Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 17, 2018, 01:26:09 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: New features added! Click here for more information. Click here to configure new features.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Presidential Election Process (Moderator: muon2)
| | |-+  Electoral College reform proposal
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Electoral College reform proposal  (Read 2492 times)
MassTerp94
Rookie
*
Posts: 39


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 08, 2018, 08:59:26 am »

Obviously this couldn't be determined at the federal level as states control elections, but here's my idea for reforming the Electoral College:

Each state gives ONE electoral vote to the national popular vote winner. The remaining electoral votes are decided in the same way they are now. This would give the popular vote winner a 50 vote advantage, and one which would be difficult but not impossible for the other candidate to overcome.  It would encourage more competition in the smaller states as the disadvantaged candidate would need to rack up as many states as possible, both large and small. At the same time, it would require the candidate with the advantage to pay attention to these states as well so as to keep his/her advantage.

I cannot support total abolition of the EC as candidates would only pay attention to CA, NY, TX and IL.
Logged
FairBol
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,265
United States


View Profile WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2018, 09:04:30 am »

I couldn't support this.  Why "throw out the baby with the bath water"?

Oh, and in other news, CT has just joined the "National Popular Vote Compact".  The downward spiral continues, LOL.  

https://youtu.be/w7NeRiNefO0?t=21s
Logged

FairBol (F-FL)
South Governor


I'm not actually from Florida, I just represent it on TV. Smiley

"These are the times that try men's souls" -- Thomas Paine

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" -- Senator Barry Goldwater

"Thank God I don't actually do this for a living" -- Me
megameow
Megameow
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,015
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2018, 11:57:33 pm »

If you believe that all votes matter, all voters are equal, and our country's leadership should be elected by the people, a national popular vote is the only way. Any system that allows the possibility of a "loser" to win defeats the goal of a democracy, which is to elect those who best represent the people's wishes.
Logged

Pickup Paulite
Yellowhammer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 866
United States


P P
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 26, 2018, 04:47:52 pm »

If you believe that all votes matter, all voters are equal, and our country's leadership should be elected by the people, a national popular vote is the only way. Any system that allows the possibility of a "loser" to win defeats the goal of a democracy, which is to elect those who best represent the people's wishes.
America is not, nor ever has been, a democracy.
Logged



"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one."   
- Thomas Paine

“Nobody can discover the world for somebody else. Only when we discover it for ourselves does it become common ground and a common bond and we cease to be alone.”
- Wendell Berry
Lincoln Senator Lok
lok1999
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,135
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.45, S: -5.22

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 26, 2018, 05:46:24 pm »

If you believe that all votes matter, all voters are equal, and our country's leadership should be elected by the people, a national popular vote is the only way. Any system that allows the possibility of a "loser" to win defeats the goal of a democracy, which is to elect those who best represent the people's wishes.
America is not, nor ever has been, a democracy.
The US is a republic with a representative democracy
Logged

A Liberal LGBT in one of the most pro LGBT cities in the country.

JOIN THE DISCORD!!!
https://discord.gg/7kKvzqT

Cory Booker
olawakandi
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,618
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 26, 2018, 10:21:56 pm »

Instead of going to House in tie,  or a discrepancy between popular vote and EC vote, 2000 and 2016, have a runoff
Logged

P=KY ANDY BESHEAR=GOV;assembly overrode Bevin veto 4 Schools
P=LA JBL=GOV
T-MS Reaves=Gov
S=MS ESPY=SENATOR
Karpatsky
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 690
Ukraine


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 26, 2018, 11:01:59 pm »

If you believe that all votes matter, all voters are equal, and our country's leadership should be elected by the people, a national popular vote is the only way. Any system that allows the possibility of a "loser" to win defeats the goal of a democracy, which is to elect those who best represent the people's wishes.
America is not, nor ever has been, a democracy.

A representative democracy is still a democracy.

Besides, this objection is meaningless because the argument being made is normative, not positive. Saying 'the U.S. is a republic, not a democracy' in response is an attempt to shut down discussion, not engage with it in a meaningful way.

