EC vs. NPV - Page 8 - 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 #106 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 04:56 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,997
Re: EC vs. NPV

Isn't the EC sworn to vote the way their district votes? It basically just combines the results from a number of voters who choose their candidate, into one vote.

I don't think it matters how we pick them, as long as they vote according to what they have sworn. Actually, those EC members who changed their vote, even though legal, should probably be replaced. They cannot be trusted by all voters of whatever party they are backing.


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

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #107 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 05:20 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,370
Re: EC vs. NPV

Given who the two candidates were, I actually think more of the EC members who did betray their parties.

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

New Dads group
ExiledBayStater is offline  
post #108 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 05:29 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,997
Re: EC vs. NPV

It's not an opinion poll, though. That's the issue I have. They can cast their own vote for the candidate they favor and probably campaign for whichever candidate they like. In the end, the only reason to vote as an EC member, in a manner other than with the majority of the voters in the district, is if there was evidence of something illegal.

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

"And this, too, shall pass away."

Last edited by 2ntnuf; 12-29-2016 at 05:32 PM. Reason: Clarity
2ntnuf is offline  
 
post #109 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 07:29 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,698
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by VladDracul View Post
"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 the EC were purely proportional, the candidates would have campaigned differently. They would not have been facing a winner-take-all for states such as PA and FL which were contested and had a lot of EC votes. Why campaign for a very few additional votes in those states rather than go spend time and money where they could get more votes somewhere else? And the voters would have behaved differently, too. Voters in CA and NJ for example had very different motivations for going to the polls than voters in FL and OH did this year. But if the EC were proportional, CA and NJ voters may have turned out in very different ways than they did.

All of these different ways of slicing and re-calculating the 2016 election are meaningless other than as time wasters. The candidates, the voters, and the political machines behave the way they do due to the rules. Change the rules and you drastically change the behavior.

Having said all that, the county level data consistently shows the vast majority of the land area of the USA votes R in Presidential elections, while the coastal urban areas vote D. There is indeed a big divide.
Thor is online now  
post #110 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 07:36 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,698
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
Isn't the EC sworn to vote the way their district votes? It basically just combines the results from a number of voters who choose their candidate, into one vote.
Almost every state has a winner-take-all EC voting block. If a state has 6 EC votes, all 6 are mandated by the state law to vote for the candidate who got the most total votes within that state. The states don't break it down any more granularly than that.

Nebraska and Maine are the only states which split their EC votes. They assign 2 votes to the overall state wide winner, and then one vote to the winner of each congressional district within the state (2 for Maine, 3 for Nebraska) for a total of 4 EC votes for Maine and 5 EC votes for Nebraska.

The EC members are required by their state laws to vote the way they are pledged but the penalties for violation is minor.
Thor is online now  
post #111 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 08:44 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,162
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
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.
The whole idea of gerrymandering is to "divide and conquer" in an effort to marginalize groups of voters. The EC divides states into solid R, solid D, or swing. Solids are largely cast by the wayside, especially if they're the minority. Mission Accomplished.

Quote:
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)?
At the federal level, while I can see the rationale behind this "balance", I'm not sure it has any effect in terms of "balance"... It's simply two bodies that use each other to score bonus points. The House passes some crazy rah rah law like "extra 10% income tax for redheads" and the Senate brings "sanity". Lolz galore. Why not have three? House, Middle, and Senate? Do I hear four?

Given the abysmal ratings out federal representatives earn year after year, I would say, whoa, it ain't working folks... But it's cast in stone so...

Quote:
That's really some twisted logic to say that one party has benefited by the EC.
Given the distribution of democratic votes, it's not twisted logic by any means. Small states are automatically GOP, large states don't matter after a certain point... This leaves a handful of states to decide for everyone... Hello Gerry...

Quote:
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?
That's a pie in the sky question. A pure NPV system would have forced policies to be put on the platform that benefit more people. This would change the way candidates campaign MUCH more. Possibly in ways we can't even imagine. In my birth country there are no swing states... And campaign intensity is relatively uniform across the country.

Quote:
You are claiming that the NPV in previous Presidential elections was un-influenced by the EC system. Which is complete hogwash.
I have no idea what this means. If it means that because of the EC, people stay home, sure, they do. To what extent it influenced elections we don't know. Bob the Democrat stays home in Kentucky much like Jill the GOP fan stays home in Boston. How many Bob's and Jill's? No idea. But we do know that our turnout percent is pitifully low, which may or may not influence the outcome.

In my birth country we're generally required to vote, incidentally. Not a bad thing. And we do have a voter ID card. Again not a bad thing.

