If there was ever a year a third party could make traction... (1 Viewer)

[tenordas]

surely this is it.

One party is running a man half the country hates - no, despises, the other is running a woman even most of the other politicians in her own party can't stand.

Where are you Libertarians? Green Party? Hello?

I thought 2016 was a real shot, but the two most viable third parties both put up unelectable morons.

All one of them needs is someone actually viable and IMHO they could sway a lot of people away from these two...

 

[Optimus Prime]

If you want to keep the EC because you think it's important and make our election system work, the only way to do that is to make it so that EC votes in states aren't winner take all. In other words, split up the EC votes for that state as a reflection of that state's actual popular vote. That would actually force presidential candidates to compete in all states and infuse democracy into voting even in traditional red or blue states. People would be much more motivated to vote and the votes would matter.

Do any of you who want to keep the EC have a problem with that?

anyone know what the last few elections would look like if this was in place?

 

[Incumbent]

If you want to keep the EC because you think it's important and make our election system work, the only way to do that is to make it so that EC votes in states aren't winner take all. In other words, split up the EC votes for that state as a reflection of that state's actual popular vote. That would actually force presidential candidates to compete in all states and infuse democracy into voting even in traditional red or blue states. People would be much more motivated to vote and the votes would matter.

Do any of you who want to keep the EC have a problem with that?

This is a good compromise to the current system. Maine and Nebraska assign electoral votes proportionally. The current system effectively disenfranchises millions of voters.

 

[LA - L.A.]

We can make sure there are only two candidates in the ballot without propping up a two party system.

Just have an open primary with all candidates, then a runoff with the top two.

That wouldn't guarantee just two candidates either. Presidential elections are done at the state level. Even if all 50 states had an open primary with all candidates and then a runoff with the top two, that wouldn't guarantee all 50 states would have the same two runoff candidates on their ballots. There could be a different combination of top two candidates in every state which would make it even more likely that no one candidate would win enough Electoral College votes to win the election outright.

Unless one wants to risk letting the House of Representatives choose the president, the Electoral College has to go first and then we can shake up the domination of the two party system, otherwise the House of Representative will most likely being choosing the president.

 

[Infoman]

If you want to keep the EC because you think it's important and make our election system work, the only way to do that is to make it so that EC votes in states aren't winner take all. In other words, split up the EC votes for that state as a reflection of that state's actual popular vote. That would actually force presidential candidates to compete in all states and infuse democracy into voting even in traditional red or blue states. People would be much more motivated to vote and the votes would matter.

Do any of you who want to keep the EC have a problem with that?

That's just the popular vote without calling it the popular vote... LOL

I'm for a free, fair, transparent, and balanced system that doesn't place the power of the Executive solely and consistently and irreversibly in the hands of one region, set of values, class of living, personal ideology or center of finance...

As of today (and very near since our county's inception) that's been the EC...

 

[CoolBrees]

This is a good compromise to the current system. Maine and Nebraska assign electoral votes proportionally. The current system effectively disenfranchises millions of voters.

They do not do it proportionally.

They have two voting districts and each are winner take all

 

[LA - L.A.]

They won't bother going anywhere else because the swing states that matter now will not matter at all any more, only the big cities will matter. And that means rural America, which provides the food urban America eats will become de facto servants to those big cities because they will never have a voice again.

Since you're focused on the importance of giving farmers a voice, here's the top 10 food producing states with my notes by their names:

1. California - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	11.8%
2. Iowa - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	8.0%
3. Nebraska - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	6.1%
4. Texas - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	5.7%
5. Minnesota	5.0%
6. Illinois	4.9%
7. Kansas - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	4.9%
8. Indiana - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	3.3%
9. North Carolina	3.1%
10. Wisconsin	2.9%

If one wants more campaigning in the states that provide the most food to Americans, then they should want the Electoral College system repealed.

All 50 US States Ranked by Agricultural Production [Report 2024]

Check out the data of US states ranked by agricultural production and find out how much is produced in your state.

usabynumbers.com

 

[MT15]

You're not serious saying that, are you?

Have you seen the compound where he lives? Do you know his insane net worth? Do you know that he and his wife illegally write off the insane speech fees they receive? Have you not seen the videotape of him bragging about getting the inspector who was investigating him and his son fired by threatening not to give the money to that country until they fired him?

Please, Biden is a poster child for politicians who play the money game. He has been in the pockets of corporations and other countries his entire career.

You are spouting right wing propaganda. His tax returns have been public for decades. His recent money was earned through speaking fees and book deals after he served as VP. During the time he was serving as VP he was considering a second mortgage to help with expenses due to Beau’s illness and Obama talked him out of it, he didn’t have wealth until after he served in the WH. Biden left the Senate with one of the lowest net worths in that body. He didn’t play the money game his entire career. He didn’t capitalize on the many ways his colleagues enriched themselves. This is objective fact, you can look up his tax returns. So your entire career statement is objectively untrue.

The Ukraine stuff is complete garbage. It wasn’t Biden, it was US policy and the policy of our allies for that prosecutor to go, and it was because he was corrupt himself and not investigating Burisma. It had nothing to do with Hunter at that time, and it sure as hell wasn’t anything to do with Joe.

Look I’m not saying he’s a saint, but the stuff you are pegging him with is just partisan garbage. Except maybe the tax stuff - I don’t know about that, but it seems to me if there is a problem, he would have been investigated by now.