As for this proposal, it is only marginally better than the existing system, and if there was enough will to make such an amendment it would be better to actually implement a modern voting system on the whole.
Logged

Democrats, please save the US by saving your party:
House Speaker 2019: Marcy Kaptur
Senate Minority Leader 2019: Sherrod Brown
President of the USA 2020: Sherrod Brown Amy Klobuchar
-----
President of Ukraine 2019: Andriy Sadovyi
reagente
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 290
Portugal


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 27, 2018, 12:28:49 pm »

Obviously this couldn't be determined at the federal level as states control elections, but here's my idea for reforming the Electoral College:

Each state gives ONE electoral vote to the national popular vote winner. The remaining electoral votes are decided in the same way they are now. This would give the popular vote winner a 50 vote advantage, and one which would be difficult but not impossible for the other candidate to overcome.  It would encourage more competition in the smaller states as the disadvantaged candidate would need to rack up as many states as possible, both large and small. At the same time, it would require the candidate with the advantage to pay attention to these states as well so as to keep his/her advantage.

I cannot support total abolition of the EC as candidates would only pay attention to CA, NY, TX and IL.

Trump would still win under this system. 274 to 257.
Logged
Southern Speaker Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8,857
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 27, 2018, 06:19:34 pm »

The ideal reform probably is simply creating a pool of 100 EVs awarded to the PV winner, which is similar to this proposal.
Logged


Vote Lib Dem on May 7 - keep Clegg as deputy PM

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=244197.0
Different states!
MarkD
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,424
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 30, 2018, 05:49:14 pm »

If you believe that all votes matter, all voters are equal, and our country's leadership should be elected by the people, a national popular vote is the only way. Any system that allows the possibility of a "loser" to win defeats the goal of a democracy, which is to elect those who best represent the people's wishes.
America is not, nor ever has been, a democracy.

I often feel as though we're a judicial oligarchy instead of a republic or a representative democracy, with the Supreme Court behaving like a set of supreme dictators.
Logged

Rewrite the 14th Amendment!
States should have clear guidelines what laws they cannot pass, and the federal courts should have far less discretion in choosing what laws to strike down. Take away from the federal courts the power to define liberty and the power to define equality. Those are legislative powers and should be in the hands of legislators. Rewrite Section 1 of the 14th to make its meaning narrower and clearer.
Skill and Chance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,184
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 03, 2018, 03:06:58 pm »

If you believe that all votes matter, all voters are equal, and our country's leadership should be elected by the people, a national popular vote is the only way. Any system that allows the possibility of a "loser" to win defeats the goal of a democracy, which is to elect those who best represent the people's wishes.
America is not, nor ever has been, a democracy.

I often feel as though we're a judicial oligarchy instead of a republic or a representative democracy, with the Supreme Court behaving like a set of supreme dictators.

Do you think it would be an improvement if the norm was packing SCOTUS upon taking office whenever control of the federal government flipped?  On the one hand, it could make government more explicitly responsive to the will of the people.  On the other hand, it could lead to a near dictatorial presidency pretty quickly.
Logged
MarkD
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,424
United States


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2018, 08:18:23 pm »

If you believe that all votes matter, all voters are equal, and our country's leadership should be elected by the people, a national popular vote is the only way. Any system that allows the possibility of a "loser" to win defeats the goal of a democracy, which is to elect those who best represent the people's wishes.
America is not, nor ever has been, a democracy.

I often feel as though we're a judicial oligarchy instead of a republic or a representative democracy, with the Supreme Court behaving like a set of supreme dictators.

Do you think it would be an improvement if the norm was packing SCOTUS upon taking office whenever control of the federal government flipped?  On the one hand, it could make government more explicitly responsive to the will of the people.  On the other hand, it could lead to a near dictatorial presidency pretty quickly.

If the President packs the SCOTUS with ideologues, no, that would not be an improvement. If you're going to pack the SCOTUS, pack it with the most objective interpreters of law.
Logged

Rewrite the 14th Amendment!
States should have clear guidelines what laws they cannot pass, and the federal courts should have far less discretion in choosing what laws to strike down. Take away from the federal courts the power to define liberty and the power to define equality. Those are legislative powers and should be in the hands of legislators. Rewrite Section 1 of the 14th to make its meaning narrower and clearer.
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines