EC supporters: Do you think any other place should have an "electoral college"?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:23:26 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Process (Moderator: muon2)
  EC supporters: Do you think any other place should have an "electoral college"?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: EC supporters: Do you think any other place should have an "electoral college"?  (Read 11310 times)
Nichlemn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,920


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 03, 2017, 03:22:30 AM »

Should France give electoral votes to each of its regions to elect its President? Should California give electoral votes to each of its counties to elect its Governor? If not, what makes the US federal government unique among all polities in the world that means an electoral college is optimal for it, but nowhere else?

(Basically, it's my view that there's an enormous status quo bias for why people justify the Electoral College. If it didn't exist, there would be absolutely zero push to change to it. I think the fact that every other election seems to work fine it without it is strong evidence that the US Presidency would be fine, too).
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2017, 03:43:44 AM »

I think states should have the right to do so, just like I think they should have the right to base their State Senates on counties as well.
Logged
Strudelcutie4427
Singletxguyforfun
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,375
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 03, 2017, 10:07:00 AM »

I think it would work well in other extremely polarized countries. Ukraine comes to mind
Logged
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,175


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2017, 10:52:10 AM »

I think states should have the right to do so, just like I think they should have the right to base their State Senates on counties as well.

The question was whether they should, not whether they have the right to.

I think it would work well in other extremely polarized countries. Ukraine comes to mind

How would this improve Ukrainian politics?
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 03, 2017, 04:09:14 PM »

It really would work in a country as geographically, demographically, politically, and culturally diverse and encompassing as our own. The Electoral College system is a uniquely American brand. I really can't see it being practiced anywhere else successfully in the world at this point.
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,137
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 03, 2017, 04:33:47 PM »

I think states should have the right to do so, just like I think they should have the right to base their State Senates on counties as well.

The question was whether they should, not whether they have the right to.

I think it would work well in other extremely polarized countries. Ukraine comes to mind

How would this improve Ukrainian politics?

It would be an absolute disaster in Ukraine, and make the existing East/West divide there even worse. If anything, what Ukraine needs is devolution and federalism.
Logged
BaldEagle1991
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,660
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 03, 2017, 10:59:53 PM »

An electoral college would help in the Philippines too. Duterte would've never been President today if something like an EC was set up there.
Logged
Slander and/or Libel
Figs
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,338


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 07, 2017, 12:55:22 PM »

It really would work in a country as geographically, demographically, politically, and culturally diverse and encompassing as our own. The Electoral College system is a uniquely American brand. I really can't see it being practiced anywhere else successfully in the world at this point.

Corrected.
Logged
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,175


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 07, 2017, 05:22:29 PM »

An electoral college would help in the Philippines too. Duterte would've never been President today if something like an EC was set up there.

Or just IRV....
Logged
CatoMinor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,007
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 07, 2017, 07:12:58 PM »

In nations with no or little history of federalism then an electoral college would make almost no sense, but in the U.S. with our ConFenderal system it makes sense. I could see it used in China if they ever shifted to a U.S. style system where the rural inland parts were somewhat over-represented in an E.C. to protect their voices from drowned out by the coastal cities and Beijing, like how states such as Wyoming are over represented with the bare minimum at the expense of California. I could also see it working in less centralized countries like Switzerland.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,709
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: March 07, 2017, 08:05:25 PM »

The 50 state governments and France (the two places mentioned by OP) are both examples of unitary governments, whereas an electoral college makes sense in a federal system.

In fact, very few democratic countries elect their chief executives directly.  The UK, Germany, Sweden, Japan, India all use parliamentary systems which, I would argue, is far more of an affront to democracy than the electoral college.
Logged
ApatheticAustrian
ApathicAustrian
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,603
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 07, 2017, 09:39:54 PM »

a system without up to 40% of "lost" votes and without creating majorities out of numeric minorities can never be less democratic.
Logged
Lachi
lok1999
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,347
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -1.06, S: -3.02

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 08, 2017, 03:25:50 AM »

The 50 state governments and France (the two places mentioned by OP) are both examples of unitary governments, whereas an electoral college makes sense in a federal system.

In fact, very few democratic countries elect their chief executives directly.  The UK, Germany, Sweden, Japan, India all use parliamentary systems which, I would argue, is far more of an affront to democracy than the electoral college.
Care to explain why you think that?
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,709
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: March 08, 2017, 10:53:20 AM »

The 50 state governments and France (the two places mentioned by OP) are both examples of unitary governments, whereas an electoral college makes sense in a federal system.

In fact, very few democratic countries elect their chief executives directly.  The UK, Germany, Sweden, Japan, India all use parliamentary systems which, I would argue, is far more of an affront to democracy than the electoral college.
Care to explain why you think that?

Voters do not directly vote for their chief executive.  They vote for an MP who then votes for a Prime Minister in parliament.  The electoral college is a more direct election process, and it at least allows voters to illustrate a preference for a split legislative/executive branch.

What is someone to do if they love their local MP but hate that party's leader/candidate for PM?  or vice-versa? 
Logged
Slander and/or Libel
Figs
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,338


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: March 08, 2017, 10:58:47 AM »

But this is a better argument for direct election, not an electoral college.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,709
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: March 08, 2017, 12:01:55 PM »

But this is a better argument for direct election, not an electoral college.

My point is that the United States is much like the rest of the world in that we do not directly elect a chief executive.  Its not like the electoral college makes our democracy suck compared to nations like the UK and Italy.
Logged
ApatheticAustrian
ApathicAustrian
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,603
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: March 08, 2017, 02:22:30 PM »

What is someone to do if they love their local MP but hate that party's leader/candidate for PM?  or vice-versa? 

the option of vote-splitting is possible in some countries...you can vote for your "direct" candidate and for another party nationally.
Logged
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: March 09, 2017, 01:56:04 AM »

I think other places with a lot of really diverse geography/a lot of space and strong urban/rural divides would benefit from it. Other than Canada and Brazil though, the rest aren't *really * functional democracies (China, Russia) at the moment, sooooo.
Logged
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,090
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: March 09, 2017, 02:15:33 AM »

Only if they have legally-sanctioned slavery and/or no urban centers.
Logged
BaldEagle1991
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,660
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: March 10, 2017, 11:43:30 PM »

The UK, Germany, Sweden, Japan, India all use parliamentary systems which, I would argue, is far more of an affront to democracy than the electoral college.


Well the winner of their elections usually wins the PV. So I wouldn't say it's not an affront to democracy.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: March 12, 2017, 03:48:39 PM »

The UK, Germany, Sweden, Japan, India all use parliamentary systems which, I would argue, is far more of an affront to democracy than the electoral college.


Well the winner of their elections usually wins the PV. So I wouldn't say it's not an affront to democracy.

     The winner of our elections usually wins the PV. Parliamentary systems select the chief executive in a way that is very similar to the Electoral College.
Logged
ApatheticAustrian
ApathicAustrian
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,603
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: March 12, 2017, 09:12:27 PM »

The winner of our elections usually wins the PV. Parliamentary systems select the chief executive in a way that is very similar to the Electoral College.

not at all.

1) johnson and stein didn't get any seats out of their millions of votes.

2) those non-seats also couldn't be transferred in the first place.

3) hillary won the a clear majority of those votes and wouldn't regularily need the non-existing other votes int he first place.

4) most of all, we are not killing anyone's vote just cause they are living in a federal state run by the opposite majority/living inside a city instead of a rural region.

over here, there is representation, the EC is a system which gives power only to the small minority living in tipping point states.

hillary would have won in a majority-vote system without the EC and in a represenative, parliamentary democracy - no contest.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: March 12, 2017, 09:40:02 PM »

The winner of our elections usually wins the PV. Parliamentary systems select the chief executive in a way that is very similar to the Electoral College.

not at all.

1) johnson and stein didn't get any seats out of their millions of votes.

2) those non-seats also couldn't be transferred in the first place.

3) hillary won the a clear majority of those votes and wouldn't regularily need the non-existing other votes int he first place.

4) most of all, we are not killing anyone's vote just cause they are living in a federal state run by the opposite majority/living inside a city instead of a rural region.

over here, there is representation, the EC is a system which gives power only to the small minority living in tipping point states.

hillary would have won in a majority-vote system without the EC and in a represenative, parliamentary democracy - no contest.

If the US was divided into UK style constituencies with FPTP, it's not at all clear that Hillary would have won in parliament. She would still have too many votes overconcentrated in urban seats.
Logged
ApatheticAustrian
ApathicAustrian
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,603
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: March 12, 2017, 09:44:46 PM »

If the US was divided into UK style constituencies with FPTP, it's not at all clear that Hillary would have won in parliament. She would still have too many votes overconcentrated in urban seats.

depends on gerrymandering and the construction of the system, but i think you are up to something there.

anyway, ofc i respect the EC since the US could have changed it anytime and came close to it a few decades ago...it's just frustrating if some people are calling it more..."democratic".
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: March 12, 2017, 10:20:41 PM »

If the US was divided into UK style constituencies with FPTP, it's not at all clear that Hillary would have won in parliament. She would still have too many votes overconcentrated in urban seats.

depends on gerrymandering and the construction of the system, but i think you are up to something there.

anyway, ofc i respect the EC since the US could have changed it anytime and came close to it a few decades ago...it's just frustrating if some people are calling it more..."democratic".

Trump won 230 CDs to 206 for Clinton (including DC). I might assume that all the CDs drawn by independent commissions and the courts are about what the UK commission might draw. That leaves the states subject to a partisan gerrymander. Some of the suburban Pub seats in those states went for Clinton anyway (eg. PA 6,7), so there's no need to un-gerrymander them. That leaves me looking at roughly 8 or 9 CDs that might have been drawn by a neutral body that would increase Hillary's count. That would still leave Trump with a parliamentary majority.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.06 seconds with 12 queries.