EC vs. NPV - Page 7 - 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 #91 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-28-2016, 05:33 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,370
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
You really don't...

There's not much to distinguish Kansas City from St. Louis from Indianapolis from Columbus. Likewise rural Kansas from rural Ohio. Yea, the weather is not the same and the cows look different... You get the idea.

I've lived in a few states and visited most others, and pretty much it's not quite the spread people think.

A few are unique - or used to be - but most are not too different.

There's something unique about every place, don't get me wrong, but I'm not moving to Idaho because of the weather or the terrain .
Thought we were talking public policy?

If you want to carry guns guns and have a strong social welfare net, you can move to Vermont. If you want to carry guns and pay as little as less in taxes, you can move to New Hampshire. If you think women should be allowed to go topless in public, any state in northern New England will do. If you're socially conservative, you can move to the deep south. If you want a robust tech sector and public transit to get you to work, you can move to greater Boston or greater NYC.

If we were to consolidate governance and increase the role of Uncle Sam, where on the political spectrum would that government be? Are you willing to compromise with the right wing for the sake of consolidation?


My wife texted asking me if I was sitting down, and I knew what was coming next.

New Dads group
ExiledBayStater is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-28-2016, 08:41 PM
Member
 
Kivlor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 2,897
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
It's not the EC per se but the winner take all aspect...
Kindly explain to me how it would somehow special or different, that we replace the "winner take all" electoral college with a winner take all National Popular Vote?

All such contests are inevitably winner take all. This is sophistry, and mere hand-waving.

Do you hear the people sing / Lost in the valley of the night?
It is the music of a people / Who are climbing to the light.
For the wretched of the earth / There is a flame that never dies.
Even the darkest night will end / And the sun will rise...
Kivlor is offline  
post #93 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-28-2016, 09:05 PM
Member
 
Kivlor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 2,897
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
You really don't...

There's not much to distinguish Kansas City from St. Louis from Indianapolis from Columbus. Likewise rural Kansas from rural Ohio. Yea, the weather is not the same and the cows look different... You get the idea.

I've lived in a few states and visited most others, and pretty much it's not quite the spread people think.

A few are unique - or used to be - but most are not too different.

There's something unique about every place, don't get me wrong, but I'm not moving to Idaho because of the weather or the terrain .
I find it interesting that you pick solely from Mid-western states. Hard to make your claim when you try to compare LA to KC or San Francisco to Indi.

There are many similarities between all of the states. Each is a Republic, for example. But it would be disingenuous to claim that these similarities--such as all being Republics--make them indistinguishable from each other. Whether you like to admit it or not, the laws and attitudes of Kansas and Missouri are not all that akin to their Californian brethren. Nor are those of Nebraska much like Washington. Nor is New York all that much like Tennessee. In fact, often, when you take people from one of these places, and drop them into another, you find that they are quite astonished at how different things are.

Take Missouri--since you named 2 cities from there--as an example. Statewide it is legal to carry both long-arms and handguns, concealed or open, without government permits; there is no gun registry required, there are no magazine size limits, etc. Now, let's compare with California, where it is illegal to have a magazine capacity of over 10 rounds, background checks are required to purchase ammunition, any gun requires a government permit, guns must be registered, .50 caliber weapons are illegal to sell, open carry is illegal in any incorporated area, it is unlawful to sell or transfer your own firearms unless you are a licensed dealer. It is also illegal for a person who has ever been a mental patient or committed for mental observation in the past (ie depression) to own a gun.

Now, this isn't to debate the merits of gun legislation, but to display but one obvious (and high-profile/controversial) example of an uncountable list of drastic differences in the laws and culture of these states.

Do you hear the people sing / Lost in the valley of the night?
It is the music of a people / Who are climbing to the light.
For the wretched of the earth / There is a flame that never dies.
Even the darkest night will end / And the sun will rise...
Kivlor is offline  
 
post #94 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-28-2016, 09:56 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,418
Re: EC vs. NPV

I was talking environment, not policy. My misunderstandingz...

I still think it's silly to have different laws and regulations for different states. Or, for states to play off said laws to attract or repel people.

Even sillier for an act that's legal in one state but illegal in another.

And even more sillier to play states against each other financially. Heck, why not move to Camas, WA (no income tax) shop everything across the Willamette in Oregon (no sales tax) then complain college is expensive.

I understand we're the United States, but more often than not it feels like the Disjointed States... And the larger the disconnect the more the polarization grows...
john117 is online now  
post #95 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-28-2016, 10:10 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,418
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kivlor View Post
Kindly explain to me how it would somehow special or different, that we replace the "winner take all" electoral college with a winner take all National Popular Vote?

All such contests are inevitably winner take all. This is sophistry, and mere hand-waving.
An election, by definition, is winner take all since we're not a Parliament based form of government. But antiquated schemes like the EC make it much harder to determine exactly who won what...

Just to be fair, my own birth country is a Parliamentary democracy (lolz) and we've never, to the best of my knowledge, ran one person one vote either. There's crazy math involved in deciding how many MPs (members of parliament) are to be in each state, how they're selected via elections, and how coalition governments may be formed. Except we, the people, know the system is screwed and don't waste time defending it. The system changes every few years too, since it is law, not Constitution based.

Granted, IMHO, the EC is fairly mild in terms of misrepresentation of public vote compared to our stuff, but it's just as much a misrepresentation as our system de jour
john117 is online now  
post #96 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 07:27 AM
Member
 
Kivlor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 2,897
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
I was talking environment, not policy. My misunderstandingz...

I still think it's silly to have different laws and regulations for different states. Or, for states to play off said laws to attract or repel people.

Even sillier for an act that's legal in one state but illegal in another.

And even more sillier to play states against each other financially. Heck, why not move to Camas, WA (no income tax) shop everything across the Willamette in Oregon (no sales tax) then complain college is expensive.

I understand we're the United States, but more often than not it feels like the Disjointed States... And the larger the disconnect the more the polarization grows...
Should we do away with municipalities, and forbid them from having individual laws from one incorporated area to the next?

Do you hear the people sing / Lost in the valley of the night?
It is the music of a people / Who are climbing to the light.
For the wretched of the earth / There is a flame that never dies.
Even the darkest night will end / And the sun will rise...
Kivlor is offline  
post #97 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 08:13 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,418
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kivlor View Post
Should we do away with municipalities, and forbid them from having individual laws from one incorporated area to the next?
No, but...

The system is abused as it is both from residents and government entities.

You want to talk gerrymandering? Ann Arbor MI is a classic example where tentacles sprawl, annexations happen, people live in magic spots which give them coveted schools but no taxes..

Look at any city's map and count the tentacles. Then think how property taxes are collected and disbursed.

I have a friend living in Dublin OH. Classy wealthy suburb. My friend posts pics of the same street which goes thru Dublin and the next city after a snow fall. Dublin is snow free, the other city... Ice rink.

Same here. Too many layers, duplication... Multiple police entities. Highway departments. Etc etc.

The average American pays a ton more in property, sales, and local taxes than they do federal taxes and do they ever complain? Nope.

Difference in law's not a major issue, as municipalities generally have civic ordinances, not criminal laws, to worry about.
john117 is online now  
post #98 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 09:41 AM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,779
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
An election, by definition, is winner take all since we're not a Parliament based form of government. But antiquated schemes like the EC make it much harder to determine exactly who won what...
Really? You can't understand the rules of the election where whomever gets 270 EC votes wins the Presidency? The national popular vote totals are completely irrelevant.

People only have a hard time determining who won because they don't understand the rules or they wish the rules were different.
Thor is online now  
post #99 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 10:06 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,418
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Really? You can't understand the rules of the election where whomever gets 270 EC votes wins the Presidency? The national popular vote totals are completely irrelevant.

People only have a hard time determining who won because they don't understand the rules or they wish the rules were different.
You seem to have misunderstood what I wrote. ANY presidential election in the USA is winner takes all, regardless of EC. There's a winner and a non winner.

This is in contrast with Parliament based governments where MPs are selected by the people and, depending on outcomes, can form coalition government. So in a Parliament type country you get 40% and the two other guys get 25 and 35 and you think jolly I won, unless they form a coalition. Even that is essentially one person one vote and NPV.

The screwy part with EC and with Parliamentary systems is how electors or MPs are chosen. And, from my decades of voting, neither system passes my smell test for the exact reason.

To keep the EC, I would love to see proportional representation for electors based on state popular vote, state wide. Not by gerrymandered congressional district. And, appointment of electors, again, by state population, not the current.

In my birth country we know the system we use is not representative of the will of the people. The 40% vs 35% margin often results in staggering difference in MP numbers, largely due to EC style machinations. But we know it's rigged, because the party that wins blatantly changes the system via elections law rewriting to ensure their continued success.

In the USA, it's written in the Constitution of course, but it's no surprise that one party, the one that has benefited twice in sixteen years from the EC supports it the most.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/198917/am...s-sharply.aspx
john117 is online now  
post #100 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 10:14 AM
Member
 
Chaparral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 11,503
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
Reeeeeeeeeeeeally? Any worse than the 3M Californians?
I'm curious as to why you think they were Californians. From what I have read they do not have to show ID to get a drivers license and are automatically registered to vote. Looks like anyone in the world can vote in California.

Chaparral is offline  
post #101 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 11:01 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,418
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaparral View Post
I'm curious as to why you think they were Californians. From what I have read they do not have to show ID to get a drivers license and are automatically registered to vote. Looks like anyone in the world can vote in California.
Epic lolz. Plenty of other state's require no ID, a few swing states included. Are the mirage voters all in one place?
john117 is online now  
post #102 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 11:28 AM
Member
 
Chaparral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 11,503
Re: EC vs. NPV

How come the gerrymandering thingy was great when the Democrats used it for decades and now since voters have rejected them at every level it's such a bad thing?
Chaparral is offline  
post #103 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 11:45 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,418
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaparral View Post
How come the gerrymandering thingy was great when the Democrats used it for decades and now since voters have rejected them at every level it's such a bad thing?
Decades?

http://election.princeton.edu/2012/1...es-do-it-myth/
john117 is online now  
post #104 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 01:29 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,779
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
You seem to have misunderstood what I wrote. ANY presidential election in the USA is winner takes all, regardless of EC. There's a winner and a non winner.

This is in contrast with Parliament based governments where MPs are selected by the people and, depending on outcomes, can form coalition government. So in a Parliament type country you get 40% and the two other guys get 25 and 35 and you think jolly I won, unless they form a coalition. Even that is essentially one person one vote and NPV.
Well you must have meant something very different than I understood when you wrote "But antiquated schemes like the EC make it much harder to determine exactly who won what..."

I assumed you meant that it is difficult to understand who won a Presidential election under the EC, perhaps when one candidate won more popular votes yet fewer EC votes. I assumed you meant there is confusion about who actually won under such a situation. My response was that, no, there is no ambiguity whatsoever, because the rules are clearly that the person who get at least 270 EC votes is the winner. Popular vote is nowhere in the rules, thus there is nothing to be confused about if one pays attention to what counts and what doesn't.


Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
The screwy part with EC and with Parliamentary systems is how electors or MPs are chosen. And, from my decades of voting, neither system passes my smell test for the exact reason.

To keep the EC, I would love to see proportional representation for electors based on state popular vote, state wide. Not by gerrymandered congressional district. And, appointment of electors, again, by state population, not the current.

Where specifically is there gerrymandering in the EC system? Electors are chosen under the rules established by each state, and the Electors are directed by law how to vote. Currently it is almost universally a winner-take-all for the Electors, so they are required to vote how the majority of their state's voters did.

While you would love to see proportional EC voting, what you are loving is a watering down of the balances built into the system. You've ignored my question before so I'll ask it again. Do you oppose the way Congress is constructed (as well as all the State level legislatures) where there is a balance between population (House of Reps) and States (Senate)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
In my birth country we know the system we use is not representative of the will of the people. The 40% vs 35% margin often results in staggering difference in MP numbers, largely due to EC style machinations. But we know it's rigged, because the party that wins blatantly changes the system via elections law rewriting to ensure their continued success.

In the USA, it's written in the Constitution of course, but it's no surprise that one party, the one that has benefited twice in sixteen years from the EC supports it the most.

That's really some twisted logic to say that one party has benefited by the EC.

Tell me exactly precisely and with what level of confidence we can conclude that absent the EC or with a purely proportional EC Hillary would have won the 2016 election. Explain to me your logic that the candidates would not have campaigned any differently than they did, and how voters would have shown up or stayed home exactly the same. Would Trump supporters in California, Oregon, Hawaii, NY, NJ, CT, and DC have stayed home under a NPV the way they did with the EC? Would Dems in Idaho have stayed home under NPV?

You are claiming that the NPV in previous Presidential elections was un-influenced by the EC system. Which is complete hogwash.

Last edited by Thor; 12-29-2016 at 01:34 PM.
Thor is online now  
post #105 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 04:09 PM
Member
 
VladDracul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 909
Re: EC vs. NPV

"or with a purely proportional EC Hillary would have won the 2016 election."

Interesting. I wonder if somebody did the comps. It would be easy on an Excel spread sheep to allocate the EC votes based on the states popular vote. I would do it but one, I'm too sorry and lazy and two, my man won. Oh wait, let me be PC and say the standard "I didn't vote for him but glad Hillery didn't win". What the hell! I voted for him, would do it again, and tried to talk everybody I could into voting for him.
Besides the EC ain't the reason Hillery lost. It was the Russian's fault (or was it big Jim Comey).

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 online now  
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