Why would this be better? More importantly, if we're changing the system why not just abolish the electoral college entirely?That way if the two idiots (ahem, candidates) come within 1% of one another as election day closes then the state is frozen and the electoral votes are split. Are there not already states that split electoral votes among candidates? And what would be the down side to this? Neither candidate is worthy enough?
That way if the two idiots (ahem, candidates) come within 1% of one another as election day closes then the state is frozen and the electoral votes are split. Are there not already states that split electoral votes among candidates? And what would be the down side to this? Neither candidate is worthy enough?
If you have a 1% rule you still have a problem proving that it's really 1% and not 1.01%. Lawsuits!!!!!!!!!!!That way if the two idiots (ahem, candidates) come within 1% of one another as election day closes then the state is frozen and the electoral votes are split. Are there not already states that split electoral votes among candidates? And what would be the down side to this? Neither candidate is worthy enough?
He's also demonstrated that nobody should vote for an incorrigible narcissist pathological liar for president.If there is one thing that Trump has clearly demonstrated is that it is definitely time to do away with the electoral college.
This system allows minority rule, so those in the minority (and they have quite a bit of power right now) will never agree to it.If there is one thing that Trump has clearly demonstrated is that it is definitely time to do away with the electoral college.
Are there not already states that split electoral votes among candidates?
He's also demonstrated that nobody should vote for an incorrigible narcissist pathological liar for president.
I saw posting here of a to-me novel idea that's been bandied about in political circles, a way of doing an end run around minority rule. Namely, a cabal of states with a lot of electoral votes, totaling 270+ that pledge to cast their electoral votes for the ticket with the most votes nationally. I suppose that could be engineered state by state. One state does it, then another, snowballs to the point where 270+ electoral votes are guaranteed and you have effectively eliminated the electoral college morass.
Could this be engineered? I don't know. Swing states may not want to do that. Do they get something out of being swing states other than a deluge of advertising? Would red states be against it? Universally?
Yup. It's a real thing.
Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote
One-page explanation (PDF) The National Popular Vote law will guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It will apply the one-person-one-vote principle to presidential elections, and make every vote equal. Why a...www.nationalpopularvote.com
And probably our "easiest" path to a nation vote that doesn't require a constitutional convention.
So, we can try to reform a broken system put in place 230 years ago by white male slave owners, or we can just let every single vote for President be equal to every other vote for President.
Touch choice.
A partially split electoral system doesn't really work. In fact, it only exacerbated the current problem. If all electoral split based on vote share it may be okay, but you still get the 2 free electoral per state.
Also, Biden is a good presidential candidate. You personally may not like him, but he's certainly not an "idiot." The only real idiots here are Trump and the 70 million that voted for 4 more years of a wannabe dictator that is objectively the worst in US history.
n0b0dy pops into a thread, screams at mirror, shits himself in anger, and runs off."Biden is a good presidential candidate?"
Are you high or just incredibly stupid?
The man had gaffs in the thousands. His public speaking is horrendous. His cabinet that is currently being filled is already chalk-full of big-pharma, big-tech, big-oil, lobbyists galore.....
If this is your idea of a good presidential candidate than you sincerely need some mental help.
"Biden is a good presidential candidate?"
Are you high or just incredibly stupid?
The man had gaffs in the thousands. His public speaking is horrendous. His cabinet that is currently being filled is already chock-full of big-pharma, big-tech, big-oil, lobbyists galore.....
If this is your idea of a good presidential candidate than you sincerely need some mental help. This is status quo 101. Nothing will change, corporate lobbyists will be very happy Americans will be pissed as usual.
The best progressive candidate of change was Elizabeth Warren. Unfortunately I don't think she would have gotten the 80 million votes."Biden is a good presidential candidate?"
Are you high or just incredibly stupid?
The man had gaffs in the thousands. His public speaking is horrendous. His cabinet that is currently being filled is already chock-full of big-pharma, big-tech, big-oil, lobbyists galore.....
If this is your idea of a good presidential candidate than you sincerely need some mental help. This is status quo 101. Nothing will change, corporate lobbyists will be very happy Americans will be pissed as usual.
He beat an incumbent by the largest amount of any candidate since FDR. Apparently he did something right."Biden is a good presidential candidate?"
Are you high or just incredibly stupid?
The man had gaffs in the thousands. His public speaking is horrendous. His cabinet that is currently being filled is already chock-full of big-pharma, big-tech, big-oil, lobbyists galore.....
If this is your idea of a good presidential candidate than you sincerely need some mental help. This is status quo 101. Nothing will change, corporate lobbyists will be very happy Americans will be pissed as usual.