International News Trump impeached

tonyw

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
1,424
But if you take into account Cities like NYC, LA, Philadelphia, Chicago, Houston, New Orleans, etc. how many are strongholds for Republicans? Not many (and that is failing is on the Reps, 100%). Giuliani was the exception rather than the rule in New York. The electoral college takes that into account, but doesn't bias it - I can see why some Dems want to tinker with it all.

But, kind of not my concern here, but it does speak for a cleverly thought out political system!
So the problem with the electoral college is exactly the same as the problem with Britain's constituencies, as currently imagined.

We discussed last month how someone in Skye's vote was several times as important as the vote of someone in the Isle of White.
Same is true in the US - in Wyoming, each electoral college vote represents 192,920 people; in Texas, it's 763,050 (those are the two extremes - and obviously both Republican states, even if the demographic changes you mentioned are in danger of turning Texas purple).

Is a system really fair if someone who lives in Cheyenne has four times has much influence on who's going to be President as someone who lives in Dallas?
 

Gary Baldi

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
6,340
So the problem with the electoral college is exactly the same as the problem with Britain's constituencies, as currently imagined.

We discussed last month how someone in Skye's vote was several times as important as the vote of someone in the Isle of White.
Same is true in the US - in Wyoming, each electoral college vote represents 192,920 people; in Texas, it's 763,050 (those are the two extremes - and obviously both Republican states, even if the demographic changes you mentioned are in danger of turning Texas purple).

Is a system really fair if someone who lives in Cheyenne has four times has much influence on who's going to be President as someone who lives in Dallas?
It all depends on how their system is setup and the intent of it - but they do review the EC don't they after each election based on population? Thought I read that a long while back. Regardless, they set their system up to avoid big cities ruling the roost due to the size and disparate nature of the country, ours is not like that and has been bastardised many times by many Govts. I see why Dems want it changed as it would virtually give them power for life, which is what the founding fathers didn't want?

Re: Trump, Obama & Judges

 

tonyw

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
1,424
It all depends on how their system is setup and the intent of it - but they do review the EC don't they after each election based on population? Thought I read that a long while back. Regardless, they set their system up to avoid big cities ruling the roost due to the size and disparate nature of the country, ours is not like that and has been bastardised many times by many Govts. I see why Dems want it changed as it would virtually give them power for life, which is what the founding fathers didn't want?
They do, but they have a baseline - no state falls below three votes total - and the total must add up to 538.

So the states with the smallest populations (Wyoming, Montana, the Dakotas, Vermont, Rhode Island, Delaware etc. - so mostly, but not exclusively Republican) always get systematically overrepresented, and the states with the largest populations (Texas, California, Florida, New York) are always systematically underrepresented.

For the most part, it was a system that the founding fathers adopted as a compromise position to bring all the 13 states into the union, and allay the fears of some of the smaller ones of being ignored and overwhelmed by the biggest.

But as well as the fact that that was a time of minimal interstate movement and commerce compared to today, the strict two senate seats per state rule already achieves this - so really, this mechanism for the electoral college is just doubling up on discrimination in favour of residents of smaller states.
 

Gary Baldi

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
6,340
They do, but they have a baseline - no state falls below three votes total - and the total must add up to 538.

So the states with the smallest populations (Wyoming, Montana, the Dakotas, Vermont, Rhode Island, Delaware etc. - so mostly, but not exclusively Republican) always get systematically overrepresented, and the states with the largest populations (Texas, California, Florida, New York) are always systematically underrepresented.

For the most part, it was a system that the founding fathers adopted as a compromise position to bring all the 13 states into the union, and allay the fears of some of the smaller ones of being ignored and overwhelmed by the biggest.


But as well as the fact that that was a time of minimal interstate movement and commerce compared to today, the strict two senate seats per state rule already achieves this - so really, this mechanism for the electoral college is just doubling up on discrimination in favour of residents of smaller states.
And I am sure the founding fathers would say, yes, we designed the system in order to prevent one party or geographical area/s retaining a political grip on the USA for a sustained period of time. It maybe statistically unfair based on geographical size and population, but it ensures a sense of freedom and equal representation for all Americans.

The problem is the US system is rigidly fair at the top that today it's created a structure where a few seats move and super majorities are relatively rare. As such, a good reason to retain it "as is" in the hope this current partisan malaise burns out and people see sense on collaboration.
 

tonyw

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
1,424
And I am sure the founding fathers would say, yes, we designed the system in order to prevent one party or geographical area/s retaining a political grip on the USA for a sustained period of time. It maybe statistically unfair based on geographical size and population, but it ensures a sense of freedom and equal representation for all Americans.

The problem is the US system is rigidly fair at the top that today it's created a structure where a few seats move and super majorities are relatively rare. As such, a good reason to retain it "as is" in the hope this current partisan malaise burns out and people see sense on collaboration.
Except it doesn't, and that's the whole point of my post!

The representation is skewed - massively - in favour of residents of smaller states.
It's not even necessarily an urban vs. rural thing. Someone could live in a town in southern Pennsylvania, and then decide to move to a very similar town just across the border in Delaware, and all of a sudden their vote in the presidential election is worth four times as much!

Small states already have massive overrepresentation in the Senate. They shouldn't have massive overrepresentation in the presidential college as well.

And don't even get me started on gerrymandering........
 

Gary Baldi

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
6,340
Except it doesn't, and that's the whole point of my post!

The representation is skewed - massively - in favour of residents of smaller states.
It's not even necessarily an urban vs. rural thing. Someone could live in a town in southern Pennsylvania, and then decide to move to a very similar town just across the border in Delaware, and all of a sudden their vote in the presidential election is worth four times as much!

Small states already have massive overrepresentation in the Senate. They shouldn't have massive overrepresentation in the presidential college as well.

And don't even get me started on gerrymandering........
Perhaps the founding fathers didn't think more deeply about making some states sizes the same - the issue then is mitigated but they wouldn't know where the population would grow!. But... From the various proposals that have been floated by some from all sides, I don't think either party can be trusted to be bi-partisan on a new solution and thus the status quo will persist.

Or lots of people need to go to Vermont...
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Essexyellows In the news 706

Similar threads


Top Bottom