New Amendment of Colorado - Page 2

truebrit · #11 (**permalink**) 09-29-2004, 08:19 PM

..and I agree with Leo that it would give folks of one party a reason to go to the polls in states traditionally dominated by the other party, but how do you determine how to do a 60/40 split when there are say, 26 votes on the line...how do you give the winner 15.6 electoral college votes?? Do you round up or do you round down?

And just bear in mind all you republican hand-wringers what a proportional split of the vote would mean in a state like California....

Aaaah...I thought that might get your attention...

Niceguy · #12 (**permalink**) 09-30-2004, 01:36 AM

Personally I don't really get it why you at all have an electoral vote nowadays. I can understand the need for them in older times when communications where to slow to allow for effective elections in such a huge country as the US. This archaic construction are however obsolete today and should, in my opinion be abolished totally. Well it's up to you Americans to decide, it's your country after all, I just voice my opinion of the matter.

Leonides · #13 (**permalink**) 09-30-2004, 01:43 AM

The electoral system was put into place for a variety of reasons, not just because of poor communication. It was felt that without it (and a minimum number of electoral votes needed) the candidates would only concern themselves with the major cities, and not the rest of the country. This is still a legitimate concern.

Niceguy · #14 (**permalink**) 09-30-2004, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leonides";p=&quot

The electoral system was put into place for a variety of reasons, not just because of poor communication. It was felt that without it (and a minimum number of electoral votes needed) the candidates would only concern themselves with the major cities, and not the rest of the country. This is still a legitimate concern.

Ok, I don't have much insight in the system. The US are HUGE so it would be unreasonably difficult for a candidate to visit even every major city. A question thou, who select the electors?

Liberty · #15 (**permalink**) 09-30-2004, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G-1";p=&quot

I thought that the rules for the Electoral College were set up at a Federal level, ie., Colo cannot do this. Could someone educate me, please?

(been meaning to post this question for a while...)

And yes, this is a Federal issue, not a state/local. IMO. Please don't move, until the 72 hours. Then move to Current Events. I'm axeing ya.

The electoral college is set up at the Federal level, but it is up to individual states on how to choose their electors. Uncle Sam says Colorado gives 9 electoral votes, but Colorado gets to decide how the 9 people are chosen.

Liberty · #16 (**permalink**) 09-30-2004, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ikari";p=&quot

But the effects of this must be realized. Splitting the electoral votes will cause more elections to go to the courts and congress. Effectivly removing the people from the process entirely. Remember, a candidate must have 270 electoral votes to win without it going to Congress. And recounts, my god let's not get into that. If a state goes (for example) 60% Bush, 40% Kerry there is no need for recounting, Bush won the state. But if electoral votes are counted as a percentage of the popular vote, then we would see an increase in court cases with recounts and electoral vote splitting, etc.

This would depend on the makeup of each congressional district. I've never seen any numbers on this, but I would imagine that most districts are rather homogenous, so I don't think it's a given that there would be an increase in court cases and disputes. In Florida, it might have actually simplified things.

Liberty · #17 (**permalink**) 09-30-2004, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by truebrit";p=&quot

..and I agree with Leo that it would give folks of one party a reason to go to the polls in states traditionally dominated by the other party, but how do you determine how to do a 60/40 split when there are say, 26 votes on the line...how do you give the winner 15.6 electoral college votes?? Do you round up or do you round down?

And just bear in mind all you republican hand-wringers what a proportional split of the vote would mean in a state like California....

Aaaah...I thought that might get your attention...

It doesn't work that way. It goes by congressional district. Each state gets 2 EV + 1 for each district. Colorado has 7 districts and therefore gets 9 electoral votes. Each district would control the vote of one elector, thus if 4 districts were primarily Republican and 3 were primarily Democrat, Bush would get 6 EV votes and Kerry 3, OR Bush 4 Kerry 5 (the extra 2 votes go to the statewide majority).

Ikari · #18 (**permalink**) 09-30-2004, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liberty";p=&quot

It doesn't work that way. It goes by congressional district. Each state gets 2 EV + 1 for each district. Colorado has 7 districts and therefore gets 9 electoral votes. Each district would control the vote of one elector, thus if 4 districts were primarily Republican and 3 were primarily Democrat, Bush would get 6 EV votes and Kerry 3, OR Bush 4 Kerry 5 (the extra 2 votes go to the statewide majority).

That's how Maine and Nebraska work I believe. However, that's not what is being proposed for Colorado. It's a strict percentage of the total votes for the entire state, not district by district.

Liberty · #19 (**permalink**) 09-30-2004, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liberty";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by truebrit";p=&quot

..and I agree with Leo that it would give folks of one party a reason to go to the polls in states traditionally dominated by the other party, but how do you determine how to do a 60/40 split when there are say, 26 votes on the line...how do you give the winner 15.6 electoral college votes?? Do you round up or do you round down?

And just bear in mind all you republican hand-wringers what a proportional split of the vote would mean in a state like California....

Aaaah...I thought that might get your attention...

It doesn't work that way. It goes by congressional district. Each state gets 2 EV + 1 for each district. Colorado has 7 districts and therefore gets 9 electoral votes. Each district would control the vote of one elector, thus if 4 districts were primarily Republican and 3 were primarily Democrat, Bush would get 6 EV votes and Kerry 3, OR Bush 4 Kerry 5 (the extra 2 votes go to the statewide majority).

I just read the proposed amendment and it DOES work that way

. I'd be for the method described above, but against the amendment the way it's written, as it basically turns the electoral college into a straight popular vote with rounding error.

Liberty · #20 (**permalink**) 09-30-2004, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ikari";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liberty";p=&quot

It doesn't work that way. It goes by congressional district. Each state gets 2 EV + 1 for each district. Colorado has 7 districts and therefore gets 9 electoral votes. Each district would control the vote of one elector, thus if 4 districts were primarily Republican and 3 were primarily Democrat, Bush would get 6 EV votes and Kerry 3, OR Bush 4 Kerry 5 (the extra 2 votes go to the statewide majority).

That's how Maine and Nebraska work I believe. However, that's not what is being proposed for Colorado. It's a strict percentage of the total votes for the entire state, not district by district.

You caught me before I could post my correction!

I now agree with your earlier statement. If every state did what Colorado is proposing, a close race would have the potential to turn into a nationwide nightmare.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode