Electoral College

[scott2000]

Pretty cool maps....

The prism map is interesting....interactive....Amazing what a different perspective looks like

http://metrocosm.com/election-2016-map-3d/

 

[living sounds]

I thought this was well explored but apparently not.

For the Nth time we are not a simple democracy, more like a representative democracy or constitutional democracy. The framers not only wanted to prevent the federal government from gaining too much power over individual states, but to also protect individuals from the tyranny of the masses. 

Progressives calling to lower the voting age to 16 YO is not to seek out thoughtful, informed, voters, but to expand the pool of easily manipulated low information voters.

Arguments that an individual's vote doesn't matter are raised by both sides (apparently pretty successfully) to discourage voters with opposing views.  The "swing state" straw man is a new argument against the EC. There would still be swing states with simple democracy just with swing state lines drawn closer and relative to the population centers. For another "my one vote doesn't matter" argument, why would a CA voter still vote, if the election outcome has already been settled by states voting a few time zones earlier? A problem that did not exist a couple centuries ago. Of course there are relatively simple remedies for this too. 

The actual argument our founders debated is how a simple democracy would consolidate power in the most populous states  (at the time NY, VA,  MA, and PA because CA wasn't a state yet ) and disempower the smaller states (DE, GA, KY, and VT) reducing their influence over federal government decisions.

I can imagine improvements to our constitution to better deal with modern distortions that allow some sectors undue influence, but most of them have remedies already in the constitution if we just follow it honestly. Amendments are difficult but possible for any real changes needed.

I expect more silly arguments as both political parties jockey for power leading into 2020.

JR

PS: With a population of a few hundred million souls, it is hard to argue that any one vote matters, but this is all about citizenship and investing people with some ownership in their country.

Now matter how you dress it, what it boils down to is valueing arbitrarily drawn borders over actual people. And again, the electoral college discourages voter participation, as evidenced by studies:

https://www.npr.org/2016/11/26/503170280/charts-is-the-electoral-college-dragging-down-voter-turnout-in-your-state
https://www.ledger-enquirer.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/article29214202.html

As for the other points: Obviously vote counts should only be made official after the last poll in the entire country has closed. The current practice is indeed a remnant from the 19th century. Voter registration should be automatic (I get a notice from my government for every election, no need to register). Election day should be on a sunday or better a national holiday. Voting restrictions should be banned on the federal level. The shenanigans the Republicans pull of with increasing vigor every cycle are unbelivable attacks on Democracy itself. Especially in a country with such a long and sad tradition of voter disenfrechisement.

And please, no more "the founders in their infinite wisdom..." "arguments". They were only men, fallible like everyone else, making it up as they went along in their pre-scientific time. They themselves would not have seen their system as an unchangable work of art.

 

[pucho812]

Now matter how you dress it, what it boils down to is valueing arbitrarily drawn borders over actual people. And again, the electoral college discourages voter participation, as evidenced by studies:

https://www.npr.org/2016/11/26/503170280/charts-is-the-electoral-college-dragging-down-voter-turnout-in-your-state
https://www.ledger-enquirer.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/article29214202.html

As for the other points: Obviously vote counts should only be made official after the last poll in the entire country has closed. The current practice is indeed a remnant from the 19th century. Voter registration should be automatic (I get a notice from my government for every election, no need to register). Election day should be on a sunday or better a national holiday. Voting restrictions should be banned on the federal level. The shenanigans the Republicans pull of with increasing vigor every cycle are unbelivable attacks on Democracy itself. Especially in a country with such a long and sad tradition of voter disenfrechisement.

And please, no more "the founders in their infinite wisdom..." "arguments". They were only men, fallible like everyone else, making it up as they went along in their pre-scientific time. They themselves would not have seen their system as an unchangable work of art.

I wouldn't hold the shenanigans to be singularly from one party.  I think you will find that both sides over here do their fair share of shenanigans. 

 

[Matador]

I wouldn't hold the shenanigans to be singularly from one party.  I think you will find that both sides over here do their fair share of shenanigans.

You are right: both sides are at fault (pic of states that fail the new 'efficiency gap' calculation):

 

[pucho812]

You are right: both sides are at fault (pic of states that fail the new 'efficiency gap' calculation):

you math is off.

 

[PRR]

The original deal was that STATES (legislatures) would pick Electors any way they wanted.

Remember before there was a "United" States, there were a dozen Legislatures who had many decades of experience in governance, and who were wary of ceding power, and had to keep control of the unified government.

This shifted over time. The President did not have more power than the Senate or Reps, states moved to Popular Election of Electors. When things were tight, state and county officials could always Vote The Dead and get the Electors they wanted.

Of course this power must be used effectively, which means once the state true leaders pick a side, they must vote the WHOLE state that way.

Someone keeps saying "Maine". Yes, we split our Electors last time. As in Calif, this may "more fairly represent" Maine's split between southern urban and back-woods thinking. Or, as in so much Maine politics, it may simply null-out our vote. Locally, so many proposals are such a 50:50 split between urban and woods that nothing really gets done. It has been suggested that if we PAID our Gov and Legislature professional salaries, we would get professional-level leaders; but most don't like seeing more money for sitting in Augusta, and the sitters kinda like the informal crowd of retirees and non-profit execs.

Low turn-out in the US when other places people are fighting and dying to vote--- well, to them it MATTERS. Here in the US we rarely have a significant choice. Flavor R or flavor D? Both the old-time parties have shifted from what they used to be. Any particular candidate will say one thing then do as he is told/asked by party/lobbyists. OK, _I_ voted-out Bruce because he became a total tool. This kid Jared has not been corrupted yet. (All this complicated by first use of RCV.) But do I think the direction of the country will change with Jared instead of Bruce? I think it will take a microscope to tell. By the time a shift could be visible, Jared will be a tool too. Ignoring hyperbolic tweets, the USA is doing OK and it generally can not do a lot better because we can't/won't pay for it, or because entrenched interests prevent major changes.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Now matter how you dress it, what it boils down to is valueing arbitrarily drawn borders over actual people. And again, the electoral college discourages voter participation, as evidenced by studies:

https://www.npr.org/2016/11/26/503170280/charts-is-the-electoral-college-dragging-down-voter-turnout-in-your-state
https://www.ledger-enquirer.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/article29214202.html

I doubt the founders held the public in very high regard... I can't say that I do either.

As for the other points: Obviously vote counts should only be made official after the last poll in the entire country has closed. The current practice is indeed a remnant from the 19th century. Voter registration should be automatic (I get a notice from my government for every election, no need to register). Election day should be on a sunday or better a national holiday. Voting restrictions should be banned on the federal level. The shenanigans the Republicans pull of with increasing vigor every cycle are unbelivable attacks on Democracy itself. Especially in a country with such a long and sad tradition of voter disenfrechisement.

as I said easily remedied...

And please, no more "the founders in their infinite wisdom..." "arguments". They were only men, fallible like everyone else, making it up as they went along in their pre-scientific time. They themselves would not have seen their system as an unchangable work of art.

We need more fallible leaders like that... :  A great deal of study into comparable systems of governance, was performed. Not really hard science but more psychology and human behavior, already mature disciplines hundreds of years ago.

General Washington was offered being made King and declined... They don't make leaders like that, or if they did, they would never get elected in todays toxic political environment.

So sorry no, I will still hold out founders in the high regard they deserve.

JR

 

[living sounds]

I doubt the founders held the public in very high regard... I can't say that I do either. as I said easily remedied... We need more fallible leaders like that... :  A great deal of study into comparable systems of governance, was performed. Not really hard science but more psychology and human behavior, already mature disciplines hundreds of years ago.

General Washington was offered being made King and declined... They don't make leaders like that, or if they did, they would never get elected in todays toxic political environment.

So sorry no, I will still hold out founders in the high regard they deserve.

JR

Well, you're the king of non sequiturs. 

 

[JohnRoberts]

Well, you're the king of non sequiturs. 

Thank you... :

And please, no more "the founders in their infinite wisdom..." "arguments". They were only men, fallible like everyone else, making it up as they went along in their pre-scientific time. They themselves would not have seen their system as an unchangable work of art.

Nice pivot to attack them, (I don't recall saying they had infinite wisdom but they were brilliant thinkers IMO so I may have). I wouldn't call them "pre-scientific time", more like pre-social media.  :

They may have lived before modern "social science" was a named discipline of study (but not before science), and not before the debate and discussion of government by informed people. Arguably the constitution was a grand social (science) experiment.

I am confident they didn't view the constitution as "unchangeable", or why would they have incorporated the amendment process within it to change it as needed.

I expect they would be surprised that their grand experiment was this successful and survived for centuries. Indeed it was novel, but not exactly thrown together. They studied all other forms of government that went before and addressed the apparent flaws to the best of their ability.  I don't feel lucky about lasting for centuries from here but will not be around to worry about that. I do not expect improvement from here to come from removing key features.

The world has changed, but human nature (and frailty) remains the same constant impediment to good governance it always was. 

JR

PS: To speak about actual governance the senate is again invoking the nuclear option (simple majority) to approve administration appointments that the minority has been slow walking for the last two years to thwart the administration accomplishing policy goals. The nuclear option has been invoked 3 times in the last decade so arguably senate politics in getting more contentious. The nuclear option is a last ditch remedy, that can come back to bite the party if (when) they later lose the senate and are in the minority again. The pendulum of control always swings back and forth.  The voters don't like either party in power too long.

 

[living sounds]

Nice pivot to attack them,

That's another non sequitor - I did not attack them. I challenged the notion that they were gifted with superhuman foresight in creating the political system. Which is really just me pointing out the obvious.

 

[JohnRoberts]

That's another non sequitor - I did not attack them. I challenged the notion that they were gifted with superhuman foresight in creating the political system. Which is really just me pointing out the obvious.

You are the one delving in hyperbolic straw men...

I went back to find what I said and all I could find in this thread is

Our founders were brilliant people and the most remarkable thing is how well the government they crafted has survived for this long. Leaders of their caliber, are very few and very far between.

I stand by my judgement that they were head and shoulder above our modern crop of politicians.

a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.

Opinions vary... calling it a non-sequitur does not make it so, any more than my calling your hyperbolic mischaracterization of my comments straw men.

JR 

 

[Matador]

PS: To speak about actual governance the senate is again invoking the nuclear option (simple majority) to approve administration appointments that the minority has been slow walking for the last two years to thwart the administration accomplishing policy goals.

I thought you were against screed?  Do I need to link to a portrait of Merrick Garland?

 

[JohnRoberts]

I thought you were against screed?  Do I need to link to a portrait of Merrick Garland?

I am not sure I understand your comment...  This is about the machinery of the sausage making.

I stated the facts that this has happened 3 times  recently (not ignoring Garland, in fact at the time I wanted to approve Garland as a lesser evil than who Hillary would surely appoint after she won  : ) and pointing out that changing senate rules can come back to bite you...  FWIW Harry Reid was the one who used the nuclear option in 2013, and it has come back, but in case I wasn't clear I am not in favor of changing the senate rules.

Government was designed by "those guys" to be contentious and slow moving... it should not be too easy.  I wouldn't mind if they did nothing again ever, (except maybe close the asylum law loopholes that make it too easy to game our immigration system drawing millions to our southern border.)

JR

 

[living sounds]

I went back to find what I said and all I could find in this thread is

Well, we had these arguments before, and this and similar argument from antiquity logical fallacy (every logical fallacy is also a non sequitor) comes up.

I stand by my judgement that they were head and shoulder above our modern crop of politicians.

These people exist today, but they are teaching at universities, advising governments or are part of the so called "deep state". Forward thinking (that's where the term "progressive" comes from) people with great ideas how to make things better. But in this day and age they are sadly thwarted by the anti-intellectual right wing.

 

[pucho812]

Well, we had these arguments before, and this and similar argument from antiquity logical fallacy (every logical fallacy is also a non sequitor) comes up.

These people exist today, but they are teaching at universities, advising governments or are part of the so called "deep state". Forward thinking (that's where the term "progressive" comes from) people with great ideas how to make things better. But in this day and age they are sadly thwarted by the anti-intellectual right wing.

the opposite of pro is con. the opposite of progress is congress.  ;D 

 

[scott2000]

Forward thinking (that's where the term "progressive" comes from) people with great ideas how to make things better. But in this day and age they are sadly thwarted by the anti-intellectual right wing.

Surely in the future they will have figured out a way over this hurdle?

The opposite of anti  is pro.... I'm hopeful

 

[Matador]

I am not sure I understand your comment...  This is about the machinery of the sausage making.

Your comment was that the 'slow walking' has been happening for "for the last two years to thwart the administration accomplishing policy goals", and I was taking exception to that, since it's actually been going on for more like 10 years (aka. when the positions of the various players were opposite).  In fact, Harry Reid invoked the nuclear option for the exact same reason as McConnell:  at the time, there were over 82 nominations that the GOP had 'slow walked'.

Saying we can just amend the constitution, to me, is like saying "We can just find the gold at the end of the rainbow to solve our financial worries", because I'm fairly certain a constitutional amendment recognizing that the sun rises in the east wouldn't pass through 37 states. 

 

[JohnRoberts]

Your comment was that the 'slow walking' has been happening for "for the last two years to thwart the administration accomplishing policy goals", and I was taking exception to that, since it's actually been going on for more like 10 years (aka. when the positions of the various players were opposite).  In fact, Harry Reid invoked the nuclear option for the exact same reason as McConnell:  at the time, there were over 82 nominations that the GOP had 'slow walked'.

My judgement is that was the proximate cause (note I did not endorse the rules change then and now).

Saying we can just amend the constitution, to me, is like saying "We can just find the gold at the end of the rainbow to solve our financial worries", because I'm fairly certain a constitutional amendment recognizing that the sun rises in the east wouldn't pass through 37 states. 

I prefer the amendment process, the alternative is revolution (we already suffered through a divisive civil war). 33 amendments have been proposed with 27 approved, the most recent was finalized in 1992, not that long ago.

The constitution is a living , evolving document and institution.

JR

 

[Phrazemaster]

My judgement is that was the proximate cause (note I did not endorse the rules change then and now). I prefer the amendment process, the alternative is revolution (we already suffered through a divisive civil war). 33 amendments have been proposed with 27 approved, the most recent was finalized in 1992, not that long ago.

The constitution is a living , evolving document and institution.

JR

In its next incarnation the constitution should be digital. Then states can ratify amendments through email. Click “approve” and be done with it 

 

[JohnRoberts]

In its next incarnation the constitution should be digital. Then states can ratify amendments through email. Click “approve” and be done with it 

Back in the 70s I speculated about using the telephone network for electronic voting. A switch on the phone set could be set yea or nay and the phone network computers would poll overnight and accumulate the result... That was before I understood the nuance of our form of government. There was a lot I didn't understand back then...  8)

JR