• Have something to say? Register Now! and be posting in minutes!

Triple Espresso of Coffee Talk

Status
Not open for further replies.

forty_three

It’s Raining Falafel
45,103
19,604
1,033
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Make sure you don't use your Arabic numerals when getting the ratio for dilution.

I bet there is an episode of the educational show "Arthur" that deals with doing science without Arabs.

Alabama won't air 'Arthur' episode that shows same-sex wedding - CNN


Oh.


I... I just...

It seems like these people are proud of being the opposite of intellectual.


So by the same token, the government will agree to leave religion out of the argument about whether or not the business named "Planned Parenthood" is allowed to operate?
 

mooger_35

my hatred for MY team clouds my judgement
5,920
2,577
293
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Location
Victoria, BC
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
What a day for Mr. Carson


"Reclaiming my time."

"You don't get to do that."

"Oh."
 

Bloody Brian Burke

#1 CFL Fan!
35,326
10,867
1,033
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Location
West Toronto, BC
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,152.09
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Make sure you don't use your Arabic numerals when getting the ratio for dilution.
jonah-grid-uproxx.jpg
 

dash

Money can't buy happiness, but it can buy bacon
127,127
36,287
1,033
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Location
City on the Edge of Forever
Hoopla Cash
$ 71.82
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
I surprised he didn’t come out and state REO speedwagon sucks.

Heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend who heard it from another that Ben Carson is a dummy.
 

Bloody Brian Burke

#1 CFL Fan!
35,326
10,867
1,033
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Location
West Toronto, BC
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,152.09
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Nevada Poised To Become 15th State To Ditch Electoral College

If they get the majority of available electoral college votes to agree, then the electoral college essentially vanishes. They have agreement from states that hold 199 votes.

71 more to go.
But critics of the effort say it could make rural states irrelevant in choosing the president and would give even more power to highly-populated states like California and New York. Presidential candidates might even forgo campaigning in many states, they say.

My new favourite thing in politics is when someone says something as a negative in a way that makes it sound as positive as it actually is.

/it’s even more ironic when politicians forego campaigning in states like NY and CA for that exact reason already.
 

dare2be

IST EIN PINGUINE
18,788
5,778
533
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Location
Jax FL
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
But they already forego most states now. Most campaigning now is done in about a half-dozen "battleground" states where the slim majority can switch. You single out NY and CA, but that happens in TX and about 40 other states as well.

Perhaps the most equitable way to do it is treat the popular vote as a "51st" state, with an electoral vote count equal to the average number of electors in each of the 50 states.
 
Last edited:
35,052
2,004
173
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Location
Tucson, AZ
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
But they already forego most states now. Most campaigning now is done in about a half-dozen "battleground" states where the slim majority can switch. You single out NY and CA, but that happens in TX and about 40 other states as well.

Perhaps the most equitable way to do it is treat the popular vote as a "51st" state, with an electoral vote count equal to the average number of electors in each of the 50 states.

I think allowing electoral college votes to be ascribed proportional to popular vote in each state might also help, as a compromise. At the very least, it means candidates don't have to focus so exclusively on battleground states, since the gains to be achieved a lot smaller when you're splitting 20-some votes roughly evenly instead of the winner-takes-all.
 

forty_three

It’s Raining Falafel
45,103
19,604
1,033
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
But critics of the effort say it could make rural states irrelevant in choosing the president and would give even more power to highly-populated states like California and New York. Presidential candidates might even forgo campaigning in many states, they say.

My new favourite thing in politics is when someone says something as a negative in a way that makes it sound as positive as it actually is.

/it’s even more ironic when politicians forego campaigning in states like NY and CA for that exact reason already.

If it makes candidates stop spending so much time in Ohio, then I am all for it.
Swing State Hell - Ohio Votes - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (Video Clip) | Comedy Central
 

sabresfaninthesouth

Lifelong Cynic
8,569
2,214
173
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Location
Charlotte, NC
Hoopla Cash
$ 800.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
I think allowing electoral college votes to be ascribed proportional to popular vote in each state might also help, as a compromise. At the very least, it means candidates don't have to focus so exclusively on battleground states, since the gains to be achieved a lot smaller when you're splitting 20-some votes roughly evenly instead of the winner-takes-all.
The difficulty I always see in that is the lack of consistency and the much greater difficulty it presents when splitting a large state.

If you allocate based on congressional districts like Maine does, you're subject to the same risks as presented by gerrymandering. NC voted 50-46 but our Congressional delegation was 10-3 and both of our Senators were Rs. While a 12-3 breakdown would have obviously been different - and arguably better - than the actual 15-0 allocation, it provides an even greater incentive to forever gerrymander the state.
 
35,052
2,004
173
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Location
Tucson, AZ
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
The difficulty I always see in that is the lack of consistency and the much greater difficulty it presents when splitting a large state.

If you allocate based on congressional districts like Maine does, you're subject to the same risks as presented by gerrymandering. NC voted 50-46 but our Congressional delegation was 10-3 and both of our Senators were Rs. While a 12-3 breakdown would have obviously been different - and arguably better - than the actual 15-0 allocation, it provides an even greater incentive to forever gerrymander the state.

I wasn't thinking of breaking it down by district. The whole state's popular vote decides the split. Completely decouples the result from gerrymandering, and heightens the minority voice.

I think it would do wonders for voter turnout in typically uncontested states, too. People would actually feel like their votes mattered, since it could more easily be the difference between an electoral vote going on way or the other.
 

Comeds

Unreliable Narrator.
22,669
11,174
1,033
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Location
Baltimore
Hoopla Cash
$ 754.60
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Maybe it would help if they modernized/standardized the primary elections and caucuses it would help too.
 

sabresfaninthesouth

Lifelong Cynic
8,569
2,214
173
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Location
Charlotte, NC
Hoopla Cash
$ 800.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
I wasn't thinking of breaking it down by district. The whole state's popular vote decides the split. Completely decouples the result from gerrymandering, and heightens the minority voice.

I think it would do wonders for voter turnout in typically uncontested states, too. People would actually feel like their votes mattered, since it could more easily be the difference between an electoral vote going on way or the other.
I see what you're saying there. Unfortunately, for now at least, it's generally been the larger and bluer states that are on-board with the idea of the popular vote campaign, but none of them are ever going to change until they can be assured that their sway isn't going to be diluted.

For exampe, while any individual person in CA may feel that their vote carries more weight under an allocation method, the state as a whole will never switch unless they either get enough other states on board as they're trying to do, or to get a Constitutional amendment that mandates it, because CA isn't going to cede ~35% of it's electoral votes (which would, BTW, be equivalent to about the 7th highest number) if they don't get Texas to cede ~45% of theirs, plus a bunch of the small (Wyoming, Alaska, the Dakotas, etc.) to give up (usually) 1/3 of their votes.

I'm also worried about the consequence of "gerrymandering" the cutoffs. How do you allocate SD's 3 votes when the margin of victory was 63-27? 63% isn't far off from 2/3, but obviously 27 is pretty far away from 1/3 and then you have to figure out what to do with third party candidates where 5% in Wyoming is worth nowhere near 1/3 so you presumably round them down, but 5% in CA is worth 2.75 EVs, so you presumably round them up?
 

blindbaby

i want to bang on the drum all day
14,813
5,170
533
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Location
giver river
Hoopla Cash
$ 2,500.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
that movie had terrific boobs
like, remember-them-30-years-later quality boobs


I watched it in a theater when it first came out. There were definitely a few times in the movie where it wouldn't have been appropriate to get up and go for popcorn, if you know what I mean.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top