Electoral College: Closer to being gone than you think

[USS Triumphant]

Well with regards to voting, don't complain about the result if you couldn't be bothered to vote. But why hasn't a third party or more managed to gain some traction in the US.

The less generous part of me says it is because of the rah-rah-go-our-team mentality of much of the American populace that has to turn everything into Us vs Them, and having more than one Us or more than one Them, or a third party that isn't either one, is just too much for them to handle.

But it is also true that the two major parties have done a pretty darned good job of legislating a degree of security for their own mutual control of the system. Getting at least 5% of the vote guarantees your party's candidate is on the ballot next time - which they always do, but is very hard for a new party or even a smaller established one like the Green or Libertarian parties. Without that guarantee, you have something like $25 million dollars to pay and 7.2 million signatures to get altogether to be on the ballot in all 50 states - and it's a state by state process, also, not something you can just turn in to the Federal Elections Commission one time.

And then voters tend to be reluctant to lose whatever seniority and party connections their politician has in the House/Senate to bring benefits (and pork) to their district/state. Everyone says "throw the bastards out" but what they usually actually mean and demonstrate at the polls is "throw all the bastards out except MY bastard".

And THEN, there actually have been a few times when a third party has done well - like Ross Perot and the Reform Party in 1992 - but repeat performance to build on those successes is hard because mostly when that happens, it's really the candidate, not the party. The Reform Party ran Perot again in '96, but at that point he already had the stink of "loser" (and not just a loser, but a loser who had blown his own chances with his choice of Veep and other weird behavior like dropping out and dropping back in, in '92) and was running against a popular incumbent. And then 2000 came and the Reform Party ran Pat Buchanan and the nation mostly either yawned and said "who?" or knew who he was and said "hell no". It being the candidate and not the party was mostly true of Ron Paul with the Libertarians, too. Gary Johnson has only done as well as he has the last two elections (still below 5%) because of the people he was running against, not really his own merits.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

See Duverger’s "law."

 

[USS Triumphant]

Oh - and the only way we could change any of this to make the system more open would be to get the politicians it benefits to change it (HA) or to call a Constitutional Convention. (VERY difficult, but under way - by people I don't trust to defend Constitutional principles, unfortunately.)

 

[RJDiogenes]

Well with regards to voting, don't complain about the result if you couldn't be bothered to vote.

I'm not sure if you were talking to me or making a general statement, but I always vote, even if I have to write someone in.

But why hasn't a third party or more managed to gain some traction in the US.

Because the system inevitably leads to a two-party confrontation. That's why we need the dual reforms of direct voting and ranked voting-- it's the only way to make independent candidates and alternative parties viable.

Oh - and the only way we could change any of this to make the system more open would be to get the politicians it benefits to change it (HA) or to call a Constitutional Convention. (VERY difficult, but under way - by people I don't trust to defend Constitutional principles, unfortunately.)

That's pretty much where it stands, yeah.

 

[MacLeod]

I'm not sure if you were talking to me or making a general statement, but I always vote, even if I have to write someone in.


Because the system inevitably leads to a two-party confrontation. That's why we need the dual reforms of direct voting and ranked voting-- it's the only way to make independent candidates and alternative parties viable.


That's pretty much where it stands, yeah.

It was a general comment about don't complain about the result if you didn't vote.

But take the UK for example we have two main parties the Conservatives and Labour. But we still have multiple other parties such as the Lib Dems, SNP (in Scotland), Greens, Plaid Cymru (in Wales) plus a host of others not to mention Independants. Whilst it is true that it's rare anyone other than the two main parties will ever form a UK Government they can still win seats in Parliament. It doesn't seem as if the third parties in the US manage even that though sometimes an Independandt does (I think one in the US is Bernie Sanders).

 

[Refuge]

It's compulsory voting in Australia. Every time there's a local body, State, or of course Federal vote if you are of age you need to register and be crossed off the list at the voting polls.

The US Electoral College I think is a good system. Not always but usually the populist vote is going to match up with the Electoral tally win. At least parts of your big country don't get to tell some dismissed farmers (the ones who can still make a living being a farmer) in the middle of the land they don't count.

Trump ran a better election campaign than his opponent.

 

[RJDiogenes]

It was a general comment about don't complain about the result if you didn't vote.

Gotcha. And I agree.

It doesn't seem as if the third parties in the US manage even that though sometimes an Independandt does (I think one in the US is Bernie Sanders).

There are a handful, but the system makes it very difficult for them.

It's compulsory voting in Australia.

I don't agree with that, though. Everybody should also have the right to not vote, if that's what they prefer.

At least parts of your big country don't get to tell some dismissed farmers (the ones who can still make a living being a farmer) in the middle of the land they don't count.

The big problem with the Electoral College is not that it occasionally results in the loser winning, but that it discourages people from voting-- because their votes don't count. It's nice enough that I was able to vote for Sanders without contributing to Trump's victory, but I only was able to do that because I live in a blue state where my vote is meaningless. I could have voted for anybody or nobody and the result would have been the same. If everybody's vote counted-- because it goes directly to the candidate and because you get to name your second choice-- then more people would be involved.

Trump ran a better election campaign than his opponent.

He ran a surreal circus that should have been nothing more than an amusing novelty.

 

[Refuge]

Hmm.. well as much as it seems dictatorial that you MUST vote at least you put your money where your mouth is when you have to. People have died for the right to vote and now present day voters can't get off their arses to vote. They are the worst of the lot. It's not a 'preference' when losers choose not to vote.. it's pathetic in my opinion.

I'm sorry I know everyone has to hate Trump, but he is a player. He knows the rules of the game he is in. He played the rules of the Electoral College smarter than Hillary did. SHE let herself down by being lazy. You guys underestimated Trumps supporters. They didn't have the populist numbers but they had the numbers that counted.

Fact is I think I would've voted for him. Hillary wasn't in touch..

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Everybody should also have the right to not vote, if that's what they prefer.

Why?

 

[Tenacity]

He ran a surreal circus that should have been nothing more than an amusing novelty.

In spite of that still delivered a clearer message than Clinton, who usually came off as having no message.

It's compulsory voting in Australia. Every time there's a local body, State, or of course Federal vote if you are of age you need to register and be crossed off the list at the voting polls.

If you show up at the polling place, get crossed off the list and then choose not to vote, will the state harm you in some fashion? Monetarily, incarceration?

 

[MacLeod]

Why?

Perhaps because in many democracies you have freedom of choice (well at least within the laws of the land). But if you choose not to vote you are basically saying I don't care who wins. Now that might be because you don't trust politicans (who does) or some other reason. But for example in the UK you go and spoil your ballot paper, but the number of spoiled ballot papers are counted and disclosed so perhaps if suddenly instead of a few dozen spoiled papers we hada few thousands politicans might take more note (doubt it though)

Hmm.. well as much as it seems dictatorial that you MUST vote at least you put your money where your mouth is when you have to. People have died for the right to vote and now present day voters can't get off their arses to vote. They are the worst of the lot. It's not a 'preference' when losers choose not to vote.. it's pathetic in my opinion.

I'm sorry I know everyone has to hate Trump, but he is a player. He knows the rules of the game he is in. He played the rules of the Electoral College smarter than Hillary did. SHE let herself down by being lazy. You guys underestimated Trumps supporters. They didn't have the populist numbers but they had the numbers that counted.

Fact is I think I would've voted for him. Hillary wasn't in touch..

Not wanting to turn this thread in to a Trump thread, but I doubt many of those jobs in the coal industry will come back, coal is in decline as a fuel source. What aout Healthcare, should the GOP ever get to repealing the PPACA I suspect many Trump supporters will find themselves without medical insurance. One never knows when they will get sick and what they will get sick with.

But with regards to the EC surely the way to make it fair is that each college vote is worth approximatly the same number of population i.e 300 000 people. (and yes I'm aware it's tied into the US constitution, but mechanisms were put in place to ammend it so it kept up with the times).

But politicans are loathe to change anything that might give their opposition an advanatge. So very little changes. Then we have the voters with die-hard supporters on both sides refusing to believe anything that doesn't conform to their beliefs, despite seemingly overwhelming evidence to support that they are wrong.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

But if you choose not to vote you are basically saying I don't care who wins.

Voting is an absolute civic duty. It's everyone's responsibilty as a citizen. There's no excuse not to do it.

 

[Refuge]

If you show up at the polling place, get crossed off the list and then choose not to vote, will the state harm you in some fashion? Monetarily, incarceration?

If it is that important to not vote then there are of course ways around it. Including showing up, getting your name, address etc. crossed or ruled out, being given the ballot papers and then when you go into the the booth you can put nothing down. Submit nothing if that is what you want to represent. Some people go out of their way to not register in the first place. No voting, jury service .. There are fines but I think they are really pithy amounts. At least at first..

 

[Refuge]

Perhaps because in many democracies you have freedom of choice (well at least within the laws of the land). But if you choose not to vote you are basically saying I don't care who wins. Now that might be because you don't trust politicans (who does) or some other reason. But for example in the UK you go and spoil your ballot paper, but the number of spoiled ballot papers are counted and disclosed so perhaps if suddenly instead of a few dozen spoiled papers we hada few thousands politicans might take more note (doubt it though)


Not wanting to turn this thread in to a Trump thread, but I doubt many of those jobs in the coal industry will come back, coal is in decline as a fuel source. What aout Healthcare, should the GOP ever get to repealing the PPACA I suspect many Trump supporters will find themselves without medical insurance. One never knows when they will get sick and what they will get sick with.

But with regards to the EC surely the way to make it fair is that each college vote is worth approximatly the same number of population i.e 300 000 people. (and yes I'm aware it's tied into the US constitution, but mechanisms were put in place to ammend it so it kept up with the times).

But politicans are loathe to change anything that might give their opposition an advanatge. So very little changes. Then we have the voters with die-hard supporters on both sides refusing to believe anything that doesn't conform to their beliefs, despite seemingly overwhelming evidence to support that they are wrong.

I think in part this hand wringing is a Trump backlash. Like he won and now it's how dare the Electoral College system let that happen. I know it's not all about Trump because there will always be people unhappy with such a system, especially when the candidate they wanted didn't win.

Observing that election last year it astounded me that not ONE indication filtered through our press that hinted Trump would win. I'm not even talking about 80% bitching about Trump stories, it was 100% bitching about Trump. Every poll showed Hillary had it all but in the bag. The way it was framed was that there were only a few Trump supporters and they were all running around minus teeth and with pitch forks. Seriously it was rather insulting. I did wonder if the silent Trump supporter just wanted to be recognised.. Imagine it. Your family has seen its farm or industry traded off for a better deal overseas. You see Wall street propped up. You send your child off to a foreign war because he's an actual citizen and then you get told you are a racist, misogynist, 'whatever', or just as bad.. you apparently don't exist. Whether Trump can help these people or not does remain to be seen but at least he saw them.

Frankly I would be very careful about ditching the Electoral College system. It is not that commonplace when the popular vote is not the Electoral win as well, but those few times when it does happen should be a wakeup call that you have a spread of votes that represent all parts of you country not just the coastal or financial centers. Those forgotten areas need more Electoral votes.. otherwise they would lose out every time.

 

[MacLeod]

I think in part this hand wringing is a Trump backlash. Like he won and now it's how dare the Electoral College system let that happen. I know it's not all about Trump because there will always be people unhappy with such a system, especially when the candidate they wanted didn't win.

Observing that election last year it astounded me that not ONE indication filtered through our press that hinted Trump would win. I'm not even talking about 80% bitching about Trump stories, it was 100% bitching about Trump. Every poll showed Hillary had it all but in the bag. The way it was framed was that there were only few Trump supporters and they were all running around minus teeth and with pitch forks. Seriously it was rather insulting. I did wonder if the silent Trump supporter just wanted to be recognised.. Imagine it. Your family has seen its farm or industry traded off for a better deal overseas. You see Wall street propped up. You send your child off to a foreign war because he's an actual citizen and then you get told you are a racist, misogynist, whatever. or just as bad.. you apparently don't exist. Whether Trump can help these people or not does remain to be seen but at least he saw them.

Frankly I would be very careful about ditching the Electoral College system. It is not that commonplace when the popular vote is not the Electoral win as well, but those few times when it does happen should be a wakeup call that you have a spread of votes that represent all parts of you country not just the coastal or financial centers. Those forgotten areas need more Electoral votes.. otherwise they would lose out every time.

I think you might need to edit this so quotes and replies are attributed correctly.

 

[Refuge]

Where? I thought it was okay?

 

[RJDiogenes]

I'm sorry I know everyone has to hate Trump, but he is a player. He knows the rules of the game he is in. He played the rules of the Electoral College smarter than Hillary did. SHE let herself down by being lazy.

He expected to lose as much as anybody. It really was the failure of Clinton and the Democrats.

Why?

Freedom.

In spite of that still delivered a clearer message than Clinton, who usually came off as having no message.

Yes, she was about the worst option the Democrats had.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Freedom.

And do you expect to have "freedom" from paying taxes as well?

 

[RJDiogenes]

And do you expect to have "freedom" from paying taxes as well?

Do you expect to make apple pie using oranges?

Are there any other rights you'd like to turn into a requirement? Make speaking your mind mandatory? Round people up to peaceably assemble? Force them to carry guns? Pair them up with lawyers whether they want them or not?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The point is that paying taxes is an absolute civic duty that can't be avoided - you don't have the "freedom" not to pay. Why should voting be any different? Why should you have the freedom not to vote?