Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
February 09, 2010, 12:38:11 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpCalendarLogin Register
News: *Note* Updated various scripts to version 1.1.10 on 10/15/09 -> please let me know if there are any observed issues.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2008 Elections
| | |-+  2008 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign (Moderator: Nym90)
| | | |-+  Survey USA: California may very well split its electoral votes
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: Survey USA: California may very well split its electoral votes  (Read 9699 times)
WEB Dubois
olawakandi
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6144
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: -4.70

P P

View Profile
« on: December 04, 2007, 10:28:27 am »
Ignore

Yes: 47%
NO:  35%
unsure 19%

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=b54d1007-5528-4fb6-82e8-ec4c64fb7732

Unlikely to appear on June ballot initiative, likely to appear in November, 2008

http://uselectionatlas.org/NEWS/index.php
« Last Edit: December 04, 2007, 10:39:31 am by Quincy »Logged

agcatter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3803


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2007, 10:33:20 am »
Ignore

I didn't like it when Democrats tried to pull this in red NC and I don't like it when Republicans pull it in blue state California.  It's an effort to gain a partisan advantage in the electoral race to 270.  Where does it stop?
Logged
Floridude
Full Member
***
Posts: 179


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2007, 11:01:44 am »
Ignore

I agree.  Messing with the equality of the democratic process state-by-state isn't right, no matter which party does it.  Either do it for all states, or for none.

Logged

For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life-John 3-16



Political compass....

About +4/-1

Whover promises to end hurricanes will win Florida in a landslide
josh4bush
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10335
Political Matrix
E: +3.61, S: -1.74


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2007, 11:02:29 am »
Ignore

Good for the Republicans, bad for the Democrats.
Logged
agcatter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3803


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2007, 11:59:05 am »
Ignore

Republicans getting 20 out of the 52 electors from California would be equal to the Republican candidate carrying Pennsylvania.
Logged
Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4186
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: -7.13

P P

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 04, 2007, 10:25:24 pm »
Ignore

I wouldn't be that opposed to this if California wasn't one of the most gerrymandered states in the country.  In fact, I'd favor a nationwide district method if there were a sure fire way of creating fair congressional districts nationwide.
Logged

Хahar
Xahar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27361
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -4.58, S: -3.04

View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2007, 10:26:07 pm »
Ignore

I wouldn't be that opposed to this if California wasn't one of the most gerrymandered states in the country.  In fact, I'd favor a nationwide district method if there were a sure fire way of creating fair congressional districts nationwide.
Logged

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.

Senator Duke
AHDuke99
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9167


Political Matrix
E: +0.52, S: -6.87

P P
View Profile
« Reply #7 on: December 05, 2007, 02:33:10 am »
Ignore

Yup. THe GOP could afford to lose Ohio and still have a chance at winning the election with 20 EVs from California.
Logged

http://twitter.com/AndrewHarrisSC
Quote of the year:

Quote from: Workers' Friend
Quote from: MSUfan
Quote from: Workers' Friend
Oral sex is awesome anyway.
How would you even know?
I know how it is done. I masturbate already, so when I get a wife, her using her mouth to stroke my dick would be very similar to me using my hand.

Wake Forest "Basketball" 16-5 (6-3)
Erc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4352
Slovenia


Political Matrix
E: 5.81, S: 2.61


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 05, 2007, 02:36:47 am »
Ignore

Believe me, the Democrats will be spending money on this like mad and it'll go down in flames, thankfully.  (Of course, it gets them to spend money in CA, which is always a good thing, I suppose)

Especially if it's on the ballot in November, where it'll seem like even more of a Republican trick to get votes (compare a similar initiative in CO in 2004 which failed miserably).
Logged
Playing tracks 6 and 7 again and again
BRTD
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 48682
Viet Nam


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -7.48

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2007, 02:37:37 am »
Ignore

"Should California's 55 electoral college votes continue to all go to the winner? Should the system be changed so that California's Electoral College votes are divided among the candidates for president based on the percent of the popular vote each receives? Or, are you not sure?"

That's not what the ballot initiative is. And the wording is very notable. Of course many Democrats are going to say yes to this, does that mean they'll vote for it? No. I remember the Colorado initiative polled a lot better than it did.
Logged

Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4186
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: -7.13

P P

View Profile
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2007, 08:38:35 pm »
Ignore

If California Republicans want more EVs then San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, and San Diego counties should just break off to form their own state.  If such a state were to form it would be larger in population than Michigan and would likely have about 17 electoral votes.  I'd actually be very much in favor of such a move too because California is far to large anyways.
Logged

bullmoose88
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11843


Political Matrix
E: 1.55, S: -7.30


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2007, 10:13:04 pm »
Ignore

I supported the Colorado intiative, I supported the North Carolina plan, and I support this...and in every other state that may consider such a plan.
Logged

A Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative NE Republican with some Left-Libertarian/3rd Way Leanings. Simply, a Rockefeller Republican.

Quote
Hancock:  Traitors, Mr. Dickinson? To what? The British crown, or the British half-crown? Fortunately there are not enough men of property in America to dictate policy.

Dickinson: Perhaps not. But don't forget that most men without property would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich, than face the reality of being poor.
-1776
Angel of Death
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 992
View Profile
« Reply #12 on: December 06, 2007, 04:02:54 am »
Ignore

I wouldn't be that opposed to this if California wasn't one of the most gerrymandered states in the country.  In fact, I'd favor a nationwide district method if there were a sure fire way of creating fair congressional districts nationwide.

You mean like this?
Logged

WARNING: Selling oil in euros has been proven to be hazardous to one's health.
Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4186
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.19, S: -7.13

P P

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2007, 05:51:30 am »
Ignore

I wouldn't be that opposed to this if California wasn't one of the most gerrymandered states in the country.  In fact, I'd favor a nationwide district method if there were a sure fire way of creating fair congressional districts nationwide.

You mean like this?

I've seen similar (if not the same) thing proposed before and I am disinclined to put it in action.  In several states you end up with strange slivers such as this one in Ohio stretching from the western edge of Cincinnati up to Springfield:



Also, as the mapmakers themselves note, sometimes a state has a highly concentrated population near a central line which creates odd shaped districts.  The mapmakers use this crazy looking map of Colorado as an example:



Thus, I think that a mathematical method of creating the smallest possible district would be far superior to the splitline method.  The would create more compact districts and avoid the splitting problem in Colorado.  Also, I think that some man made boundaries should be considered important, such as voting precincts.  It seems ridiculous to me that people within the same voting precinct would be voting for two different members of congress.
Logged

Everett
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3627



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: December 06, 2007, 07:01:34 am »
Ignore

I might favour specifying a minimum ratio between the area and perimeter of each district using the isoperimetric inequality to combat gerrymandering. And even if that proves ineffective, there are so many other effective algorithms. Of course, as long as people want gerrymandering or are at least willing to turn a blind eye, it will keep happening. And it is a disgusting practice that, political implications aside, also happens to result in spectacularly ugly district shapes. I certainly don't care which party does this; gerrymandering should not be tolerated, period.
Logged

"People aren't people. They're just political positions."
- Lucas

It's a shame natural selection doesn't seem to apply to threads.
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Forums Directory