From today's New York Times:
A caution: the article is neither short not easy ...
A caution: the article is neither short not easy ...
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
An interesting observation about the Electoral College
- Thread starter Jayhawker Soule
- Start date
Balthazzar
N. Germanic Descent
Will you summarize the implication of the article? Maybe I'm being lazy. I would hate a seat in congress. I like to read, discern, and add insight, but not so much that I'm eager to at every intersection presenting itself on the tables of consideration. I do need to examine how the electoral college functions, though. I'll wait for other comments. I am eager to read this thread ... just not the article.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Yes a good article, it is not that there wasn't a midterm correction, but it seems to have been held back in elections that relied on MAGA politics.
We can hope that the same holds true for the presidential election but bodes poorly for Democratic control of Congress.
Balthazzar
N. Germanic Descent
Reigns without a counter restraint can be a very dangerous proposition. The iron clad type of rule requires a counter-balance of power. This seems to be applicable in every aspect of life, including religion and our bill of rights. For this reason, I love supporting the efforts of the Satanist Temple ... as a Christian when it pertains to separation of church and state and equalizing the playing field more inclusively.
Large group agendas and conquests are rarely met with absolute passage rights. I prefer it this way. Our government was set up to enable balance of power. It helps everyone from being neglected and abused by those who hold contrary positions to our own.
Last edited:
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Actually impossible for some of us to read.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Try this.
Republicans’ Electoral College Edge, Once Seen as Ironclad, Looks to Be Fading
A review of the evidence that Donald Trump’s advantage relative to the national popular vote has declined significantly.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
Nevertheless the ridiculous antiquated Electoral College needs to GO. It's the only political office (in the USA) that doesn't use a simple vote count, and it distorts a lot of other things, like electioneering (the "swing" states get all the attention). It also occurs to me that a popular vote system would make the current vote suppression attempts much more difficult as they would need to be country wide. I would say the same if the current system favored the Democrats. Get rid of it!
Clizby Wampuscat
Well-Known Member
I disagree, the vote pandering would just shift to the major cities and the the vast majority of the country would have no say. Last election Biden received 57% of the EV's and only 51.3% of the popular vote. Trump received 43% of the EV's but had 46.7% of the popular vote. It does seems to favor democrats.
I hear a lot of complaining about it but no action from politicians.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
It is the major cities now, it is just the major population centers in a very limited number of states. Nothing is bringing back whistle-stop campaigning with the candidate on the back of the train. Yes, biden's win was a distortion of the popular vote, but that is the problem, when Trump won in 2016 he didn't even win the popular vote, that is how distorting it is.
Altfish
Veteran Member
The problem with the US's current system is that about 95% of the people are irrelevant to the outcome. People are not fussed about turning out to vote because they will make no difference to the outcome. The party with the most votes (i.e. the popular vote should be the winner. Take California, in the last election Biden got 63.48% of the votes, Trump 34.32%. Yet Biden won all 55 electoral college votes, Biden should have won about 35 to Trumps 20.
The UK is similar but usually not quite as bad; in our system with about six parties, in the recent election Labour received 33.7% of the vote but ended with a massive majority in our Parliament. That cannot be right (and I voted Labour)
Pogo
Well-Known Member
just a note, as a subscriber you can share 10/month.
click on share full article under the title and copy, then paste.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Exactly and we all know most urban areas are going to be Democrat favored , so one knows where the truth lies in the rhetoric about eliminating the Electoral College.
Canada is much like the UK in that respect. It is technically possible for 1 of our 5 parties to get as littel as 25% of the popular vote, and yet every single seat in Parliament. (It's unlikely, but technically possible. Still, the party winning the majority of seats usually wins well under 40% of the popular vote.)
Pogo
Well-Known Member
well if you only had two main parties like us you wouldn't have that problem, but how often does one party win a majority of seats without forming a coalition?
Pogo
Well-Known Member
well since they are supposed to be according to population, why don't we just do it according to popular vote instead of house majority? you are not really solving the problem.
Not as often as I'd like, but still, since 2004, 5 out of 7 governments have been minority governments, requiring the support of another party, and this happens at the provincial level, as well.
I happen to be a fan of minority government -- it tends to mean that those in power have to tread a little more carefully, have to listen to more voices than just their own. It's harder work for them, but I frankly think that's a good thing.
More than that, I think it would happen even more often if we abandoned our first-past-the-post system and move to some sort of proportional representation. That would certainly mean more coalitions, and coalitions seem like a good thing to me.
I did. I must have exceeded my allotment.
Note: if you examine the URL in the link, it ends: "=url-share"
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Didn't look, worked for me so I shared it for you.
Of course I’m solving the problem. It still gives small states some input while avoiding winner take all and a focus on the most populated. Also breaks up big states like Texas, New York and California.