EC vs. NPV - Page 4 - Talk About Marriage
Politics and Religion This is the place to discuss politics, morality, religion, and anything controversial.

User Tag List

 262Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #46 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 09:59 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,655
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
Extra incentive? Worth more? How are they worth more and not equally valued?
Have you not been reading on why this is a problem? I have stated it a few times.

California Population: 38.8 million
Wyoming Population: .5 million

California EV: 55
Wyoming EV: 3

California EV/Pop: 55/38,800,000= .00000142 (this is the value of Electoral College Votes each member of California has)
Wyoming EV/Pop: 3/500,000= .000006 (this is the value of Electoral College Votes each member of Wyoming has)

Wyoming's increased value of EV per person = .000006/.00000142= 4.23 (this number represents the number of times more valuable a vote in Wyoming is over California, or if you like percentages, 423% more)

The math doesn't lie. People might want to say it lies, or it doesn't matter or what have you. It's inherently unfair when Wyoming ALREADY has equal representation in the Senate. It's already on equal footing in half of one of the branches and has an ADVANTAGE in another branch. The founding fathers likely never thought that population would be so dramatically dispersed and did not account for it. It was a simple process back then, but it doesn't make sense now.

Why would you continue to just use Newtonian Physics after you ALREADY had Einstein and now have Quantum Mechanics?!?! I get that some people have a vested interest in classical mechanics, but that is selfish reasoning and not logical.

Herschel is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #47 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 10:09 AM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,703
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
Are you kidding me?

Rural communities, to begin with, receive tons of subsidies, mostly farming. Then you have road building and infrastructure. Rural electrification has cost the rest of us a lot, and now we're seeing the same with Internet and cable TV.

Cost of providing such services in rural areas are much higher due to lower densities. Yet we're subsidizing those.

Then you have the simple economics that urban and suburban counties produce a lot more of the wealth of the country.

In terms of taxes, same thing:

Study: Urban tax money subsidizes rural counties

Rural streets are already subsidized by urban residents - Boulder Daily Camera

https://www.google.com/amp/civileats...st-demand/amp/

The cynic in me would also point out the state subsidies going to greenfield plants paying $12-15 an hour with no health or other benefits in the middle of nowhere, lowering the bar, and taking established locations and higher wages down.
I don't agree with every federal law on the books, even those which financially benefit my locality.

Regardless, the bulk of concentrated population exists in the bicoastal very liberal states. That is where the candidates would concentrate their election efforts, and thus it is the population they would pander to once in office. Those areas are very left of center, and very different than most of the land mass of the country.

Under the EC, candidates must make some effort to appeal to a wide swath of the population, not just one demographic. Urban coastal liberal is one demographic.
Thor is offline  
post #48 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 10:13 AM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,703
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herschel View Post
It's inherently unfair when Wyoming ALREADY has equal representation in the Senate. It's already on equal footing in half of one of the branches and has an ADVANTAGE in another branch. The founding fathers likely never thought that population would be so dramatically dispersed and did not account for it. It was a simple process back then, but it doesn't make sense now.
So you do understand that the President is a co-equal branch of government, right? Thus the Senate has nothing to do with the President. If you agree that the Senate is acceptable because it provides some balance against the House of Representatives within Congress, why don't you see the EC as providing a very similar blend of balances within the Executive branch?

IOW, if it is good to have both a population proportional representation and an equal weight per state representation in the Congress, why is in not acceptable to have that within the Executive?
Thor is offline  
 
post #49 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 10:25 AM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,703
Re: EC vs. NPV

Here's a little thought experiment.

If you live in a rural area, imagine the urban and nearly-urban areas comprise 50% + 1 of your state's population. If you live in suburbia or an urban area, imagine the rural area comprises 50% + 1 of your state's population. Now imagine every seat in your state government is selected only by simple majority vote.

Do you feel your philosophies, needs, and goals would be respected and addressed?

Now let's twist that a bit. If you're a liberal, imagine 50% + 1 of your state population is far right religious conservative. If you're conservative, imagine 50% + 1 of your state population is far left progressive socialist.

Now do you feel your philosophies, needs, and goals would be respected and addressed?

The Founders absolutely did foresee political differences with the risk of tyranny of the majority. They set up an elegant system to provide balance. How can anyone say they didn't foresee the possibility of a person winning more popular vote yet losing the electoral college when the national popular vote has absolutely nothing to do with the rules of the game? They intended only for the winner of the majority of EC votes to become President. And they provided for the House of Representatives to decide the outcome if nobody reached that threshold. This implies more than two serious candidates splitting the EC, so by definition the eventual winner as decided by the House of Representatives would have much less than 50% of the national popular vote, and could in fact have been the candidate with the fewest popular votes by a large margin.
Thor is offline  
post #50 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 12:23 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,175
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Under the EC, candidates must make some effort to appeal to a wide swath of the population, not just one demographic. Urban coastal liberal is one demographic.
The wide swath (lol) is basically Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, and a couple more states in the November election and Iowa / New Hampshire etc in the primary.

And why not pamper the people who produce the wealth of the country vs pamper the moochers who live off subsidies and other government programs yet hate government.

If you can't see that there's no point in having elections to begin with.
john117 is online now  
post #51 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 12:27 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,175
Re: EC vs. NPV

The 50% + 1 example is irrelevant due to gerrymandering... Look at North Carolina...
john117 is online now  
post #52 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 01:10 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,997
Re: EC vs. NPV

@Herschel

Do you think California needs more Senators and Representatives in Congress? Do you understand the United States of America was never a democracy? Therefore, it was never meant that the popular vote should determine the election of the president. Do you understand how one party could consistently have the presidency sewn up? How would it be for you if that turned out to be Republicans? It could happen.

Several years back I was talking with someone and realized who my parents used to vote with/for. They were Democrat and always, as far as I know, voted Democrat. Guess what? The party back in the 40's, 50's and even to some extent the 60's and 70's was nothing like it is today.

When I looked at it, the republican party, among the two standard parties, was closest to what they believed previously. Since then, none of them is very close. The two major parties are pretty similar. Individual candidates are different.

One issue you might have with someone other than an avowed progressive(read socialist) being president is that in the past 8 years, the current president and the previous have increased their powers to circumvent Congress. While they don't have the power of a dictator, they do have more renewable limited powers than ever in the history of the United States of America. Notice how I type that.

I type it as the United States of America, not America. This is not a continent of countries working toward one goal. This is one country, a republic, trying to do things no other country has ever done before and we've been successful. We've been successful until we lost our way and decided we knew more than the rest of the world.

We are so arrogant, we think no one can harm us. We think we will always be safe and nothing can cause us to dissolve. Well, here we are arguing about this election. We do it because there are so many ideas out there. No one knows what this country is because those who taught you didn't want you to know. That way, they could teach you that it was something it never was. Now, you believe you are correct, when you are simply misguided.

"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #53 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 01:37 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,703
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
The 50% + 1 example is irrelevant due to gerrymandering... Look at North Carolina...
I guess the concept of a thought experiment eludes you.

Last edited by Thor; 12-25-2016 at 01:43 PM.
Thor is offline  
post #54 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 01:50 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,175
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
I guess the concept of a thought experiment eludes you.
No point running thought experiments if the premise is flawed.
john117 is online now  
post #55 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 02:13 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,703
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
No point running thought experiments if the premise is flawed.
How would there be gerrymandering if the entire state were one district? As per my challenge, every office in the state is decided by the entire popular vote, not by individual counties or districts. Whichever side gets 50%+1 votes wins every seat in the state level government.

Thor is offline  
post #56 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 02:30 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,175
Re: EC vs. NPV

The premise is flawed in that the president is a national office, not subject to the artificial borders of states (aka gerrymandering at the national level).

The state example does not scale to national level.
john117 is online now  
post #57 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 03:11 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,703
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
The premise is flawed in that the president is a national office, not subject to the artificial borders of states (aka gerrymandering at the national level).

The state example does not scale to national level.
Whatever, dude.
Thor is offline  
post #58 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 03:38 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,997
Re: EC vs. NPV

Thanks Obama for making such a wonderful deal....

Quote:
According to the Sunday report, Asghar Fakhrieh Kashan says that despite an initial $16.8 billion deal with Boeing to purchase 80 passenger planes, "Regarding the style of our order and its options, the purchase contract for 80 Boeing aircraft is worth about 50 percent of the amount."

Iran announced earlier this month that it had finalized the deal, which was made possible by last year's landmark nuclear agreement. It is the largest single contract with an U.S. company since the 1979 revolution and takeover of the U.S. Embassy.

News from The Associated Press

"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #59 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 05:28 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,175
Re: EC vs. NPV

The total order is split between Airbus and Boeing. I have no idea of the product mix. Maybe we should ticked off the Iranians to give the whole order to Airbus
john117 is online now  
post #60 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-25-2016, 05:47 PM
Member
 
VladDracul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 851
Re: EC vs. NPV

Here's my math. If somebody takes California, with about 12% of the US population, they get 20% of the electoral votes needed to win. Throw in NY and Pennsylvania and you've got 40%. Yet these three states are roughly 22% of the US population.

If you don't embody controversy, what you say will become just another part of the media driven culture of stifling thought and debate about issues.
VladDracul is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome