Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!
  1. Hi there... Can you please quickly check to make sure your email address is up to date here? Just in case we need to reach out to you or you lose your password. Muchero thanks!

The Electoral College is Very Unpopular

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by mdgator05, Aug 30, 2024.

Page 1 of 6
  1. Aug 30, 2024 #1
    mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    16,257
    2,098
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    This is a very good thing. It seems like most people are tired to being ruled by 100K occasional voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Nevada. Wouldn't it be crazy to see Presidential candidates have to actually campaign for votes in Salt Lake City and Los Angeles and Seattle and New Orleans?

    Unfortunately, I don't think our country is adaptable enough right now to get better. Still, at least most people understand that the electoral college means that their interests are not represented.

     
    • Disagree Bacon! x 6
    • Like x 4
    • Funny x 2
    • Agree x 1
    • Winner x 1
    • Informative x 1
  2. Aug 30, 2024 #2
    GatorRade

    GatorRade Rad Scientist

    8,748
    1,645
    1,478
    Apr 3, 2007
    The current version of the EC is extremely flawed. The Upshot determined that if Alabama and not Florida had won the battle for the panhandle, Clinton would have won the 2016 election. Any decision system that isn’t robust against such an arbitrary and inconsequential difference should not be selecting the president of the United States.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. Aug 30, 2024 #3
    duggers_dad

    duggers_dad GC Hall of Fame

    16,478
    1,208
    2,088
    Jan 5, 2022
    My preference would be for non-violent secession.

    Why not ? It’s about as likely, perhaps more likely to happen than to abolish the Electoral College.
     
  4. Aug 30, 2024 #4
    mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    16,257
    2,098
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    Yeah, there are a million of those too. I mentioned this a couple of days ago, but imagine that Republicans didn't win the a Congressional majority in 1888. Then, we likely have one Dakota state instead of 2.
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  5. Aug 30, 2024 #5
    ETGator1

    ETGator1 GC Hall of Fame

    16,016
    1,858
    808
    Apr 3, 2007
    LOL!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Aug 30, 2024 #6
    Orange_and_Bluke

    Orange_and_Bluke Premium Member

    10,323
    2,544
    3,288
    Dec 16, 2015
    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. Aug 30, 2024 #7
    agigator

    agigator GC Hall of Fame

    1,232
    46
    263
    Apr 8, 2007
    Change the apportionment act so that the house isn't capped 435 members and apportion districts per 50,000 residents. This would address the electoral college and gerrymandering.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  8. Aug 30, 2024 #8
    wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    30,270
    1,911
    2,218
    Apr 19, 2007
    It would also ruin Nate Silver's branding as an added bonus
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. Aug 30, 2024 #9
    mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    16,257
    2,098
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    Not a bad thought. Wouldn't directly solve gerrymandering unless you pulled districting away from states (states could theoretically carve up their states by 50k in a gerrymandered fashion), but you could do that as well. Wouldn't mind carving 50k blocks like electors either, especially if they weren't gerrymandered. Not as good as popular vote, but would at least provide some incentive to compete for votes in a variety of locations.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. Aug 30, 2024 #10
    gator_jo

    gator_jo GC Hall of Fame

    1,891
    247
    193
    Aug 9, 2024
    Just end it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. Aug 30, 2024 #11
    Orange_and_Bluke

    Orange_and_Bluke Premium Member

    10,323
    2,544
    3,288
    Dec 16, 2015
    You want to stack the deck so the libbies can win every election with city folk votes.
    [​IMG]
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. Aug 30, 2024 #12
    gator95

    gator95 GC Hall of Fame

    7,877
    864
    2,113
    Apr 3, 2007
    A lot of D's wanting to do this. Shocked...
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. Aug 30, 2024 #13
    mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    16,257
    2,098
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    It is always funny how the people who complain the most about how all their choices are terrible are also the most resistant to changing the system that produces those terrible choices. I'd rather the country not be run by low-information, occasional voters in states selected because accidents of history decided that they were "competitive."
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  14. Aug 30, 2024 #14
    mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    16,257
    2,098
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    Wow, 57% of the country are Ds?

    I'd think an R in Utah might like the parties to care what they think too.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. Aug 30, 2024 #15
    sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    15,589
    13,304
    1,853
    Apr 8, 2007
    Lots of R's want to keep it: shocked
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 2
  16. Aug 30, 2024 #16
    GatorNorth

    GatorNorth Premium Member Premium Member

    17,402
    8,139
    3,203
    Apr 3, 2007
    Atlanta
    The Apportionment Act was passed in 1929, when US population was 121M. At 435 reps, that's one rep for every 278,000 people.

    Population today is 333M, so that's one rep for every 765,000 people.

    I realize that you live in a very binary world where everything is the fault of the libs but just look at the math and ask youself whether a single rep can represent 765,000 constituents as well as they can 278,000 people while running for re-election every 2 years?
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2024
    • Like Like x 2
  17. Aug 30, 2024 #17
    agigator

    agigator GC Hall of Fame

    1,232
    46
    263
    Apr 8, 2007
    If libbies have that big of a majority then we're screwed regardless of the system we have in place. I believe that expanding the House, and thus the Electoral College, is actually in line with what the framers would want. Having said that, the point of the Electoral College was that the states were intended to have a much larger role in our form of government than they currently do.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Aug 30, 2024 #18
    HeyItsMe

    HeyItsMe GC Hall of Fame

    1,881
    558
    2,088
    Mar 7, 2009
    Expected response by you given that the EC is the only chance the Republican Party has of ever winning an election since they never win the popular vote and most of the country detests their “policies.”
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  19. Aug 30, 2024 #19
    agigator

    agigator GC Hall of Fame

    1,232
    46
    263
    Apr 8, 2007
    Changing the incentives is often more effective than a direct solution. The difficulty of gerrymandering would go up and the reward would go down.
     
  20. Aug 30, 2024 #20
    Orange_and_Bluke

    Orange_and_Bluke Premium Member

    10,323
    2,544
    3,288
    Dec 16, 2015
    I ask myself…why are only the libbies unhappy with the current system.
     
Page 1 of 6