What is up with the EU

[drg]

Most people want to leave it in place because it works.

I wonder if you'd be singing the same tune if Kerry had won Ohio and another small state, winning the presidency while losing the popular vote by 3 million. It was entirely possible.

[Albinonewt]

I wonder if you'd be singing the same tune if Kerry had won Ohio and another small state, winning the presidency while losing the popular vote by 3 million. It was entirely possible.

I would have.

In order to win Ohio and another state he probably would have had to cut the margin down to less then 3 million votes, which is only 2% I can handle Bush winning the pop vote by 2% but losing the electoral by less then 1%. That's a pretty decent margin of error.

[drg]

I would have.

In order to win Ohio and another state he probably would have had to cut the margin down to less then 3 million votes, which is only 2% I can handle Bush winning the pop vote by 2% but losing the electoral by less then 1%. That's a pretty decent margin of error.

Well as our European friend pointed out, that percentage could quite possibly range a lot higher. And as the populations of our most populated states grow, the winner-takes-all system goes beyond simply enfranchising less-populated states to actively disenfranchising more populated states. Of course until it actually happens, there will be no real cry for reform.

[Lohman446]

The electoral system is in place for a reason, it has worked well in the past, sure it may be getting outdated, but with elections seeeming to get closer - well coudl you imagine a margin of less than 1% of the popular vote, then trying for a recount if it were a direct election, think of the chaos.

[drg]

The electoral system is in place for a reason, it has worked well in the past, sure it may be getting outdated, but with elections seeeming to get closer - well coudl you imagine a margin of less than 1% of the popular vote, then trying for a recount if it were a direct election, think of the chaos.

Of course it's not the aggregation function that doesn't work, it's the winner-take-all nature that is always a threat to cause undesirable results.

[PyRo]

Just imagine if one canidate won by 1% in a popular vote system. It would turn into a huge ordeal demanding recounts all over, claiming this vote or that vote wasn't properly counted, this county didn't get absentee ballots out on time, etc, etc. You know what go ahead and change it to a popular vote Bush will get another four years in office while Hilary and Arnold are battling it out in court over who won the election.

[Lohman446]

Just imagine if one canidate won by 1% in a popular vote system. It would turn into a huge ordeal demanding recounts all over, claiming this vote or that vote wasn't properly counted, this county didn't get absentee ballots out on time, etc, etc. You know what go ahead and change it to a popular vote Bush will get another four years in office while Hilary and Arnold are battling it out in court over who won the election.

Arnold, unless there is an amendment to the Constitution, is not eligible to be president.

[Albinonewt]

The electoral college minimizes fraud. It's genius, it's needed, it should stay.

[-Carnifex-]

The electoral college minimizes fraud. It's genius, it's needed, it should stay.

How so?

[Albinonewt]

Say there are a million fraudulant votes cast in South Dakota, for example. Now, in a close popular vote election those votes could change the entire course of the election, but with the electoral college that fraud can only affect South Dakota. The first contest between Bush and Gore was extremely close in the popular vote. We all know what a disaster Florida was. How much fun would it have been if the ENTIRE country had to be recounted?

[1stdeadeye]

I wonder if you'd be singing the same tune if Kerry had won Ohio and another small state, winning the presidency while losing the popular vote by 3 million. It was entirely possible.

If....

Wah go cry somewhere else!

[PyRo]

Arnold, unless there is an amendment to the Constitution, is not eligible to be president.

It was supposed to be a joke. We already went through wheather or not we should ammend the constitution to allow forigners to run for president like Arnold wants.

[PyRo]

Say there are a million fraudulant votes cast in South Dakota, for example. Now, in a close popular vote election those votes could change the entire course of the election, but with the electoral college that fraud can only affect South Dakota. The first contest between Bush and Gore was extremely close in the popular vote. We all know what a disaster Florida was. How much fun would it have been if the ENTIRE country had to be recounted?

I bet you could recount the popular vote five times for the last election and each time you would come up several million votes differant than the last count :)

[1stdeadeye]

I bet you could recount the popular vote five times for the last election and each time you would come up several million votes differant than the last count :)

Only in NJ and Chicago!

[drg]

If....

Wah go cry somewhere else!

Cry? This was a theoretical question. Does it not bother you that with a swing of only a few hundred thousand votes, someone could have taken the presidency with several million votes less than another? I know it kind of bugs me. Having someone take the presidency with HALF a million less votes was pretty bad for the electoral system and democracy in general in the US -- the same thing multiplied fivefold or more could only be worse.