ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 19th May 2019, 04:15 AM   #201
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 3157'S 11557'E
Posts: 14,447
Only Democrat states have signed up to the initiative so far and as soon as California has to give all of its EV's to the Republicans despite having voted Democrat I suspect that the initiative will fall apart.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 10:39 AM   #202
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,955
Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
National Popular Vote -- the homepage of that initiative. If enough states pass it, they will give their electoral votes to the popular-vote winner.


It has currently passed in 14 states and DC with a total of 189 EV's: CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, NJ, NM, NY, RI, VT, WA.


That means 81 EV's to pass the threshold of 270 EV's.


It is currently being considered in ME, MN, NV, and OR, with a total of 4+10+6+7 = 27 EV's. Passage in all four states would mean 54 EV's to go.

Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Only Democrat states have signed up to the initiative so far and as soon as California has to give all of its EV's to the Republicans despite having voted Democrat I suspect that the initiative will fall apart.
Why would California Democrats begrudge losing their EV given that they lost the national popular vote? This wouldn't strike me as remotely unfair, especially compared to the results of 2000 & 2016.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/

Last edited by d4m10n; 21st May 2019 at 10:41 AM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 11:06 AM   #203
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 16,525
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Why would California Democrats begrudge losing their EV given that they lost the national popular vote? This wouldn't strike me as remotely unfair, especially compared to the results of 2000 & 2016.
Suppose the Democrat would have won the electoral college, but lost the popular vote. Do you still thing California Democrats would be happy as clams? I'm guessing they would be trying to undo their passage of the National Popular Vote compact as rapidly as possible.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 11:16 AM   #204
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,955
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Suppose the Democrat would have won the electoral college, but lost the popular vote.
When was the last time the EC flipped the popular vote in the favor of Democrats? 1800?

Quote:
Do you still thing California Democrats would be happy as clams?
They should at least recognize that it's not fundamentally unfair, given all the individual votes were weighted equally.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 11:28 AM   #205
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,680
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
When was the last time the EC flipped the popular vote in the favor of Democrats? 1800?
1888, Benjamin Harrison. Of course the Dems were still very much the party of the south then. And he only lost by about 8 tenths of a percent.

ETA: nope nevermind, I got that one backwards. He was the Republican. Its never happened.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 21st May 2019 at 11:31 AM.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 11:31 AM   #206
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 16,525
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
When was the last time the EC flipped the popular vote in the favor of Democrats? 1800?
It could have happened quite easily in 2004. Bush won the national popular vote by over 3 million, but if Kerry had flipped just 60,000 Bush voters in Ohio, he would have won the Electoral College.

Quote:
They should at least recognize that it's not fundamentally unfair, given all the individual votes were weighted equally.
Yeah, so who cares if Trump gets a second term, at least it was fair this time? I'm guessing that the definition of fairness would change overnight.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 11:47 AM   #207
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,955
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
...if Kerry had flipped just 60,000 Bush voters in Ohio, he would have won the Electoral College.
If my steer had balls he'd be my bull.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 11:50 AM   #208
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 18,106
Okay? If some hypothetical Democrat had won or will someday win by courting Electoral Votes and losing the popular vote... that would still be wrong.

I'm capable of holding the thoughts "My preferred outcome" and "the process is still wrong and needs to be changed" in my head at the same time. It's not my problem if other people can't.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 12:25 PM   #209
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,955
After a bit of clicking around, I finally managed to find a wiki article on point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...vote#Elections

Looks like five Democratic Party candidates have been screwed by the EC: Jackson, Tilden, Cleveland, Gore, & Clinton.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 02:39 PM   #210
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 16,525
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
If my steer had balls he'd be my bull.
Trans-bulls everywhere are upset with this comment.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 10:42 PM   #211
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 3157'S 11557'E
Posts: 14,447
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Okay? If some hypothetical Democrat had won or will someday win by courting Electoral Votes and losing the popular vote... that would still be wrong.

I'm capable of holding the thoughts "My preferred outcome" and "the process is still wrong and needs to be changed" in my head at the same time. It's not my problem if other people can't.
You might be happy to see your vote transferred to somebody you voted against but I suspect that most voters are not as fair minded as you.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

Last edited by psionl0; 21st May 2019 at 10:43 PM.
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2019, 10:55 PM   #212
Silly Green Monkey
Cowardly Lurking in the Shadows of Greatness
 
Silly Green Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,651
That's just it though, our votes weren't transferred. The percentage of the state we are in get the votes we cast, and the percentage of the state that voted their way get their percentage. Right now, everybody who *didn't* vote with the state's majority might just as well have stayed home, their votes were transferred to somebody they voted against.
__________________
Normal is just a stereotype.
Silly Green Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 08:10 AM   #213
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 18,106
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
You might be happy to see your vote transferred to somebody you voted against but I suspect that most voters are not as fair minded as you.
It's not "My vote." Again I'm capable of understanding that "fair" is not defined as "I have an advantage, I don't see the problem."
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 08:35 AM   #214
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,955
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
. . . "fair" is not defined as "I have an advantage, I don't see the problem."
After noticing that the EC has only ever screwed the Democratic Party, I'm beginning to think that the rationalizations we've seen may be post hoc & self -serving.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/

Last edited by d4m10n; 22nd May 2019 at 08:38 AM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 08:39 AM   #215
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 18,106
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
After noticing that the EC has only ever screwed the Democratic Party, I'm beginning to think that the rationalizations we've seen may be post hoc & self -serving.
And here's the thing, and I think this is why feet have been dragging on revamping the EC for so long.

Nobody exactly what a Post-EC political landscape would look like it. We can make guesses, good guesses even, but we can't be sure.

Sure looking at the raw EC / Popular vote numbers the Dems have gotten the short end of the stick. But we don't know what getting rid of the EC is going to do to those numbers long term. It might motivate the huge numbers of non-voters, it might not. We might have surges of Democrats voting in Texas and Republicans voting in California since their votes are no longer going to be so much pissing in the wind, or we might not. Third Parts and Independent candidates might fair worse or fair better, we just don't know.

A straight, popular vote is fairier. If that leads to "worse" (however one wishes to define that) candidates getting elected, so be it.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 09:00 AM   #216
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,680
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
After a bit of clicking around, I finally managed to find a wiki article on point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...vote#Elections

Looks like five Democratic Party candidates have been screwed by the EC: Jackson, Tilden, Cleveland, Gore, & Clinton.
To be technical, Jackson was not a Democrat, he was a Democratic-Republican. And so were all of his opponents. We were briefly a one party system, the Federalists having become a virtual non-entity, before the Dem-Rep's split.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 09:09 AM   #217
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 31,459
It's been over 20 years since my vote for president was represented by the Electoral College. My state always goes for someone else, even if the candidate I wanted sometimes was ultimately elected.

So that's, what, five elections now that my vote has had no impact whatsoever?

Are there any reasons why someone like me should support the EC?
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"Its easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 09:20 AM   #218
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,700
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
It's been over 20 years since my vote for president was represented by the Electoral College. My state always goes for someone else, even if the candidate I wanted sometimes was ultimately elected.

So that's, what, five elections now that my vote has had no impact whatsoever?

Are there any reasons why someone like me should support the EC?
Well, ...

If you do not love the Electoral College,

Then the Terrorists win!

__________________
On 22 JUL 2016, Candidate Donald Trump in his acceptance speech: "There can be no prosperity without law and order."
On 05 FEB 2019, President Donald Trump said in his Sate of the Union Address: "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation."
On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 09:28 AM   #219
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 18,106
The Nevada Senate has passed a bill that would give the States's 6 electoral votes to whoever wins the popular vote. If the governor signs it Nevada would become the 14th state (plus the District of Columbia) to guarantee it's electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote and bring the total to 195 of the 538 electoral votes being guaranteed to the winner of the popular vote.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 09:29 AM   #220
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,271
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
You called it a joke.

Don't play dumb. Nobody is falling for it any more.
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Mask is slipping Bob. You can't even keep track of your own Bobbings anymore.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 09:31 AM   #221
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,271
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
None of them. If the best person X or person Y can manage is ~50% of the popular vote then neither of them should be the 'winner'.
Abolish FPTP, it doesn't work. Remember Belfast South.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 09:36 AM   #222
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 8,744
Originally Posted by lpetrich View Post
National Popular Vote -- the homepage of that initiative. If enough states pass it, they will give their electoral votes to the popular-vote winner.

It has currently passed in 14 states and DC with a total of 189 EV's: CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, NJ, NM, NY, RI, VT, WA.

That means 81 EV's to pass the threshold of 270 EV's.

It is currently being considered in ME, MN, NV, and OR, with a total of 4+10+6+7 = 27 EV's. Passage in all four states would mean 54 EV's to go.
I would prefer to see the Electoral College abolished by a constitutional amendment and replaced with a direct popular vote requiring a majority to be elected, with either a runoff or ranked voting used in the case that nobody gets a majority in the general election.

OTOH, a constitutional amendment seems very unlikely to pass any time soon, and the initiative seems to have a decent chance of passing. IMO, it would represent a substantial improvement on the current situation, and has at least some possibility of spurring the passage of an amendment. At this point, I support the initiative, as I don't want to let my desire for a perfect solution prevent the passage of an improvement.
CORed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 09:49 AM   #223
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 8,744
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
After noticing that the EC has only ever screwed the Democratic Party, I'm beginning to think that the rationalizations we've seen may be post hoc & self -serving.
It's certainly possible. Remember the push for term limits? A little history. The Democrats had a virtual lock on Congress from shortly after WWII until 1994 (Republcans won the Senate in 1980 but lost it in 1982). During the '80's and early '90's, Republicans made a big push for term limits. This was mostly done at the state level, and often included state offices, but the real focus was Congress. Some state laws were passed that limited congressional terms, but were later ruled unconstitutional.

In 1994, Republicans gained control of both houses of Congress, and the whole term limit initiative evaporated faster than teaspoon of water on hot asphalt. Clearly the whole thing was based not on the belief that it was wrong in principle for somebody to hold a Congressional seat for decades, but on the belief that forcing some incumbent Democrats out of office would improve the chances of electing a Republican. As I recall, a number of Republican congressmen and senators who had pledged not to serve more that a fixed number of terms reneged on those pledges.
CORed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2019, 07:55 PM   #224
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,878
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
You might be happy to see your vote transferred to somebody you voted against but I suspect that most voters are not as fair minded as you.
An advantage of just having a vote multiplier is that each vote would be counted for the candidate, while still weighting by smaller states.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2019, 04:36 AM   #225
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 3157'S 11557'E
Posts: 14,447
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
An advantage of just having a vote multiplier is that each vote would be counted for the candidate, while still weighting by smaller states.
But don't mention the word "formula".
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2019, 05:08 AM   #226
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,878
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
But don't mention the word "formula".
Because I didn't mention a formula in my post.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 08:07 AM   #227
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,976
It doesn't matter how you set the game up, what's important is that everyone understand the rules. Right now, the game is called "Electoral College." That means you need to spend campaign resources in certain States that could go either way. A Republican need not spend much in California because it's a waste just as a Democrat need not spend much in Texas. The winner of that game is the winner, period.

It's like playing Monopoly, having $100 less than your opponent and saying, "I should win because I own more properties than you!"

To defend the EC, I think the only valid defense is that the United States of America is just that: a Union of States. Plus, we are a Representative Democracy. Thus, electing the head of that Union should be a decision arrived at by the States (representing the will of their citizens) and each State should have a voice. That voice is proportioned in the same way Congress is proportioned. I think that's fair.

I do not think we should be meddling with something that has worked relatively well for so long without considering the ramifications of that meddling on the end goal: Representing the States will on who will govern the Union of States. And we certainly shouldn't be meddling simply because some people don't like the results of a particular election.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 08:10 AM   #228
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 18,106
Yeah except this isn't a game, it's the running of the country with actual real world consequences that actually matter.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 08:15 AM   #229
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 35,004
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
It doesn't matter how you set the game up, what's important is that everyone understand the rules. Right now, the game is called "Electoral College." That means you need to spend campaign resources in certain States that could go either way. A Republican need not spend much in California because it's a waste just as a Democrat need not spend much in Texas. The winner of that game is the winner, period.

It's like playing Monopoly, having $100 less than your opponent and saying, "I should win because I own more properties than you!"

To defend the EC, I think the only valid defense is that the United States of America is just that: a Union of States. Plus, we are a Representative Democracy. Thus, electing the head of that Union should be a decision arrived at by the States (representing the will of their citizens) and each State should have a voice. That voice is proportioned in the same way Congress is proportioned. I think that's fair.

I do not think we should be meddling with something that has worked relatively well for so long without considering the ramifications of that meddling on the end goal: Representing the States will on who will govern the Union of States. And we certainly shouldn't be meddling simply because some people don't like the results of a particular election.
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Yeah except this isn't a game, it's the running of the country with actual real world consequences that actually matter.
Reason #2 for Why Arguments From Analogy Always Fail: Even when the analogy itself is cromulent enough for the purpose, the person you're trying to convince will always be able to find an excuse to dismiss it.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 08:47 AM   #230
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,878
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
It doesn't matter how you set the game up, what's important is that everyone understand the rules. Right now, the game is called "Electoral College." That means you need to spend campaign resources in certain States that could go either way. A Republican need not spend much in California because it's a waste just as a Democrat need not spend much in Texas. The winner of that game is the winner, period.

It's like playing Monopoly, having $100 less than your opponent and saying, "I should win because I own more properties than you!"

To defend the EC, I think the only valid defense is that the United States of America is just that: a Union of States. Plus, we are a Representative Democracy. Thus, electing the head of that Union should be a decision arrived at by the States (representing the will of their citizens) and each State should have a voice. That voice is proportioned in the same way Congress is proportioned. I think that's fair.

I do not think we should be meddling with something that has worked relatively well for so long without considering the ramifications of that meddling on the end goal: Representing the States will on who will govern the Union of States. And we certainly shouldn't be meddling simply because some people don't like the results of a particular election.
You clearly didn't read the OP.

A few basic questions for you.

How do you know how well the EC gives states a voice?

