Skip to main content

View Diary: What nobody is addressing about the Electoral Vote-rigging scheme (180 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yes (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pierre9045, orlbucfan

    I think the ideal situation would be to just take statewide voter percentages, and award EC's by that manner - might be some difficulty in figuring out how to do the rounding, but at least that would get rid of gerry-mandering concerns.

    Still, I think the forest is getting lost for the trees in this debate.  Winner-take-all is a BAD SYSTEM.  We should be happy to see it go.  People don't pay any attention to their local races - this would force the issue.  It would also bring light how terrible gerrymandering really is.  

    Sure, it's a Republican scheme that may result in short term gain for the R's.  But for how long?  After one election cycle when the news media constantly reports how a Democrat got a million more votes in a state, but way more EC voters went to the Republican, I'd guess it'd get cleaned up pretty quick.  

    •  The Dems already do something like this (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MPociask

      with their convention delegates:

      just take statewide voter percentages, and award EC's by that manner
      A candidate must reach a certain threshold (I think 15%) in order to qualify for any delegates from that state.  The fractional remainders are "rounded up" in favor of the canditate with more popular votes.

      The Repubs allow each state committee to decide; some do proportional, others winner-take-all.

      Under such a system the infamous 2000 election in Florida would have awarded the electoral votes 13 to Bush and 12 to Gore.  However, it still gives disproportionale power to the small states because of the 2 senators.

    •  A few points (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MPociask
      I think the ideal situation would be to just take statewide voter percentages, and award EC's by that manner - might be some difficulty in figuring out how to do the rounding, but at least that would get rid of gerry-mandering concerns.
      Essentially that should theoretically equal a popular vote.
      Still, I think the forest is getting lost for the trees in this debate.  Winner-take-all is a BAD SYSTEM.  We should be happy to see it go.  People don't pay any attention to their local races - this would force the issue.  It would also bring light how terrible gerrymandering really is.

      I'm not trying to say any one system is "better" than the other. For some states, one is clearly favorable than the other, and maybe a different system entirely is favorable. It depends on the states, their constituency, and the control of the state legislatures.

      Still, I think the forest is getting lost for the trees in this debate.  Winner-take-all is a BAD SYSTEM.  We should be happy to see it go.  People don't pay any attention to their local races - this would force the issue.  It would also bring light how terrible gerrymandering really is.

      I think another thing that the people forget when discussing Gerrymandering, is that we still only see a 60%-70% voter turnout overall. And that is just of registered voters. Imagine how many blue votes are lurking in those expansive red districts, if only they could be better mobilized.

      •  Lurking voters (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pierre9045

        I'd love to see research on lurking voters, because it seems like it may be a wash - there is less motivation to vote in both heavily blue and heavily red districts.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (141)
  • Community (70)
  • Civil Rights (26)
  • Elections (26)
  • Environment (26)
  • Media (25)
  • Culture (25)
  • Law (24)
  • Memorial Day (24)
  • Science (23)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (22)
  • Labor (21)
  • Economy (20)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Rescued (19)
  • Marriage Equality (18)
  • Climate Change (17)
  • Republicans (17)
  • Education (17)
  • Ireland (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site