelection via the electoral college despite losing the national popular vote?  Would enough Republicans suddenly become supporters that it would start passing in heavily GOP states, and actually manage to reach 270 EV and be enacted by the end of the decade?


I don't see small GOP-controlled states going that way. The EC gives them more voice than NPVIC. It would be interesting to watch a state like TX, however. They could suddenly be on the radar for presidential campaigns with NPVIC in place.

I still think the proposal is deficient without a runoff clause, but most backers from either party aren't concerned about the unintended consequences. I imagine a multi-party race with an extreme candidate taking a plurality like Le Pen nearly did in the 1st round of 2002 in France.
Logged


Lunar Eclipse of April 15, 2014 with the star Spica.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines