|
Post by swanarcadian on Aug 31, 2024 13:22:49 GMT
Of course even if the EC were abolished, a new system would need to take its place. The assumption here seems to be FPTP, but a two round system or AV (called instant run off voting in the States) could be options especially if smaller parties start to regularly put up stronger challenges à la Perot.
|
|
|
Post by stb12 on Aug 31, 2024 13:55:23 GMT
The partisan implications if it moved to a popular vote system may not be as clear cut as it would seem, the Democrats do seem to have a natural advantage with that at the moment due to their overwhelming strength in California and New York (can probably throw in the gradual improvement in Texas as well)
However with the current system there’s no logical need for the GOP candidate to campaign at all in California and New York, that would change if there was a popular vote system brought in as it would be meaningful to campaign in areas in those states where they’re strong and try to maximise the turnout for the overall national vote
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 31, 2024 13:58:23 GMT
You misread the poll, didn't you? Don't worry, we've all done it! I blame the tweeter who wrote the "No" before the "Yes"
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 31, 2024 14:03:04 GMT
Yes and No. That option doesn't actually remove the electoral college it just alters how some states would allocate their members of the college. Also it would be entirely possible for states who signed up to change back when and if it suits them. Quite: and that's an entirely serious possibility with elections so polarized (and so close) and with feelings on both sides running so high. There are actually solid arguments for retaining the EC. It reflects the federal nature of the US, and it means that when an election is close, and potentially disputed, the uncertainty is confined to a small number of states on whose counts attention can then be focused. But imagine if in a national popular vote the margin was a small fraction of 1% - it would be chaos. And besides, if the popular vote were so close that there was genuine doubt about who had won, how would the NPV scheme cope with that? If it were up to me I'd stick with the EC. I know it currently favours Republicans but that won't always be the case - these things even out over time.
If we factor in the essential fact that the USA is a federation of states, and the states have their own distinct identities within the system, it would not be realistic to have a simple system of counting the national popular vote. A sensible reform of the Electoral College system is to have a federal constitutional amendment for the electors from each state to be elected by PR (so that Florida in 2000 would have been 13-12 instead of 25-0), and for the actual election of the President to be done by the Electoral College voting by AV (or by repeated ballot) until someone has got 270 votes.
|
|
|
Post by cathyc on Aug 31, 2024 14:12:40 GMT
You misread the poll, didn't you? Don't worry, we've all done it! I blame the tweeter who wrote the "No" before the "Yes" Isn't there evidence from some studies that the answers in polls can depend on how the question is framed? So here if it had been "Should the Electoral College be scrapped" the numbers may well have been different and there is an effect caused by a double negative - as in 'no, it shouldn't be scrapped" does not have the same result as 'yes, it should be kept'.
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Aug 31, 2024 14:19:20 GMT
I blame the tweeter who wrote the "No" before the "Yes" Isn't there evidence from some studies that the answers in polls can depend on how the question is framed? So here if it had been "Should the Electoral College be scrapped" the numbers may well have been different and there is an effect caused by a double negative - as in 'no, it shouldn't be scrapped" does not have the same result as 'yes, it should be kept'. In the latest census, the "do you consider yourself English?" option was moved below the "do you consider yourself British?" option, in England. For the Wales and Scotland versions the Welsh/Scottish options remained at the top. Unsurprisingly the numbers for "English" fell compared to the previous census.
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 960
|
Post by nyx on Aug 31, 2024 14:34:01 GMT
When you look at the list of states it’s difficult for it to not be seen as a partisan exercise considering they’re all heavily Democrat controlled. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the Electoral College I can’t see how that would be sustainable It occurs to me that in the (fairly unlikely) event that Trump wins the popular vote in November whilst losing in the electoral college, it's possible that a lot of Republican state legislatures would decide to rapidly pass the NPVIC in the period between the election and the electoral college meeting, so as to try to let Trump become president.
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Aug 31, 2024 14:46:34 GMT
Very much aligned with the situation at our latest election where the Tories (almost always the beneficiaries of FPTP historically) - and Reform too - suffered under this system. Political parties will always want the system that suits them best; that's why it shouldnt be left to political parties to decide such things.
|
|
|
Post by timmullen on Aug 31, 2024 14:55:20 GMT
Of course even if the EC were abolished, a new system would need to take its place. The assumption here seems to be FPTP, but a two round system or AV (called instant run off voting in the States) could be options especially if smaller parties start to regularly put up stronger challenges à la Perot. I suspect they’d move to ranked choice voting akin to Alaska because of the logistics of running two general elections in such a small timeframe, and the calendar - you’ve got Thanksgiving thrown in the mix when a lot of people travel cross country for family gatherings, not to mention time to resolve any legal disputes as presumably there would still be a constitutional deadline for the House to certify the results.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 31, 2024 14:56:56 GMT
Does anyone know if it's actually possible to remove the College and have a uniform kind of majoritarian system? Has the current one just evolved out of the original necessity or is it embedded somehow in the Constitution? Would it have to be prised from 'cold, dead hands'? It is embedded in the Constitution - Article II Section 1. So what if the Electoral College system is embedded in the Constitution? Changing to a system of electing a President by the popular vote (plurality or majority) would merely require the passage of a constitutional amendment ion the normal way.
