Maine Senate moves to award electoral votes to popular vote winner

[3leftsdoo]

Because more people live there and your vote shouldn't count more than any other American.

It's literally the opposite of this.

Literally incorrect.

Many here don't seem to understand what this plan proposes.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

Literally incorrect.

Many here don't seem to understand what this plan proposes.

What it proposes is very simple, which is giving equal power to each person's vote. Conservatives are whining about it because the country is more liberal than they want.

 

[3leftsdoo]

This is the other argument against it that I absolutely cannot stand. California cast 10.2% of electoral votes in 2016. California cast 10.3% of the popular vote in 2016. The idea that this somehow hugely enlarges the voting power of California is just not accurate. (And all 10.2% of those EVs went to Democrats when only about 6.3% of that 10.3% went to Hillary in the popular vote.)

Maine has next to no voice compared to California the way it currently is set up. They have 4 electoral votes. California has more than 10 times that.

And the idea that this will automatically throw every election to leftist cities is kind of the same bad argument. In 2012, the electoral college favored Democrats. This is despite the fact that those same cities favored leftists roughly the same as in 2016 when the electoral college hurt Democrats. The people thinking that the electoral college will only hurt Democrats forever, (and a lot of these people are Democrats who only want it abolished for political reasons), are almost definitely wrong.

It enlarges the voting power of some states' voters - via compact - while silencing the voices of voters in other states.

It's simply a new form of cheating rather than real reform.

But politicians - whatcha gonna do?

 

[3leftsdoo]

On what premise? Again you demonstrate even the most basic understanding of the topic. States are free to allocate EC votes any way they please.

The proposed Compact may be an illegal entity.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

It enlarges the voting power of some states' voters

It sure does, and it's great.

 

[3leftsdoo]

I like the way Maine awards their electoral votes now. The winner of each congressional district is awarded that CD's electoral vote. The candidate whom received the most votes state wide receives the remaining two. This take the awarding of electoral votes down to the lowest common denominator.

Since the electoral votes are based on the number of representatives plus 2 for the senators, Maine's present system makes more sense than the winner take all states. The voters in each congressional district have a say in whom their own congressional district award its electoral vote. For me, this is what it is all about.

It's definitely better than winner take all.

But this new plan is shocking.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

It's definitely better than winner take all.

But this new plan is shocking.

What's shocking is the disproportionate power rural voters have.

 

[3leftsdoo]

It's my understanding this os a non binding agreement. If so what's to stop a state from enforcing this deal selectively depending on who or what party wins the popular election?

If it is non-binding - and I imagine it would have to be in order to avoid a flurry of lawsuits - then the entire idea is a sham.

At least until it becomes an enshrined sham.

 

[uptower]

The Compact is a grotesque farce which silences the voices of voters.

The existing EC apportionment often does this as well, but instead of rational reapportionment, this grotesque sham.

The only solution really is to get rid of the EC altogether. Two elections now have shown it does not work as intended.

But this measure will backfire. The result will just be greater polarisation between blue and red states. It is also short-sighted for states that may one day change color. It will offend the in-state voters who feel they were not represented and it may not benefit the current power-holders forever.

With no EC of course the GOP which is less popular will lose out in the short term. It will no longer be able to punch above its weight by hitting a few lucky counties. On the other hand the show may be on the other foot one day. Of course if the GOP can be more broadly appealing it doesn't need to 'win' despite only getting a minority of the popular vote, which to me sounds far easier than continually trying to game the system.

The other alternative is for all states to divide them proportionally based on number of votes earned. That may mean increasing the EC votes from a mere two in some states. More complications.

 

[3leftsdoo]

A hatred of people who live in cities dominates all reasoning in these discussions.

Imaginary hatred of imaginary people in imaginary places dominates imaginary discussions.

Very, very bad.

 

[3leftsdoo]

Exactly.

And just the issue our Founding Fathers found unacceptable when going about selecting a Chief Executive who is to represent ALL citizens of the United States, not just the people in the population centers

Another conservative who gets it.

The illiberals are on the losing side yet again.

 

[3leftsdoo]

:thumbs:

Yes, it would assure greater legitimacy amongst the body politic.

While silencing huge numbers of voters.

Fix apportionment or don't, but this is just cheating the state minority in a new way.

 

[Cardinal]

Are you saying the sun is bright?

I reject this as idiotic and unsourced.

I can see you're one of those people who really don't like having their assumptions challenged.

 

[3leftsdoo]

On the contrary, a popular vote would assure every single person's vote counts regardless of where they live in the U.S. As it is now, a handful of counties in a handful of states decides the presidency. That is absurd.

What is absurd is silencing the voices of the minority in certain states via this Compact.

Instead of dealing with apportionment fairly, this monstrosity.

Shameful.

 

[3leftsdoo]

Yeah... heeeeeeeeere comes the gaslight spamming.

Time to use some of the technology the forum provides to avoid it.

Irrelevant ad hom.

Ditto.

 

[Bullseye]

I'm hoping that the national popular vote goes against the candidate these states' popular vote favors. Those Senates are going to have some 'spaining to do.

 

[3leftsdoo]

The EC always destroys the voices of numerous voter within every state. That's inherent in the way it works. A popular vote is the only way to avoid doing that. The NPVIC still operates within the flawed mechanism of the EC but it realizes the same outcome as a real national popular vote.

Depends on the state, but too often, yes. Ditto. Popular apportionment within the state is fine; this Compact is grotesque.

 

[3leftsdoo]

What it proposes is very simple, which is giving equal power to each person's vote. Conservatives are whining about it because the country is more liberal than they want.

Not by a country mile. Perhaps, but irrelevant.

 

[3leftsdoo]

It sure does, and it's great.

Wow.

What can be said?

:hm

 

[3leftsdoo]

What's shocking is the disproportionate power rural voters have.

Fix apportionment state by state.

The Compact is grotesque - a sham upon a sham upon a sham.

 

[3leftsdoo]

The only solution really is to get rid of the EC altogether. Two elections now have shown it does not work as intended.

But this measure will backfire. The result will just be greater polarisation between blue and red states. It is also short-sighted for states that may one day change color. It will offend the in-state voters who feel they were not represented and it may not benefit the current power-holders forever.

With no EC of course the GOP which is less popular will lose out in the short term. It will no longer be able to punch above its weight by hitting a few lucky counties. On the other hand the show may be on the other foot one day. Of course if the GOP can be more broadly appealing it doesn't need to 'win' despite only getting a minority of the popular vote, which to me sounds far easier than continually trying to game the system.

The other alternative is for all states to divide them proportionally based on number of votes earned. That may mean increasing the EC votes from a mere two in some states. More complications.

Disagree. Disagree.

Agree. Agree. Agree. STRONGLY agree.

Agree. Agree. Agree. Agree.

VERY strongly agree. Agree. Agree.

Excellent post!

 

[3leftsdoo]

I can see you're one of those people who really don't like having their assumptions challenged.

Irrelevant/nonsensical ad hom and irony meter overload.

 

[3leftsdoo]

I'm hoping that the national popular vote goes against the candidate these states' popular vote favors. Those Senates are going to have some 'spaining to do.

Ha!

Indeed.

 

[Verax]

What is absurd is silencing the voices of the minority in certain states via this Compact.

Instead of dealing with apportionment fairly, this monstrosity.

Shameful.

Why should the minority outrank the majority?

 

[DiAnna]

Ha!

Indeed.

You do realize, of course, that one is not obliged to respond to every post in a thread... right?