Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-11-2016, 09:04 PM (This post was last modified: 24-11-2016 09:11 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
(13-11-2016 12:05 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Go with the Alternative Vote, also known as instant-runoff voting.

You vote for your candidates by order of preference.

You can't be serious. For many voters in the US telling them to rank order their preferences would be tantamount to asking them how many marbles are in the jar. Be like deer in a headlight.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2016, 09:05 PM
RE: Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
(24-11-2016 05:49 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(24-11-2016 04:53 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  Good to know that alternate suggestions and opinions regarding what one may see as a flawed system is whining now.

I wasn't a flawed system until November 9, 2016.

This forum is filled with the left and there are literally zero topics about changing the "flawed" system until Trump won.

All of a sudden it's flawed and unfair.

It works the way it's supposed to work. It keeps larger states in check, and it keeps them from strong arming the rest of the nation to their will.

The system works. My candidate lost too. In 4 more years, we get to try again.

What...? Left side people gave been complaining about the system and idea for years going as a point of dislike with either how often the alternative vote idea was brought up on this board or why from large lefty support of nader, bernie, warren, or other outside candidate support was so often tied to election style challenge. There's never a "started" thread about it yet it'd mentioned in dozens of political threads and nearly every main one about voting

Flawed also does not equal work. Flawed itself entirely means it works just in a janky way

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
24-11-2016, 09:11 PM
RE: Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
(13-11-2016 12:03 PM)KUSA Wrote:  The current system works fine.

I gotta go with KKKUSA here. We've invested a hell of a lot of resources into this model and it's got a solid track record of at least quasi-peaceful transitions of power (with a few notable exceptions here and there). Uprooting the system now would be chaos. And we can barely handle order such as it is.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2016, 10:21 PM
RE: Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
(24-11-2016 12:03 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  And republicans are fleeing those places and moving to states with better gun laws like Florida, Arizona and Texas giving them a boost.

Sounds like a pretty stupid reason to move. I'd be considering things like jobs and schools and cost of living and crime and infrastructure and hospitals and whatnot but whatever loads your pistol. Guess if you're moving to a state filled with undereducated people with no jobs and rotting infrastructure and lousy healthcare and high crime the gun laws might warrant more consideration.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
24-11-2016, 10:24 PM
RE: Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
(24-11-2016 01:18 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(24-11-2016 01:12 PM)Dom Wrote:  To me, if someone gets 2 million more votes, 2 million more people prefer them, and they should get the job.

That is just common sense, and the rest is crap.

I'd still like to see California, Oregon and Washington form their own union.

Me too. The U.S. Military would pull out all assets. And the Russians and Chinese would move in the next day. They'd be begging to be back in within a week.

Thought it was Texas who was seceding and the U.S. Military pulling out all its assets. The Cartel would move in the next day. And there wouldn't be any going back. ... wait, that was before the election.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-11-2016, 10:27 PM
RE: Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
(24-11-2016 05:49 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  I wasn't a flawed system until November 9, 2016.

Well there was that nasty business in 2000.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
25-11-2016, 03:27 AM
RE: Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
(24-11-2016 09:04 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(13-11-2016 12:05 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Go with the Alternative Vote, also known as instant-runoff voting.

You vote for your candidates by order of preference.

You can't be serious. For many voters in the US telling them to rank order their preferences would be tantamount to asking them how many marbles are in the jar. Be like deer in a headlight.

Counting Jelly Beans might give us a 'close-enough' answer more often than our current system. It also discourages the possibilities of options like we had this cycle:

Alright voters, you choose:

[Image: a59a2d66fb763fd18047af02e9583aae.jpg][Image: gotham_city_mugshots___penguin_by_costal...6qxynm.jpg]

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-11-2016, 10:34 AM
RE: Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
(25-11-2016 03:27 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  Counting Jelly Beans might give us a 'close-enough' answer more often than our current system. It also discourages the possibilities of options like we had this cycle:

"Marbles in a jar" is a reference to the literacy test the darkies had to pass to vote. Can you pass the test? You got 10 minutes and you can't get any wrong. GO! 30 is difficult to do even with a computer.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2016, 04:20 AM
RE: Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
(25-11-2016 10:34 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(25-11-2016 03:27 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  Counting Jelly Beans might give us a 'close-enough' answer more often than our current system. It also discourages the possibilities of options like we had this cycle:

"Marbles in a jar" is a reference to the literacy test the darkies had to pass to vote. Can you pass the test? You got 10 minutes and you can't get any wrong. GO! 30 is difficult to do even with a computer.

I'm familiar with that literacy test, but not with the expression used in this way. Anyhow, if that's what you meant I don't think anyone is advocating for that - or do you mean a system that's designed to exclude minorities is a better option than the Alternative Voting method?

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2016, 11:56 PM
RE: Replace electoral college with weighted direct vote?
(26-11-2016 04:20 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(25-11-2016 10:34 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  "Marbles in a jar" is a reference to the literacy test the darkies had to pass to vote. Can you pass the test? You got 10 minutes and you can't get any wrong. GO! 30 is difficult to do even with a computer.

I'm familiar with that literacy test, but not with the expression used in this way. Anyhow, if that's what you meant I don't think anyone is advocating for that - or do you mean a system that's designed to exclude minorities is a better option than the Alternative Voting method?

I meant it tongue-in-cheek to ridicule the electorate by implying they don't even know what "rank-order" means. And there goes the funny in my fun. Thanks.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: