More leftist lunacy

#201
#201
85SugarVol said:
And how does proportionality play into it?
Click to expand...

Each candidate would get the proportion of the EC votes based on votes of the electorate. If Florida has 29 EC votes and the popular vote is split 51% - 49% then the candidate that has the majority gets one more EC vote. 15 to 14. That way, each constituency vote counts towards the actual presidential EC tally.
 
#203
#203
GroverCleveland said:
But yet, you have not noticed it in Chinese restaurants, Chinese restaurants are not being boycotted. PERIOD.

You are pitting forth a nonsensical argument. As many PERIODS as you like.
Click to expand...
If you are arguing that the swastika is not primarily associated with hate, intolerance, antisemitism and fascism, due to it being coopted by Nazi Germany in the 1930's ... then you are either ignorant, or you just want to argue for the hell of it, which does not interest me.

If a picture of a plain swastika was shown to a focus group of 1,000 people from around Tennessee, I'm willing to bet that less than 5 of them would identify it as being something other than "The Nazi Sign."

Your argument is based on nothing but your own narrow-minded perception, rather than what is the universal norm.
 
#204
#204
BowlBrother85 said:
If you are arguing that the swastika is not primarily associated with hate, intolerance, antisemitism and fascism, due to it being coopted by Nazi Germany in the 1930's ... then you are either ignorant, or you just want to argue for the hell of it, which does not interest me.

If a picture of a plain swastika was shown to a focus group of 1,000 people from around Tennessee, I'm willing to bet that less than 5 of them would identify it as being something other than "The Nazi Sign."

Your argument is based on nothing but your own narrow-minded perception, rather than what is the universal norm.
Click to expand...
Someone in this argument is narrow minded, and pretty sure I am arguing the more open position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and AM64
#205
#205
Septic said:
Each candidate would get the proportion of the EC votes based on votes of the electorate. If Florida has 29 EC votes and the popular vote is split 51% - 49% then the candidate that has the majority gets one more EC vote. 15 to 14. That way, each constituency vote counts towards the actual presidential EC tally.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, if a state’s votes are 50/50 and their EC delegates are split 50/50, then that state really doesn’t matter. Same impact as if they don’t exist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#206
#206
Thunder Good-Oil said:
On the other hand, if a state’s votes are 50/50 and their EC delegates are split 50/50, then that state really doesn’t matter. Same impact as if they don’t exist.
Click to expand...

? Those 50% EC votes could make the difference in the race when added towards other EC votes. It also makes every state important, no more fly overs. Additionally it would moderate candidates to appeal to everyone but more importantly - it would allow everyone to have a voice and not be canceled out because their candidate was one vote short to the majority.

Again, proportioning California votes would give a voice to ~5 million Republicans and give thier candidate roughly 17 EC votes they will never get under the current system. That's like picking up an additional state. Georgia only has 16 EC votes in total by comparison.
 
#207
#207
Septic said:
? Those 50% EC votes could make the difference in the race when added towards other EC votes. It also makes every state important, no more fly overs. Additionally it would moderate candidates to appeal to everyone but more importantly - it would allow everyone to have a voice and not be canceled out because their candidate was one vote short to the majority.

Again, proportioning California votes would give a voice to ~5 million Republicans and give thier candidate roughly 17 EC votes they will never get under the current system. That's like picking up an additional state. Georgia only has 16 EC votes in total by comparison.
Click to expand...

When a state’s EC votes are split 50/50 it has the same effect as if that state had zero EC votes.

Also, if POTUS EC votes were distributed proportionally, wouldn’t the party makeup of the House of Reps almost always be aligned with the party of the POTUS? Unless lots of voters are voting R for one branch of government and D for the other.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#208
#208
Thunder Good-Oil said:
When a state’s EC votes are split 50/50 it has the same effect as if that state had zero EC votes.
Click to expand...

No. First - if an elections EC votes were split because the constituency voted 50% for one candidate and 50% for another, each candidate would still receive EC votes, they would just receive them in proportion to the will of that States constituency. Each candidate would still tally towards the totality of accumulated EC votes.

If for example, Georgia, Pennsylvania's and Arizona and Michigan were counted per my method - Trump would have picked up an additional 36 EC votes, not even counting the additional 17 from in California. With the winner take all method, he got zero.

Thunder Good-Oil said:
Also, if POTUS EC votes were distributed proportionally, wouldn’t the party makeup of the House of Reps almost always be aligned with the party of the POTUS? Unless lots of voters are voting R for one branch of government and D for the other.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you're getting from a-z on this. I'm speaking to the presidential general election and the States.
 
