The US Politics |OT|

[EnricoPallazzo]

sethnintendo said:

EnricoPallazzo said:

I still think it is a good system when you have a very large country with huge differencies in population density, but only in this specific case. What I do not know if how they calculate the number of delegates per state. Need to look into it. Also I albsolutely hate when politicians want to change rules because they are losing and unfortunately its always the left or fascist leaders doing it.

One bad thing that NOBODY talks about though is how bullshit the popular vote result is. Since in a lot of states your vote may nome matter (being red in california and ny, being bkue in texas) a lot of people just dont go voting and prefer to stay home. So saying that you won college vote but lost popular vote may not be true if 100% of people knew theur vote would matter

Your last paragraph is a good reason why not to have winner takes all in the electoral college.  Some people simply don't vote because they know their vote won't count if their state is heavily for a party that they are not.

Like I said earlier my vote has never counted in the state of Texas.  You could keep the electoral college but hand out the states electoral votes for the state based on percentage of votes each candidate receives.  This would make republican vote count in California and democrat vote count in Alabama in the presidential election. 

Sure the biased of votes being more weighted for smaller states would still be there due to the electoral college but at least all the votes would actually matter instead of people who went against the majority of what their state voted for being automatically thrown out.

Good catch, that's an impact from the electoral college that I never thought about. Don't know if it would drastically change results but yes, with popular vote people would never have the attitude of not going to vote because why bother the result will be red anyway.