Alternative Electoral college distributions

[kindy64]

Since it comes up every Presidential election and it's a popular topic on a couple of threads, here is a website for those interested in alternative methods of distributing the Electoral college. Currently, Maine and Nebraska are the only states that don't do "winner take all."

I'm actually a fan of a proportional distribution of electoral votes based on the popular vote. It would take a good deal of the election power away from the big states.

http://www.270towin.com/

Of course there are a lot of ways it COULD be done, but we have the system we have for a whole host of reasons, some of which are still valid. Are the concerns of say North Dakota, the exact same as Florida?

So here is one method, 1 point goes to popular vote winner per state, the remaining proportional to popular vote. Even then we get a squeaker. EC votes are 10th of a decimal to make the math work out. And none of them have the 270 needed for 50% of the EC. Maybe we could have a runoff after?

Trump 59,772,837 259.4
Clinton 60,017,405 255.6
Johnson 4,084,355 16.1
Stien 1,225,174 4.5
McMillan 449,190 2.1

I've attached the data for the spreadsheet if anyone wants to take a crack at it. Data obtained from here, it is a csv, even though the extension says txt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta...s_by_state

[InbetweenDreams]

Or....We could just go by popular vote and require that the popular candidate must have 50% of the vote or more... If not impose a run off vote between the top two...

But trying to sell that idea isn't going to work either...

[kindy64]

Or....We could just go by popular vote and require that the popular candidate must have 50% of the vote or more... If not impose a run off vote between the top two...

But trying to sell that idea isn't going to work either...

Getting rid of the electoral college would take a Constitutional amendment.

https://www.archives.gov/federal-registe...ml#changes

Reference sources indicate that over the past 200 years, over 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College. There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject.

http://www.fairvote.org/the_electoral_co...orks_today

To change how a state's electors are governed you would have to change the laws in those states.

Changing the laws in each state would be easier than trying to pass a Constitutional amendment...

[artyboy]

What on earth is an Electoral college distribution? Seems a bit odd to me lol!

[InbetweenDreams]

[MENTION=22879]kindy64[/MENTION]

This is why the Electoral College is still around, if you read from the article... Let's just say that there is bi-partisan support for keeping it around.

Third parties have not fared well in the Electoral College system.

When a candidate can get 20% of the vote and get 0 electoral votes....sounds like a "rigged" system.

[artyboy]

[MENTION=22879]kindy64[/MENTION]

This is why the Electoral College is still around, if you read from the article... Let's just say that there is bi-partisan support for keeping it around.



When a candidate can get 20% of the vote and get 0 electoral votes....sounds like a "rigged" system.

hmm something isnt right in the USA at the moment if you guys think thats democracy lol?

[InbetweenDreams]

hmm something isnt right in the USA at the moment if you guys think thats democracy lol?

Oh what do you know about our government. The electoral college made sense back in the days of the horse and carriage.... Today it is abused to keep the two party system intact and to keep out any emerging powers, or definitely hinder it.

The who point of electoral votes and house of representatives and the senate are to balance things out.

Say California is a big state, has a lot of people.... They get more representatives than say Rhode Island...but they have the same number of senators. The electoral college made sense in the past because ballots couldn't be processed digitally. Well the powers that be don't want change, given that it has been challenged many many times.

[artyboy]

Oh what do you know about our government. The electoral college made sense back in the days of the horse and carriage.... Today it is abused to keep the two party system intact and to keep out any emerging powers, or definitely hinder it.

The who point of electoral votes and house of representatives and the senate are to balance things out.

Say California is a big state, has a lot of people.... They get more representatives than say Rhode Island...but they have the same number of senators. The electoral college made sense in the past because ballots couldn't be processed digitally. Well the powers that be don't want change, given that it has been challenged many many times.

Hmmmm like everything these days there are too many people for these old fashioned systems to work.

Just like the Rights to Arms in the USA was designed to help the shortage of soldiers during and after the US war of Independence. I think the USA population was under a few million people at the time.

[kindy64]

That's not what the 2nd Amendment was designed for. But that's a whole other argument.

America has never been a Democracy, we are a Democratic Republic.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_republic

There are significant differences.

As to a popular vote, the President is president of "these United States." We are a country made of 51 sovereign states. The concerns of rural, urban, suburban, poor, rich, educated, uneducated, straight, gay, etc... are not the same all across the country. That is what the balance of power between the 3 branches of government attempts to balance.

Usually it's always the losers in an election who want to make the election of our President a popularity contest.

[LJay]

51 states??