 

[MT15]

Since you're focused on the importance of giving farmers a voice, here's the top 10 food producing states with my notes by their names:

1. California - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	11.8%
2. Iowa - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	8.0%
3. Nebraska - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	6.1%
4. Texas - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	5.7%
5. Minnesota	5.0%
6. Illinois	4.9%
7. Kansas - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	4.9%
8. Indiana - when's the last time there was any serious campaigning in this state?	3.3%
9. North Carolina	3.1%
10. Wisconsin	2.9%

If one wants more campaigning in the states that provide the most food to Americans, then they should want the Electoral College system repealed.

All 50 US States Ranked by Agricultural Production [Report 2024]

Check out the data of US states ranked by agricultural production and find out how much is produced in your state.

usabynumbers.com

This is so true. Nobody on a national level ever campaigns in my state, and we have a later primary so by the time I vote in the primary the race is generally decided.

The EC has ensured that my vote for president doesn’t count more often than not. It can go, it’s outlived it’s usefulness.

 

[Incumbent]

That's just the popular vote without calling it that... LOL

Here’s an explanation that will give you a better idea of how it works. It’s not as simple as dividing EC votes based on popular vote totals. It’s a compromise between keeping the EC as-is or ditching it for popular vote.

Maine & Nebraska - FairVote

Maine and Nebraska both use an alternative method of distributing their electoral votes, called the Congressional District Method. Currently, these […]

fairvote.org

 

[coldseat]

That's just the popular vote without calling it that... LOL

So you answer for a good electoral system is to silence a significant portion of the voting population within states and render their votes worthless.

And yet you wonder why our politics are so bad.

 

[Infoman]

I live in South LA... I know - no matter who I vote for as POTUS... My state's electoral votes likely will go to the R candidate....

That doesn't mean my vote didn't count... It only means that I live in a state where all it's people partook in a democratic process... and my vote was in the minority... and I lost.

If I lived in Wisconsin - My vote wouldn't count any more or less than it does now... It would only be more relevant to the outcome... due to how tight the majority/minority of votes are in that state.

 

[Infoman]

If you guys are trying to convince me that the EC system needs to be changed to permanently stack the deck of the selection of the Executive branch in one direction... hard pass. I'd rather fix the root of the problem... the binary insanity disguised illusion of choice.... that gets us into this situation in the first place.

 

[MT15]

If you guys are trying to convince me that the EC system needs to be changed to permanently stack the deck of the selection of the Executive branch in one direction... hard pass. I'd rather fix the root of the problem... the binary insanity disguised illusion of choice that gets us into this situation in the first place.

I appreciate you being able to discuss your positions here even though we disagree on some things. I think the best way to fix things that wouldn’t require an amendment to the Constitution may be to get money (esp. dark money) out of politics. It will be extremely difficult, but I do think there are politicians willing to do so.

 

[coldseat]

I live in South LA... I know - no matter who I vote for as POTUS... My state's electoral votes likely will go to the R candidate....

That doesn't mean my vote didn't count... It only means that I live in a state where all it's people partook in a democratic process... and my vote was in the minority... and I lost.

If I lived in Wisconsin - My vote wouldn't count any more or less than it does now... It would only be more relevant to the outcome... due to how tight the majority/minority of votes are in that state.

The vote of your state in the EC doesn't represent the will of it's electorate as to their choice of President. It represents the will of the of the voters that voted for that candidate who won in the state. So if that's 51% of the electorate of that state, they receive 100% of the EC votes. The will of all the other voters in that state is essentially silenced as to their presidential choice.

The vote in an election can either reflex the will of the voters, or it can represent something else. You're choosing for it to represent something else (i.e. special interest, minority power, billionaires, political elites, etc.). It doesn't matter how many parties their are, if you don't change the EC the vote will always represent something else.

 

[MT15]

The Big money donors, and high dollar elites in his own party pushed him out of the Oval office door (not voters)... I don't think him ending his race had a thing to do with his age, his mental lapses, or his policies... The reason JB is no longer in the race... Is that the people with the big money and influence... decided he was going to lose, and they were no longer willing to put money on a losing ticket...

I agree with most this, just not sure what it has to do with what I was saying about him. He wasn’t listening to them, either, so they pushed him out.

 

[Infoman]

The vote of your state in the EC doesn't represent with will of it's electorate as to their choice of President. It represents the will of the of the voters that voted for that candidate who won in the state. So if that's 51% of the electorate of that state, they receive 100% of the EC votes. The will of all the other voters in that state is essentially silenced as to their presidential choice.

The vote in an election can either reflex the will of the voters, or it can represent something else. You're choosing for it to represent something else (i.e. special interest, minority power, billionaires, political elites, etc.). It doesn't matter how many parties their are, if you don't change the EC the vote will always represent something else.

Horse shirt... It means the majority of my state wanted a specific candidate... and if I didn't vote for that candidate... my vote wasn't silenced... I am in the minority... and my candidate LOST... That's all it means... I have decorum... I know how to lose without calling foul or suggesting to change the rules.

The rules are fine.... the binary choices are the problem.

 

[MT15]

That's just the popular vote without calling it the popular vote... LOL

I'm for a free, fair, transparent, and balanced system that doesn't place the power of the Executive solely and consistently and irreversibly in the hands of one region, set of values, class of living, personal ideology or center of finance...

As of today (and very near since our county's inception) that's been the EC...

You seem to think that cities are a monolith or maybe that the Democratic Party is a monolith, but that isn’t true. I don’t see how making every vote truly count would favor one region, one class of living, one set of values or one personal ideology. Cities are amalgams of all kinds of people, all classes, all sorts of values. I think getting rid of the EV puts us a step closer to having every vote weighted equally.

 

[Infoman]

I agree with most this, just not sure what it has to do with what I was saying about him. He wasn’t listening to them, either, so they pushed him out.

I was just pointing out how money/power has more influence than the will of the voters in the current system/landscape...