The EC was useful 200 years ago. Today, I'm not quite sure. Any election system can be - and generally is - gamed.
john117 is offline  
post #112 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 11:11 PM
Member
 
VladDracul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 847
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
The whole idea of gerrymandering is to "divide and conquer" in an effort to marginalize groups of voters. The EC divides states into solid R, solid D, or swing. Solids are largely cast by the wayside, especially if they're the minority. Mission Accomplished.
Ironically, there have been and are several court cases where gerrymandering to concentrate minority votes, ( the Voting Rights Act allows for consideration of race) are challenged because such efforts to concentrate the minorities weakened the minority vote outside the district. Of course the Supreme Court considers gerrymandering for race improper. At any rate, I could warm up to the popular vote concept if there was reasonable assurance people couldn't vote illegally (or illegals couldn't vote (estimates range from 3 to 3 million))

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  
post #113 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-29-2016, 11:35 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,162
Re: EC vs. NPV

Interesting that the 3M votes in California have no. Impact on the outcome, but a fraction of that could have caused illegal​ immigrantl plentiful states like Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, etc to go Democrat...
john117 is offline  
post #114 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-30-2016, 03:21 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,997
Re: EC vs. NPV

She won California and 55 EC votes. That's impressive and more than any other state. Campaigning properly and winning voters in other states, would have elected her. It's odd that the rules are well known by the candidates and their college grad brilliant help, but for some reason they can't figure out how to win.

It ain't the electoral college's fault. It isn't the Russians fault. It isn't even Trump's fault she lost.

She lost it all on her own. It was her reputation that lost the election. Nothing was a surprise with the election process.

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

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #115 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-30-2016, 07:31 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,162
Re: EC vs. NPV

I agree 100%. She lost because she ran a coronation campaign, not an election. Like she did - and lost - in 2008.

It's for THAT reason she should not be elected, not any other.

That doesn't poo-poo my argument against the EC, however.

Want to make it more fair? Have a national primary day... Enough with the Iowa and New Hampshire krap.

john117 is offline  
post #116 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-30-2016, 08:16 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,370
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
Want to make it more fair? Have a national primary day... Enough with the Iowa and New Hampshire krap.
This, I'm fine with. We are so ridiculously disinterested in our state primary elections I don't see why anybody would think we should be highlighted nationally. Coming from Massachusetts, the one thing I really haven't gotten used to is all of the uncontested primaries. Even when there is a contest, half the time nobody pays attention.

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

New Dads group
ExiledBayStater is offline  
post #117 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-31-2016, 06:47 AM
Member
 
Joey2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 327
Re: EC vs. NPV

So tell me this: even if you agree with the idea of electoral votes rather than a strict majority rule, why do we need electors? Why don't we just say that each state has x number of votes, divided up however the state legislature says? Why do we need actual electors to cast those votes? Aren't they just useless middle men who don't really add anything to the process (except for the remote possibility that they might not vote the way they are obligated to by law)?

Passive aggressive and emotionally unavailable (whatever that means)
Joey2k is offline  
post #118 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-31-2016, 06:57 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,162
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey2k View Post
So tell me this: even if you agree with the idea of electoral votes rather than a strict majority rule, why do we need electors? Why don't we just say that each state has x number of votes, divided up however the state legislature says? Why do we need actual electors to cast those votes? Aren't they just useless middle men who don't really add anything to the process (except for the remote possibility that they might not vote the way they are obligated to by law)?
At the micro level, the above is ripe for gerrymandering abuse by low level party operatives.

At the macro level, if winner takes all remains, it's no better than the current system. And still leaves the state level gerrymandering alive and well.

As long as a vote in Wyoming counts far more than a vote in California the system is screwed.
john117 is offline  
post #119 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-31-2016, 07:49 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,370
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey2k View Post
Aren't they just useless middle men who don't really add anything to the process (except for the remote possibility that they might not vote the way they are obligated to by law)?
Middle men, yes. Not sure about useless. Who else would be responsible for recording the electoral votes of each state? How would that be tallied?

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

New Dads group
ExiledBayStater is offline  
post #120 of 331 (permalink) Old 12-31-2016, 07:52 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,370
Re: EC vs. NPV

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
At the micro level, the above is ripe for gerrymandering abuse by low level party operatives.

At the macro level, if winner takes all remains, it's no better than the current system. And still leaves the state level gerrymandering alive and well.

As long as a vote in Wyoming counts far more than a vote in California the system is screwed.
What would happen to the way of life in Wyoming if NPV is put in place? All the people there want is to be left alone.

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
 
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