If I provide an alternative method to weight votes based on states, how do you know which system would be better?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 09:03 AM   #231
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,976
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
You clearly didn't read the OP.

A few basic questions for you.

How do you know how well the EC gives states a voice?

If I provide an alternative method to weight votes based on states, how do you know which system would be better?
I read the OP and I think others have addressed it adequately so I decided to take a different approach to the subject.

The EC gives each State a voice in the exact proportion the States have a voice in Congress. I think that is a fair way to do it and it has worked very well for the last couple centuries or so. That is my evidence for how well it works -even if some people don't like the outcomes in exceptional elections.

What do you mean by "which system would be better?" What is your criteria for one system being better than the other? It would all depend on what the end goal of the game is -and proper end goals are entirely subjectively selected. For the end goal of representing the voice of the States, I think the EC is perfectly fine.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 09:05 AM   #232
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,878
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
For the end goal of representing the voice of the States, I think the EC is perfectly fine.
How do you know this?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 09:11 AM   #233
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,878
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post

What do you mean by "which system would be better?" What is your criteria for one system being better than the other? It would all depend on what the end goal of the game is -and proper end goals are entirely subjectively selected.
That is why I'm asking you. You are the only one that knows your preferences and determine what you would think would be preferred. Asking me which one is better for you is like asking me what color car you should drive.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 09:19 AM   #234
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,976
To expand a little:

If we switch to a "popular vote" system where a majority of the people elect a President, I think that would eliminate the "voice of the States," which seems counter-productive to the idea of the United States as elucidated in the Constitution.

I support the idea of Dual Federalism, where the States and National government are co-equal. I support local government being more important than a big overarching government. The Feds stick to their powers and the States do everything else. I think a popular vote directly minimizes the powers of the States and increases the importance of the Feds and I'm not about that noise.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 09:25 AM   #235
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,878
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
To expand a little:

If we switch to a "popular vote" system where a majority of the people elect a President, I think that would eliminate the "voice of the States," which seems counter-productive to the idea of the United States as elucidated in the Constitution.

I support the idea of Dual Federalism, where the States and National government are co-equal. I support local government being more important than a big overarching government. The Feds stick to their powers and the States do everything else. I think a popular vote directly minimizes the powers of the States and increases the importance of the Feds and I'm not about that noise.
Strawman. The thread is not about proposing popular vote as an alternative. This is about other weighting schemes versus the electoral college.


Here is a proposed alternative. You provide a list of electoral results that you think have been fair. We then plot percent of population versus percent of electoral votes. We develop a function that best fits the data. Now, each census we use that formula to identify each state's vote multiplier. And state vote totals are just multiplied by value.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 09:30 AM   #236
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,700
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Strawman. The thread is not about proposing popular vote as an alternative. This is about other weighting schemes versus the electoral college.


Here is a proposed alternative. You provide a list of electoral results that you think have been fair. We then plot percent of population versus percent of electoral votes. We develop a function that best fits the data. Now, each census we use that formula to identify each state's vote multiplier. And state vote totals are just multiplied by value.
Your proposed alternative is rather stupid since it is dependent upon what just one person has determined to be a "fair" list of electoral votes.
__________________
On 22 JUL 2016, Candidate Donald Trump in his acceptance speech: "There can be no prosperity without law and order."
On 05 FEB 2019, President Donald Trump said in his Sate of the Union Address: "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation."
On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 09:33 AM   #237
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,878
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
Your proposed alternative is rather stupid since it is dependent upon what just one person has determined to be a "fair" list of electoral votes.
I only care what xjx thinks with my post. If someone provided a different list of priorities, I would shape a different proposal to their preferences.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 09:41 AM   #238
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,976
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
How do you know this?
Experience. Opinion.

Are you expecting that such a question can be analyzed objectively?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 09:43 AM   #239
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,976
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
That is why I'm asking you. You are the only one that knows your preferences and determine what you would think would be preferred. Asking me which one is better for you is like asking me what color car you should drive.
Ah, well, I explained that. The States and the Feds should be co-equal. The EC is a good way to make sure the States have their proportional voice as they do in Congress. I think that works and there's no real reason to change it.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2019, 09:45 AM   #240
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,976
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Strawman. The thread is not about proposing popular vote as an alternative. This is about other weighting schemes versus the electoral college.


Here is a proposed alternative. You provide a list of electoral results that you think have been fair. We then plot percent of population versus percent of electoral votes. We develop a function that best fits the data. Now, each census we use that formula to identify each state's vote multiplier. And state vote totals are just multiplied by value.
I don't consider that better. Too complex. The rules of the game could change too often.

See, I don't feel I have to defend a system that has been working rather well for more than two centuries. If one wants to change that system, then it would be on them to make the case for it being a "better" or "fairer" system.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not 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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:29 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.