Skip to main content

View Diary: About that Gallup poll (373 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Popular Vote vs Electoral College (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blue denim, KJB Oregon
    So Romney is driving up big margins in Texas, Alabama, Oklahoma, Mississippi and other such presidentially irrelevant states
    This is why I personally support the Electoral College. Rabid states may be able to generate wide margins, but the EC limits the effect of regional voting patterns.

    The Democrats create jobs. The Republicans create recessions.

    by Tuba Les on Wed Oct 17, 2012 at 11:51:06 AM PDT

    •  So? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ncps

      Why shouldn't the biggest population centers have the most sway? They have the most people there. Why is my vote in IL worth less than someone's vote in OH? A nationalized election would probably not have this kind of divide, since votes across the country would suddenly count. Obama could campaign in TX and GA, for instance, and it'd be meaningful.

      It's president of the whole country, it should be a national race, not just a race for 10 or so swing states.

      •  Biggest Population centers (0+ / 0-)

        Under the EC the biggest population centers, CA, NY, IL, FL do have the most sway. Your vote in IL carries a very big prize to the winner. The only reason Ohio seems more important is because it is a narrow margin.

        If there was an incentive to run up the popular vote it opens the door for cheating. Also, in a close election, a nationwide recount would be a nightmare.

        The Democrats create jobs. The Republicans create recessions.

        by Tuba Les on Wed Oct 17, 2012 at 01:07:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  But in practice (0+ / 0-)

          population has no bearing on actual campaigning. When was the last time anybody bothered to campaign in NY or CA or TX? The partisan balance of states is what actually matters.

        •  No, it does not... (0+ / 0-)

          Yes, IL has the most electoral votes, but people in OH get more "bang for the EV buck" so to speak. Here are the numbers:

          IL has a population of 12,869,257 and 20 electoral votes. That means roughly every 643462.85 people are worth 1 Electoral vote.

          OH has a population of 11,544,951 and 18 electoral votes. That means roughly every 641386.17 people are worth 1 Electoral vote.

          It's pretty close, but you see that it takes LESS people to equal 1 electoral vote in OH than it does in IL.

          The issue is even starker in much higher population states. For instance,

          CA has a population of 37,691,912 and 55 electoral votes. That means roughly every 685307.49 people are worth 1 electoral vote.

          WY has a population of 568,158 and 3 electoral votes. That means roughly every 189386 people are worth 1 electoral vote!

          So, should 1 vote in Wyoming be worth more than 3.5 times as much as a vote in CA?

          •  You can keep WY (0+ / 0-)

            I will take CA and IL any day of the week. The 3 and 4 vote states are split fairly evenly. But the BIG prize is California. And it is being able to put over 50 votes in our column is a huge advantage. Going to a popular vote dilutes the power of the big states.

            Do I think the EC is perfect? No. It is the result of a compromise. But it is what we have. Changing it would create a whole different set of problems. But it is silly to argue about it now, since WE are not going to change it.

            The Democrats create jobs. The Republicans create recessions.

            by Tuba Les on Thu Oct 18, 2012 at 01:30:58 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site