lapal_fan Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 Thanks all So do the electors not just kind of.. back the popular vote of that region? Say Maine (as the example was shown to me) has 500,000 voters and Trumps has the majority of those with say, 300,000 votes, does the electoral college not just, in a word, back those votes for Trump further? I'm kind of imagining it's like an Alderman type arrangement, where the least represented are represented, in a way. you'd have to say it's a shame(?) for those smaller populous regions not to have the same voice as the larger regions like Cali/NY - it would be a bit like the London problem we have in the UK. No system is perfect, I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 2 minutes ago, lapal_fan said: Thanks all So do the electors not just kind of.. back the popular vote of that region? Say Maine (as the example was shown to me) has 500,000 voters and Trumps has the majority of those with say, 300,000 votes, does the electoral college not just, in a word, back those votes for Trump further? I'm kind of imagining it's like an Alderman type arrangement, where the least represented are represented, in a way. you'd have to say it's a shame(?) for those smaller populous regions not to have the same voice as the larger regions like Cali/NY - it would be a bit like the London problem we have in the UK. No system is perfect, I know. Maine is a tricky example, because they have a very slightly different system. To take a random example of New York, for instance - the candidate who receives the most votes receives all of the 'electors'. It isn't decided proportionally, it's an all-or-nothing arrangement. In Maine and Nebraska, some electors are awarded to the winner of the statewide vote, and one elector is awarded to the winner of each congressional district (think UK constituency) within that state. This can mean that these states can return electors to both candidates. For example, in Nebraska this year, Trump will definitely win the statewide vote (2 electors), plus the vote in 2 congressional districts, NE-1 and NE-3 (2 electors), but Biden will probably (according to polling) win in NE-2 (1 elector). However, these are two small states so this potential splitting of the electors doesn't make much difference. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddywhack Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, lapal_fan said: Thanks all So do the electors not just kind of.. back the popular vote of that region? Say Maine (as the example was shown to me) has 500,000 voters and Trumps has the majority of those with say, 300,000 votes, does the electoral college not just, in a word, back those votes for Trump further? I'm kind of imagining it's like an Alderman type arrangement, where the least represented are represented, in a way. you'd have to say it's a shame(?) for those smaller populous regions not to have the same voice as the larger regions like Cali/NY - it would be a bit like the London problem we have in the UK. No system is perfect, I know. Well one is, but no one will listen to me. Just make the states the same size. Edited November 2, 2020 by Paddywhack 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 10 minutes ago, Paddywhack said: Well one is, but no one will listen to me. Just make the states the same size. And force an equal number of people in each one, with the same ethnicities in each one, like Wales have 1 chinese and 1 indian take away per village? Wait... do Wales have a perfect system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 54 minutes ago, Genie said: I just can’t call it. Trump might sneak it with the electoral college votes... but then also he might get annihilated because of the absolute trail of destruction he’s created this past 4 years. I've read that even if you factor the polling error from 2016 into the polls this time, Biden still wins. Also the polls are likely to be more accurate simply because so many votes have already been cast which reduces the amount of possible people they have polled who would change their mind at the last minute on polling day. It's hard to see how Trump can democratically hold on to the Presidency imo, it will involve him having to do something beyond what the constitution allows. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanBalaban Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 44 minutes ago, ml1dch said: But if you just do it on popular vote then it consolidates nearly all the power with the richer, more populous coastal states and erodes the rights and powers of the individual states. This is the classic defence of the EC, but I don’t buy it. It over-estimates the power of the presidency, imo, and is arguably a conceptual misunderstanding of federalism and American democracy. The office of president of the USA doesn’t represent any single state, quite the opposite, and state representation shouldn’t come into play in elections to said office. The illegitimacy of a non-popularly elected president is a far bigger threat to American democracy than urban/coastal dominance, which is entirely kept in check by the senate anyway. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 1 hour ago, ml1dch said: There isn't that much beef with it. The side which loses normally has an issue with it. I wouldn't go that far. Twice recently the candidate has lost the popular vote and won the EC. Both Republicans and both controversially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 10 minutes ago, Michelsen said: This is the classic defence of the EC, but I don’t buy it. It over-estimates the power of the presidency, imo, and is arguably a conceptual misunderstanding of federalism and American democracy. The office of president of the USA doesn’t represent any single state, quite the opposite, and state representation shouldn’t come into play in elections to said office. The illegitimacy of a non-popularly elected president is a far bigger threat to American democracy than urban/coastal dominance, which is entirely kept in check by the senate anyway. Sure, I don't particularly disagree. I should have maybe caveated with "those in favour of it argue that..." with my bothsidesism. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 The EC sounds like FPTP where popular vote doesn't matter if the state (constituency) is won? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 The EC is weighted by population size to a degree, hence why California and Texas are worth a lot more to win than Ohio. You could have a system where each state gets 1 vote towards deciding the president. The weighting on the EC has been thrown out of whack a bit because people keep moving out of the Midwestern farming states and over to the coasts where all the jobs are, yet the weighting hasn’t been adjusted to reflect that current trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 14 minutes ago, darrenm said: The EC sounds like FPTP where popular vote doesn't matter if the state (constituency) is won? Yes I think all but a couple of states do it like that. It's not divided up quite as equally as the UK election in which each constituency is roughly the same number of people though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 4 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said: Yes I think all but a couple of states do it like that. It's not divided up quite as equally as the UK election in which each constituency is roughly the same number of people though. Senate situation is just as bad with this one too. 4 people represent 60 million (Cal/Texas) and 18 represent 10 million (10 smallest states) and often these smaller states swing red giving Republicans way too much power (look at the SC nonsense recently) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 (edited) 20 minutes ago, LondonLax said: The EC is weighted by population size to a degree, hence why California and Texas are worth a lot more to win than Ohio. You could have a system where each state gets 1 vote towards deciding the president. The weighting on the EC has been thrown out of whack a bit because people keep moving out of the Midwestern farming states and over to the coasts where all the jobs are, yet the weighting hasn’t been adjusted to reflect that current trend. This is right. With regards to 'adjusting' it though, this is extremely complicated. Essentially the combination of two things limits the number of electors that California can have: Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution (link: https://constitutingamerica.org/april-15-2011-–-article-ii-section-1-clause-2-of-the-united-states-constitution-–-guest-essayist-tara-ross-author-enlightened-democracy-the-case-for-the-electoral-college/), which states 'Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress' - in other words, since California has 53 congressional districts plus 2 senators, 55 electors) The Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 fixed the size of the House at 435 members, which has disadvantaged large states There is a proposal called the 'Wyoming Rule' which would address this by fixing the size of congressional districts as a proportion of the smallest one, which is Wyoming's at-large congressional district. Implementing that would increase the size of the House to around 550 members. As it stands instead, though, California may actually lose a congressional seat in the next round of redistricting that follows the 2020 census, as its population has declined proportionally since 2010. Edited November 2, 2020 by HanoiVillan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 1 hour ago, lapal_fan said: Thanks all So do the electors not just kind of.. back the popular vote of that region? You could be a 'faithless elector' and vote against the winning party (which of course will also be your own party). Perfectly legal to do afaik although I'm sure the other consequences and the fact you're voting against your own party makes it a very rare occurrence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 2 hours ago, lapal_fan said: Thanks So why's the beef with it? Think of it as Possession vs Goals. Hillary dominated possession, whereas Trump scored more goals, hence winning the game. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 8 minutes ago, villakram said: Think of it as Possession vs Goals. Hillary dominated possession, whereas Trump scored more goals, hence winning the game. I like that analogy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 2, 2020 Moderator Share Posted November 2, 2020 8 minutes ago, villakram said: Think of it as Possession vs Goals. Hillary dominated possession, whereas Trump scored more goals, hence winning the game. Think of Trump as Sam Allardyce 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 2 minutes ago, bickster said: Think of Trump as Steve Bruce fixed that one for the benefit of the On Topic crowd 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 2, 2020 Moderator Share Posted November 2, 2020 2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: fixed that one for the benefit of the On Topic crowd Well I could have gone all Wing Co Charles Reep for the nerds but decided against it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts