joebialek Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 The debate has started again as to whether the US Constitution should be amended in order to change the presidential election process. Some promote eliminating the Electoral College in favor of a direct popular vote for president while others believe the Electoral College should remain unchanged. Just as compromise solved the initial problems of the framers so it is that compromise can solve this problem. The solution is to change the electoral votes to electoral points and reward each candidate a percentage of points based on the percentage of popular votes received in each state. This would eliminate the "winner take all" system thus allowing for all the votes to count. A voter is more apt to believe their vote counted when a percentage of popular votes are taken into account rather than the "all or nothing" system currently in existence. Further, this new system would integrate the desire for a popular vote for president with the need for the individual states to determine who actually gets elected. As for political primaries the number of delegates awarded in each state should be determined by the percentage of votes won by each candidate. For 2016 multiplying the percentage of votes each candidate received {in each state} times the number of electoral votes {in each state} results in the following: Clinton 256.985 and Trump 253.482. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 Go suck Hillary's cock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 Democrats are reactionary morons that think like 1 week in advance, Remember when filibusters were out? Now they want the filibuster back because ofc now they're mot in power. So instead of just confronting the fact hillary lost because of her dirty shit, they want to change some rules or some shit and them it'll bite them right in the ass next election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 Democrats are reactionary morons that think like 1 week in advance, Remember when filibusters were out? Now they want the filibuster back because ofc now they're mot in power. So instead of just confronting the fact hillary lost because of her dirty shit, they want to change some rules or some shit and them it'll bite them right in the ass next election. Damn...You said something I agree with? A Christmas miracle. Though everybody is a reactionary moron not just Democrats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 It was the end of the world when both Trump and Obama won Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 I can see why the democrats want the electoral college done away with because twice now (recently) they have lost a presidential election having won the popular vote. Of course they would want to get rid of it, it doesn't benefit them. But it was put in place as part of the country being set up as a republic and not a true democracy by the founders. With the demographics today I look for the forseeable future any reasonably close election won by a republican they will win it by the electoral college and not the popular vote. Large heavily democratic states like California and New York run up the margins so large now it is bound to happen. While not happening often before it will be happening now more frequently. If the shoe were on the other foot it probably would be the republicans wanting to do away with the electoral college. It is a tough pill to swallow to win the popular vote and lose the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 Oh well dont like it? Go start your own country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbluhm86 Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-popular-vote-connecticut-20161223-story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 The day 3/4 of states agree to be nothing more than California's bitch will never come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 California and New York already deride us as "flyover country" but now they want us to bend the knee to them? Fat fucking chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbluhm86 Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 I think that the electoral college is overall not a bad idea, but it could use a bit of tweaking. As it stands, the number of electoral votes each state has is based off of that state's number of Representatives in the House (population), which allows for candidates to avoid campaigning in lower population states in favor of those with the most electoral votes. I think that we could keep the Electoral College, except that instead of basing the votes off of population, we could base it similarly to how the Senate is set up: Each state would get two electoral votes each, with Washington D.C. having one electoral vote, for a total of 101. The candidate with a simple majority of electoral votes would win, and the individual states could choose how they award their 2 electoral votes. With all states having the same number of votes, that would force candidates to actually go out and campaign in more states instead of just focusing on a few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 actually, I have to think about that. Offhand, I think it's a great idea - gets rid of the influence of the mega-populated giant cities like NY, Chicago, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbluhm86 Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 After further reading, I found that the Electoral College is based off of both the House and Senate numbers, but I did find another interesting idea from the Cato Institute: https://www.cato.org/policy-report/marchapril-2013/should-we-reform-electoral-college Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 It's great just how it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 It's great just how it is. I agree but I am very much against the democrat party and the electoral college has cost them two elections in the last 16 years. If the shoe were on the other foot and the republicans were winning the popular vote and losing in the electoral college it would be hard to resist not wanting to change it. Because it is almost impossible to do away with the electoral college some democrat states are trying to get around it by signing on to an electoral college compact to give the electors to the winner of the popular vote. The article I read talked about how this would benefit all the states ...I love it when they try to insult our intelligence...there is a reason only blue states have signed on to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 I guess it really depends on whose ox is being al gored. But beyond that apart from political allegiance it really doesn't seem right but New York Chicago and Los Angeles should run the entire country. Look at the tiny blue splotches on the map interspersed among the red. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 The day 3/4 of states agree to be nothing more than California's bitch will never come. His proposal (the same proposal many others on here have made) would weaken California... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted December 28, 2016 Report Share Posted December 28, 2016 I think it's a good idea. But you'll just get some combination of "Stupid liberal!" "We can't ever change the Constitution!" "You'll never get the votes!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted December 29, 2016 Report Share Posted December 29, 2016 "scary dark people". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted December 29, 2016 Report Share Posted December 29, 2016 I think it's a good idea. But you'll just get some combination of "Stupid liberal!" "We can't ever change the Constitution!" "You'll never get the votes!" Skeptics Realists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted December 29, 2016 Report Share Posted December 29, 2016 If it's a discussion of what should theoretically happen, and what would be the best case scenario. That discussion. Saying "well you won't get the votes" adds nothing. I get what you attempted to do, but this doesn't compare to the religion discussion. Here we're saying even if it can never happen, what would be best. Unless you want to preface your Bible discussion with "I know this could never happen, but..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted December 29, 2016 Report Share Posted December 29, 2016 So, Woody, if it were up to you would the election be a straight popular vote? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted December 29, 2016 Report Share Posted December 29, 2016 Whoever wins the electoral college loves the electoral college. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted December 30, 2016 Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 So, Woody, if it were up to you would the election be a straight popular vote? WSS No. As I've said in every past thread I think the electoral votes per state should be divided up based on the percentage of the popular vote in that state. If a state has 20 electoral votes, and you get 50% of the vote there, you get 10 electoral votes. This seems like the middle ground between what we have now and a pure popular vote from a statistical standpoint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted December 30, 2016 Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 No. As I've said in every past thread I think the electoral votes per state should be divided up based on the percentage of the popular vote in that state. If a state has 20 electoral votes, and you get 50% of the vote there, you get 10 electoral votes. This seems like the middle ground between what we have now and a pure popular vote from a statistical standpoint Electoral votes are distributed by population. So if they were equally portioned with no winner take all states the election would be primarily by population right? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 30, 2016 Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 Whoever wins the electoral college loves the electoral college. Yup https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/266038556504494082 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted December 30, 2016 Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 Electoral votes are distributed by population. So if they were equally portioned with no winner take all states the election would be primarily by population right? WSS Not entirely. Each state has a base value of votes from the Senate. That makes smaller states worth more than their percentage of the population. It would be more popular vote based than it is now, but not be entirely popular vote. There'd also be no "locks". A Rep could campaign in Cali and walk away with something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 30, 2016 Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 I have never once dissed the electoral college, win or lose. and two clinton and obamao terms were losses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted December 30, 2016 Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 So Woody, all you are doing is eliminating the winner-take-all system of the 48 states that employ it? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted December 30, 2016 Report Share Posted December 30, 2016 So Woody, all you are doing is eliminating the winner-take-all system of the 48 states that employ it? WSS Basically, ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.