What happens if Trump/Republicans keep winning while losing the PV?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:52:12 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)
  What happens if Trump/Republicans keep winning while losing the PV?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: What happens if Trump/Republicans keep winning while losing the PV?  (Read 13180 times)
Alabama_Indy10
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,319
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: June 18, 2017, 11:26:45 AM »

They will continue to win the presidency.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: June 18, 2017, 02:26:56 PM »
« Edited: September 11, 2017, 08:57:08 AM by muon2 »

An interesting twist on this came up during a luncheon in colonial Williamsburg last week. The program had some very well versed reenactors who field questions after their presentation. One question was whether the Constitution was flawed if it allowed a president to win without the support of the majority of the voters.

"George Washington" gave a lengthy answer. In short he argued that each branch of the government had a fundamentally different way to be selected. The legislature was selected popularly, either directly in the case of the House, or indirectly by the popularly elected members of the state legislatures. The judiciary was selected for life by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate to be as far removed from popular vote as possible. The executive was selected by the states through electors that could not be their elected representatives to Congress. He thought it important that the direct public not have sway over more than one branch so that checks on power be maintained.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,769
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: June 18, 2017, 03:26:50 PM »

This is the very reason why PR needs to become a state, so that this doesn't occur. Only way to happen is to make Pelosi Speaker and a divided Senate allows PR into statehood. 

Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,576
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: July 14, 2017, 03:47:26 AM »

I don't think that's a likely scenario. Trump may win the 2020 election - and if he does, with a popular vote shortfall again - but in 2024 the Democrats will have enough support to bounce back. Keep in mind that the Democrats so far have won greater victories in the electoral college in the past 30 years. After 1988, they had four victories, and even the "smallest" win in the electoral college, Obama's 332 in 2012, outnumber Donald Trump's 306; so far the biggest Republican win.
Logged
darklordoftech
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,388
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: July 30, 2017, 09:16:54 PM »

Democrats become very cynical.
Logged
varesurgent
Rookie
**
Posts: 46


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: September 08, 2017, 03:46:14 PM »

They will continue to win the presidency.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,802


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: September 08, 2017, 03:51:12 PM »

I don't see why people keep bringing up splitting up California. What would that achieve? It would impact the Senate, but have no impact on the presidency. Besides, Republicans could just split up Nebraska. It's pretty silly as a solution.

In my view, an undemocratic system is illegitimate. You can have a PV/outcome split once in a while, as in the UK and Australia, but when there are systemic factors affecting this and it is chronic, the system is no longer supported by popular sovereignty. The best thing states like California could do in situations like that is to simply declare independence.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: September 10, 2017, 11:04:20 AM »

Democrats would have to learn to live with it, you know, like it or lump it.

A constitutional amendment in this matter would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to achieve.

So good luck.

Yes, there's now way Republican legislatures touches this, provided it'll ever pass in Congress in the first place.
Logged
Holy Unifying Centrist
DTC
Atlas Politician
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,200


Political Matrix
E: 9.53, S: 10.54

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: September 10, 2017, 08:57:49 PM »

Republicans don't always benefit from the electoral college. While they did win the presidency because of it in 2000 and 2016, remember that in 2012, some polls were showing Obama could lose the popular vote, but losing the electoral vote was never really in the realm of possibilities. This was because Obama won a lot of swing states by a low margin, but lost by a big margin in many of the midwestern + Texas states.

I would prefer the electoral college system be changed to a proportional electoral college system (e.g if you get 50% of the voters vs your opponent's 49% of voters in California, you get the 2 votes from the senate, +50% of the remaining votes.)
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,622
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: September 13, 2017, 01:51:33 PM »

This is pretty possible, and the answer is it would work for a while until eventually the floodgates break open in a Queensland '89-style, large Democratic victory. At this point you would either see outright constitutional reform if the landslide is big enough, or, more likely, various fixes, such as breaking apart large Democratic states (especially California; 7.5 times the size of the median state, and 66 times the size of the smallest), and the drawing of new ones would not be covered by the VRA (and would only take bare majorities in the respective state legislature and Congress to enact) or shifting House elections to a national party-list system (states get to pick presidential election methods, but since Congress is the judge of its own elections, it de facto has the right to set standards, so it can mandate some form of NPV for the House).

Our last large-scale reform of the election process (the introduction of presidential primaries in the early 1970s) was done entirely not just extra-constitutionally but extra-legislatively. Once there is demand change of this type will come.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,677


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: September 18, 2017, 10:59:50 AM »

I don't see why people keep bringing up splitting up California. What would that achieve? It would impact the Senate, but have no impact on the presidency. Besides, Republicans could just split up Nebraska. It's pretty silly as a solution.


It would have an impact on the Presidency: CA currently has 55 EVs, 53 from House seats and 2 from Senators. A split CA would have 57 total EVs: 53 from House seats and 4 from Senators. This would also bring the total electoral college up from 538 to 540.
Logged
Kleine Scheiße
PeteHam
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,770
United States


Political Matrix
E: -9.16, S: -1.74

P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 03, 2017, 08:46:35 AM »

Democratic-controlled legislatures could start passing this thing.
Logged
Kringla Heimsins
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 346
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 04, 2017, 03:52:15 PM »

The Democrat's best bet is to win an election while losing the PV. The Republicans will collectively lose their sh!t and demand an immediate abolition of the EC.
Logged
MAINEiac4434
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,269
France


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 04, 2017, 09:33:53 PM »

The Democrat's best bet is to win an election while losing the PV. The Republicans will collectively lose their sh!t and demand an immediate abolition of the EC.
Too bad we're too popular for that...
Logged
Anzeigenhauptmeister
Hades
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,373
Israel


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 05, 2017, 12:15:26 AM »

I don't see why people keep bringing up splitting up California. What would that achieve? It would impact the Senate, but have no impact on the presidency. Besides, Republicans could just split up Nebraska. It's pretty silly as a solution.

In my view, an undemocratic system is illegitimate. You can have a PV/outcome split once in a while, as in the UK and Australia, but when there are systemic factors affecting this and it is chronic, the system is no longer supported by popular sovereignty. The best thing states like California could do in situations like that is to simply declare independence.


I don't care about splitting up California or New York. As long as states with one or two congressional districts have to join each other or bigger states. The two extra senatorial votes keep messing up the whole Electoral College..
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,457
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 05, 2017, 09:33:44 AM »

Well, there's nothing that can be done by Democrats alone. An abolition of the EC would require a constitutional amendment, as would any other possibility to fix this problem. Awarding 50 or 100 EVs for the national PV for example.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 06, 2017, 11:18:01 PM »

Well, there's nothing that can be done by Democrats alone. An abolition of the EC would require a constitutional amendment, as would any other possibility to fix this problem. Awarding 50 or 100 EVs for the national PV for example.

Are there enough states that could pass the NPVIC by referendum, even if the Dems can't pass it through the legislature?
Logged
MAINEiac4434
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,269
France


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 10, 2017, 03:56:37 PM »

You would see a very real and very strong secessionist movement begin.
Logged
SamTilden2020
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 407


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 10, 2017, 08:56:29 PM »

You would see a very real and very strong secessionist movement begin.

Which leads CA to secede, and Republicans win the PV again (without the mass CA Dem votes). Problem solves itself.
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 #44 on: October 19, 2017, 10:59:52 AM »

I don't see why people keep bringing up splitting up California. What would that achieve? It would impact the Senate, but have no impact on the presidency. Besides, Republicans could just split up Nebraska. It's pretty silly as a solution.


It would have an impact on the Presidency: CA currently has 55 EVs, 53 from House seats and 2 from Senators. A split CA would have 57 total EVs: 53 from House seats and 4 from Senators. This would also bring the total electoral college up from 538 to 540.

Yeah. If DC and PR were admitted and California split up into 5 states with almost equal population, and house seats were still apportioned at 435, then California would go from having 9.8% of the EV in 2020 to having 10.9%. If California split up into those 5 states but without DC and PR being admitted, then California would instead go to having 11.9% of the EVs (DC and PR would have 5 House votes, and by apportionment, those 5 states that used to be California would actually get all of the next 5 seats).
Logged
Starry Eyed Jagaloon
Blairite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 19, 2017, 07:18:11 PM »

You would see a very real and very strong secessionist movement begin.

Which leads CA to secede, and Republicans win the PV again (without the mass CA Dem votes). Problem solves itself.
I agree. CA's problems will solve themselves, and everyone else will be screwed. Though I don't support this, CA will be hurt way less than the other 49 states.
Logged
Nichlemn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,920


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 22, 2017, 07:33:13 PM »

Does anything significant happen if the Democrats win the House PV in 2018 by a *lot* (5+ points and over 50%), yet still fail to take the House?

Obviously, there'd be an initial burst of complaints that don't lead to anything. But does it produce significant effects on grassroots support for electoral reform?
 
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 22, 2017, 10:05:24 PM »

Does anything significant happen if the Democrats win the House PV in 2018 by a *lot* (5+ points and over 50%), yet still fail to take the House?

Obviously, there'd be an initial burst of complaints that don't lead to anything. But does it produce significant effects on grassroots support for electoral reform?

It may add fuel to gerrymandering reform efforts in states with ballot initiatives. Michigan, Missouri and Arkansas could see one, although I think Michigan is going to get one either way. Florida also needs redistricting commission amendments for the 2020 ballot, as the 2010 FD amendments require a state judiciary that will actually enforce them, and Rick Scott is already claiming he has the power to replace the 3 retiring Democratic state supreme court justices (re: he doesn't, which is why the GOP tried to pass an amendment allowing it, but failed).
Logged
Nichlemn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,920


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 22, 2017, 11:11:26 PM »

If it happened several times in a row, there is no doubt in my mind that the Dems would create several new states (requires only the majority consent of congress and of the relevant state legislature) when they finally got back in power after economic crash or an impeachment level scandal.  See also: Nebraska being admitted as a separate state from Kansas, Colorado being admitted while severely underpopulated and the splitting of the Dakotas.

I do wonder, are there any judicial limits that would prevent this being used indiscriminately? Like, could one party create 1,000 rotten borough "states" of 1 person each, who vote to guarantee one-party rule forever?

Obviously, it'd be seen widely as effectively a coup d'etat and protested against for the reason. But it there anything constitutionally prohibiting it?
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 0.056 seconds with 12 queries.