|
|
|
Post by stb12 on Aug 31, 2024 14:57:31 GMT
When you look at the list of states it’s difficult for it to not be seen as a partisan exercise considering they’re all heavily Democrat controlled. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the Electoral College I can’t see how that would be sustainable It occurs to me that in the (fairly unlikely) event that Trump wins the popular vote in November whilst losing in the electoral college, it's possible that a lot of Republican state legislatures would decide to rapidly pass the NPVIC in the period between the election and the electoral college meeting, so as to try to let Trump become president. No doubt, I certainly wasn’t suggesting partisanship just comes from the Democrats. It’s because of partisan interests that I can’t imagine the NPVIC being a sustainable or consistent way to go about things, it would just make an already very fraught and polarised political system even worse
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,765
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Aug 31, 2024 14:57:59 GMT
Well it's not exactly the same is it? Without wishing to sound too much like Davıd Boothroyd on this subject, the idea that there must be a strong link between total votes received and seats won in an election to a representative body is not nearly as self-evident as stronger advocates of proportional representation like to insist. Much comes down to the function and purpose of the representative body, and also on what we mean by representation. Whereas it is deeply peculiar for an election to a single public post to be indirectly conducted via direct elections for a Potemkin representative body. And it makes even less sense to do it in the precise way that it is presently done.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 31, 2024 15:16:38 GMT
I blame the tweeter who wrote the "No" before the "Yes" Isn't there evidence from some studies that the answers in polls can depend on how the question is framed? So here if it had been "Should the Electoral College be scrapped" the numbers may well have been different and there is an effect caused by a double negative - as in 'no, it shouldn't be scrapped" does not have the same result as 'yes, it should be kept'. I have a theory that the AV referendum in 2011 and the EU referendum in 2016 were both deliberately rigged because YES was listed on the ballot paper before NO, and REMAIN was listed before LEAVE. Normally the candidates in an election are listed in aaabcehillpt order.
|
|
r34t
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,115
|
Post by r34t on Aug 31, 2024 15:40:49 GMT
Just to reinforce the point that how people vote in a PR system is likely to be very different to how they may have voted in a FPTP election.
|
|
|
Post by swanarcadian on Aug 31, 2024 17:42:10 GMT
AV or the two round system makes sense when electing a president.
PR is more appropriate for legislative bodies, but not like the Dutch do it. Their party system pie chart resembles a very thinly sliced half pizza. Use open list D’Hondt but include a 5 percent threshold and maintain the constituency link by having a choice of 5-10 MPs to raise local matters with. All whilst keeping the principle of proportionality.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 31, 2024 18:27:03 GMT
AV or the two round system makes sense when electing a president. PR is more appropriate for legislative bodies, but not like the Dutch do it. Their party system pie chart resembles a very thinly sliced half pizza. Use open list D’Hondt but include a 5 percent threshold and maintain the constituency link by having a choice of 5-10 MPs to raise local matters with. All whilst keeping the principle of proportionality. If you have 5 to 10 MPs per constituency, then you don’t need to have an artificial threshold of 5%.
|
|
|
Post by timmullen on Aug 31, 2024 23:16:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by riccimarsh on Sept 1, 2024 0:01:01 GMT
A remarkably close Senate race too… I don’t know much about Dan Osborn, but Democrats must be ok with giving him a free run…
|
|
|
Post by timmullen on Sept 1, 2024 1:38:05 GMT
A remarkably close Senate race too… I don’t know much about Dan Osborn, but Democrats must be ok with giving him a free run… I know Wiki isn’t the most reliable source but it’s usually pretty accurate for American politicians. Seems he’s ex-Navy and a President of their equivalent of a trade union. I can’t find why he left the Democratic Party but it seems they left the field clear expecting him to run with their endorsement, an idea he ruled out the day after the primary. nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/05/15/dan-osborn-spurns-democrats-other-parties-whose-help-he-sought-in-senate-race/
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,447
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 1, 2024 6:28:48 GMT
Isn't there evidence from some studies that the answers in polls can depend on how the question is framed? So here if it had been "Should the Electoral College be scrapped" the numbers may well have been different and there is an effect caused by a double negative - as in 'no, it shouldn't be scrapped" does not have the same result as 'yes, it should be kept'. In the latest census, the "do you consider yourself English?" option was moved below the "do you consider yourself British?" option, in England. For the Wales and Scotland versions the Welsh/Scottish options remained at the top. Unsurprisingly the numbers for "English" fell compared to the previous census. This gets everywhere. When I've recently bought something through Amazon the payment page says: PAY FOR YOUR PURCHASE AND SUBSCRIBE TO PRIME pay for your purchase onlySeveral times I've only just caught myself. A few days ago I also realised I hadn't noticed: PAY FOR YOUR PURCHASE AND PAY FOR OVERNIGHT DELIVERY free standard 3-5 day deliveryI've been accidently paying an extra fiver on purchases. The doodad I ordered on Wednesday arrived on Thursday with standard no-extra-fee postage. Edit: Another thing as well. In setting up my work tablet I've had to install stuff from "The Playstore". When you search for the software and go to the download page, across the top of the page, highlighted, more distinctive than anything else, the bit your eye is automatically drawn to to go straight to to select...... IS A BLOODY DOWNLOAD LINK FOR SOMETHING ELSE! The *actual* software you want to download is further down the page.
|
|