A good breakdown of the Electoral College

[jbluhm86]

 

[Westside Steve]

On the other hand it's the same deal in New York and California Massachusetts Etc. They already have and enormous Electro advantage.

I know some people would like to erase state lines altogether.

WSS

 

[jbluhm86]

8 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

On the other hand it's the same deal in New York and California Massachusetts Etc. They already have and enormous Electro advantage.

I know some people would like to erase state lines altogether.

WSS

 

Technically, Ohio has more electoral votes (18) than Massachusetts (11), but I understand the point you're making. I'm actually in favor of keeping an Electoral College, because it helps to equalize the power between the larger and smaller states. The EC isn't bad, in my opinion, it's just functionality obsolete in its l current form. 

As mentioned in the video above, the idea of a "winner take all system" is foolish because it disenfranchises large swaths of the American electorate. In California, for example, it's almost pointless for Republicans to vote because Democrat voters outnumber them to such a degree that pretty much every presidential election goes for the Democratic candidate in California; vice versa for Democrats in heavily red states. Plus, presidential candidates currently only have to campaign in maybe a dozen states, because those states carry the most electoral votes.

That is why I'm in favour of a proportional electoral college system, in which each state's electoral votes are divided up based upon the proportion of votes in each state. That way, even if a Democratic candidate still carries most of the electoral votes in states like California or New York, Republicans and third party candidates can still get electoral votes in those states, and it'll be a better representation of the American electorate. 

The idea I support is a modified proportional vote system, in which the candidate who wins the most votes in a given state is automatically awarded a guaranteed number of electors (2, for example; just like each state gets 2 US senators), and the rest of the votes are awarded among the top two or three candidates proportional to the amount of total votes they received in that state.

 

[Westside Steve]

I guess there are two ways of looking at it. Is it outdated because technology has come to the point we don't need the EC don't really need a republic for that matter everybody can vote from their smartphone I suppose. Or is it outdated because some in government particularly in political parties want to erase the entire concept of 50 independent states? To be honest the first time that pissed me off was under my boy Ronald Reagan when some states decided they wanted to stay at 18 years old for booze and the federal government strong armed them all into Goin 21.

WSS

[hoorta]

8 hours ago, jbluhm86 said:

Technically, Ohio has more electoral votes (18) than Massachusetts (11), but I understand the point you're making. I'm actually in favor of keeping an Electoral College, because it helps to equalize the power between the larger and smaller states. The EC isn't bad, in my opinion, it's just functionality obsolete in its l current form. 

As mentioned in the video above, the idea of a "winner take all system" is foolish because it disenfranchises large swaths of the American electorate. In California, for example, it's almost pointless for Republicans to vote because Democrat voters outnumber them to such a degree that pretty much every presidential election goes for the Democratic candidate in California; vice versa for Democrats in heavily red states. Plus, presidential candidates currently only have to campaign in maybe a dozen states, because those states carry the most electoral votes.

That is why I'm in favour of a proportional electoral college system, in which each state's electoral votes are divided up based upon the proportion of votes in each state. That way, even if a Democratic candidate still carries most of the electoral votes in states like California or New York, Republicans and third party candidates can still get electoral votes in those states, and it'll be a better representation of the American electorate. 

The idea I support is a modified proportional vote system, in which the candidate who wins the most votes in a given state is automatically awarded a guaranteed number of electors (2, for example; just like each state gets 2 US senators), and the rest of the votes are awarded among the top two or three candidates proportional to the amount of total votes they received in that state.

 

I do get what you're saying between California and New York- Biden is going to get spotted 84 electoral votes right off the bat.... 

[calfoxwc]

1 hour ago, hoorta said:

I do get what you're saying between California and New York- Biden is going to get spotted 84 electoral votes right off the bat.... 

charles manson could have been spotted 84 electoral votes right off the bat.

sad.