#209
#209
Septic said:
No. First - if an elections EC votes were split because the constituency voted 50% for one candidate and 50% for another, each candidate would still receive EC votes, they would just receive them in proportion to the will of that States constituency. Each candidate would still tally towards the totality of accumulated EC votes.

If for example, Georgia, Pennsylvania's and Arizona and Michigan were counted per my method - Trump would have picked up an additional 36 EC votes, not even counting the additional 17 from in California. With the winner take all method, he got zero.



I'm not sure how you're getting from a-z on this. I'm speaking to the presidential general election and the States.
Click to expand...

A large state’s impact EVERY election is reduced by proportional distribution of ECVs. A state with 3 becomes more critical than a state with 40 that are split 50/50.

With the House of Rep elections ALWAYS happening in the POTUS cycle, then a proportional distribution of POTUS votes will usually mirror the results of the proportional makeup of HoR votes and therefore watering down the effect of separation of powers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#210
#210
The power of the member states are watered down by by splitting their POTUS votes to within probably no more than one standard deviation from 50/50 results. Proportional distribution of POTUS votes shifts power to the federal government from the individual states.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#211
#211
BowlBrother85 said:
If you are arguing that the swastika is not primarily associated with hate, intolerance, antisemitism and fascism, due to it being coopted by Nazi Germany in the 1930's ... then you are either ignorant, or you just want to argue for the hell of it, which does not interest me.

If a picture of a plain swastika was shown to a focus group of 1,000 people from around Tennessee, I'm willing to bet that less than 5 of them would identify it as being something other than "The Nazi Sign."

Your argument is based on nothing but your own narrow-minded perception, rather than what is the universal norm.
Click to expand...
I bet if you showed those same people a picture of Billie Eyelish and portrait of Michaelangelo and asked them to identify the person with great talent they would point at Billie Eyelish.

Point being just because the masses agree doesn't make it right or wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and hog88
#212
#212
Septic said:
No. First - if an elections EC votes were split because the constituency voted 50% for one candidate and 50% for another, each candidate would still receive EC votes, they would just receive them in proportion to the will of that States constituency. Each candidate would still tally towards the totality of accumulated EC votes.

If for example, Georgia, Pennsylvania's and Arizona and Michigan were counted per my method - Trump would have picked up an additional 36 EC votes, not even counting the additional 17 from in California. With the winner take all method, he got zero.



I'm not sure how you're getting from a-z on this. I'm speaking to the presidential general election and the States.
Click to expand...

If you and your wife vote, she votes one party and you vote the other. You just nullified each other's vote, and you might as well have stayed home. Works the same way if a state splits 50/50.

The worst part about a state splitting the vote is that most other states don't - the presidential race is all about what states want and how to balance power when states agreed to unite - not what the individual wants.
 
#213
#213
KB5252 said:
I bet if you showed those same people a picture of Billie Eyelish and portrait of Michaelangelo and asked them to identify the person with great talent they would point at Billie Eyelish.

Point being just because the masses agree doesn't make it right or wrong.
Click to expand...
Billie Eyelish is the best
 
#214
#214
BowlBrother85 said:
You think the swastika has no meaning? Okay ... drive around your town/city for about a month with a swastika flag hanging out of your window and then gauge the response. If you care about your reputation, you won't do it.

You guys would argue anything. You are wrong about this.
Click to expand...
LOL and you aren't paying attention to what I said Chief. But thank you so very much for proving my point about emotional leftists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and GroverCleveland
#215
#215
85SugarVol said:
Billie Eyelish is the best
Click to expand...
iu
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#217
#217
AM64 said:
If you and your wife vote, she votes one party and you vote the other. You just nullified each other's vote, and you might as well have stayed home. Works the same way if a state splits 50/50.

The worst part about a state splitting the vote is that most other states don't - the presidential race is all about what states want and how to balance power when states agreed to unite - not what the individual wants.
Click to expand...

No, that's not accurate. Not in the literal sense and certainly no more than it is now. This isn't a zero sum proposition, the candidates still move the needle with the electoral votes allotted with every vote cast.

It isn't like a game of cornhole.

Maine and Nebraska already use the integral proportional system.

Abstract
US Presidential elections make use of a majority vote in the Electoral College. The Constitution did not specify how states determine electoral votes; 48 states let the statewide popular plurality vote winner garner all electoral votes for that state. Our proposed Integral Proportional System splits the state’s electors, keeping the spirit of the Constitution and maintaining the structure of the Electoral College. This system better reflects voter preferences in a state by assigning a number of electoral votes similar in proportion to the statewide popular vote. Important properties of the system are analyzed; features and strengths are clarified using recent election data.
Click to expand...
 
#221
#221
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top