Cal Club Autocross Forums

Jeff Shyu wrote:I know WHY it was created, but in this day and age, shouldn't the electoral votes at least SOMEWHAT reflect the popular vote numbers?

They could... and we attempted a few years back here in CA. If we could devise some sort of shaired appropriation of votes vs. winner gets all. I'd even go along with a winner gets a chunk, and the remainder being split based upon some system based upon a more local bases, such as county, house district something. Anything would be better than winner takes all in a state as large as CA, TX, NY ect.

As posted above, my vote in CA at this time in History for the president is a moot point.

i honestly didn't know she was married to Greenspan.

seriously, 55 electoral votes.

that's a huge chunk of the country in terms of electoral vote weight.

i just don't think the "winner take all" system is very democratic.

The election will be called in 4 minutes...

welcome to the end

Here's your sign.

Craig Naylor wrote:

Jeff Shyu wrote:I know WHY it was created, but in this day and age, shouldn't the electoral votes at least SOMEWHAT reflect the popular vote numbers?

They could... and we attempted a few years back here in CA. If we could devise some sort of shaired appropriation of votes vs. winner gets all. I'd even go along with a winner gets a chunk, and the remainder being split based upon some system based upon a more local bases, such as county, house district something. Anything would be better than winner takes all in a state as large as CA, TX, NY ect.

As posted above, my vote in CA at this time in History for the president is a moot point.

I'm not sure which attempt that was, but a change would require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Steve Forbes wrote an article a few years ago that was a pretty good argument for keeping the EC. Of course, every four years one side or the other wants to see it abolished. That would be the losing side.

EC or no, Obama won the popular vote.

There are good and obvious reasons for the Electoral College.

the EC was established back when the transfer of information was slow, and the populous was under-informed (though, i guess the "informed" part could still be argued). your elected official was suppose to be those who are more in touch with the news, and at the same time, in touch with the local interests. They would then represent your best interest in selecting the president.

I don't see how the intent of the EC is reflected in today's system at all. the west coast were all put into Obama's win column before the polls were even close to closing, simply because of the winner takes all system.

also, without the winner takes all, candidates may actually have to spend more than the price of jet fuel on campaigning in California.

I feel like my vote doesn't count as much as people in Ohio, due to the electoral college / winner takes all system. and THAT has nothing to do with who wins or loses.

Jeff Shyu wrote:the EC was established back when the transfer of information was slow, and the populous was under-informed (though, i guess the "informed" part could still be argued). your elected official was suppose to be those who are more in touch with the news, and at the same time, in touch with the local interests. They would then represent your best interest in selecting the president.

I don't see how the intent of the EC is reflected in today's system at all. the west coast were all put into Obama's win column before the polls were even close to closing, simply because of the winner takes all system.

also, without the winner takes all, candidates may actually have to spend more than the price of jet fuel on campaigning in California.

I feel like my vote doesn't count as much as people in Ohio, due to the electoral college / winner takes all system. and THAT has nothing to do with who wins or loses.

Who called California before 8 p.m.? Or do you mean before all the ballots are counted? I switched between CBS and BBC and neither gave Obama California before the polls closed.

I didn't specifically nor only mean you, Jeff. I wanted it gone after 2000, same as you. But often those whose candidate lost are the ones that want it abolished.

no one did, but you can't honestly say that any analysts were going to go any other way.

everyone counted on CA to go dems due to the winner takes all. It was more a formality than anything else (ala steve's "4 minutes til they call the race" comment).

I'm not looking to rid EC, i just think it should be modified to at least more closely resemble the voters' choices. when there's such a great disparity between the EC and Popular vote, representative it is not.

Jeff Shyu wrote:no one did, but you can't honestly say that any analysts were going to go any other way.

Well, McCain trailed in the polls here by a large margin. ...

everyone counted on CA to go dems due to the winner takes all. It was more a formality than anything else (ala steve's "4 minutes til they call the race" comment).

... add in the exit polling that was collected and then released AFTER the polls closed, and California was projected for Obama just after 8 p.m. Let's go back 24 years. It was a formality then also, except the beneficiary was Reagan. Now, if Ohio and Florida were hanging in the balance at 8:05, then California's votes wouldn't have had the same effect. Maybe Election Day should be a national holiday and have the polls all close at the same time.

I'm not looking to rid EC, i just think it should be modified to at least more closely resemble the voters' choices. when there's such a great disparity between the EC and Popular vote, representative it is not.

It's going to be hard to apportion 3 electoral votes in the less populous states. Some kind of weighting system like they have/had in France would be a nightmare. There is no great disparity this time.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:
I'm not sure which attempt that was, but a change would require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

To abolish the EC yes, to change how a states EC is allocated, no.

Personally I would like to see the EC go away, I'm realistic, in my lifetime that will never happen. But states decide how there EC's are voted. Can't recall which ones, but there are a (very) few states who do (or can based upon the results) split their allocation.

I'm good with baby steps, start with CA's state rules for allocation of the EC votes. As stated above, even within that I'll start with baby steps giving the "winner" a big chunk of them simply for winning.

edit: Found a link with a comment on N. Carolina doing just this. http://www.eyeon08.com/2007/07/27/north ... llocation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"It's a cookbook!"

-To Serve Man, 1962 Twilight Zone.