Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 11-14-2018, 09:30 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,363
That depends on how you're flipping the votes. If you're flipping them via a glitch (intentional or otherwise) in the machines used all across the state, then it doesn't matter how big the state is.
  #52  
Old 11-14-2018, 10:23 PM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by doorhinge View Post
Hahahaha. You're a hoot. Are you actually suggesting that by 1818, the Illinois border had been deliberately drawn with the intention of giving the not-yet-created GOP an edge in the 2018 elections?
No, but states are often drawn to avoid having populations equal to those of the most populous states. Hence, my claim.
  #53  
Old 11-14-2018, 11:35 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
Cruz won by around three and a half percent. In a large state like Texas, though, that’s a quarter million votes. It wouldn’t surprise me if a small handful of votes changed, but I doubt it was that many.
OK, I will accept your answer. But still.

Vote straight Dem= Gov vote changed to Cruz
Vote straight GOP= gov vote changed to none.

This "glitch" seems extremely biased.
  #54  
Old 11-15-2018, 01:33 PM
Martin Hyde is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
Pennsylvania previously had the same disparity, but unlike North Carolina they couldn't ignore the court rulings and were forced to redistrict. As a result, the outcome of seats won this time much more closely reflects the balance of votes cast.
It's worth noting that North Carolina can't ignore the court ruling either, the court just ruled that it didn't have to correct the districts for the 2018 elections because it agreed with the GOP argument there wasn't enough time to do so properly and hold elections by election day. They will have to have new court approved maps active for State legislative and U.S. House districts for the 2020 election.
  #55  
Old 11-15-2018, 01:40 PM
Martin Hyde is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,229
I decided to look at the lowest 25 states by population (i.e. the states that are median or lower population), I labeled them as either D or R states, and there's a GOP advantage of 15-10. So while real, it's not as dire as is made out, and several of the R states are ones where there's signs Dems could be competitive in the nearish future like Kansas and Iowa (Iowa is arguably closer to being a purple state if you look at their last 10 year history, Kansas just had Democrats pick up U.S. House Seats and the Governorship which speaks to ability to win statewide races.) Not to mention some of the R states have D Senators: MT, WV.

Republicans actually have advantages in a lot of states with higher than median populations:

TX, FL, OH, GA, NC, AZ, TN, IN, MO, SC, AL, LA are all 25th or higher in population, note that TX, FL, OH, GA, NC are all top 10 states population wise.

Many of these states are "purple" or regularly vigorously contested, but at least as of right this instant Republicans hold most of the cards in these states.

Last edited by Martin Hyde; 11-15-2018 at 01:41 PM.
  #56  
Old 11-15-2018, 01:43 PM
Martin Hyde is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,229
California represents fairly hilariously bad sorting for Democrats, because it's so massively liberal, and could actually be split into four states, each of which would have more people than Michigan (so they'd all be tied for about the 10th most populous state) and all 8 of those U.S. Senate seats would go to Democrats.
  #57  
Old 11-15-2018, 03:58 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,363
Quote:
Quoth DrDeth:

OK, I will accept your answer. But still.

Vote straight Dem= Gov vote changed to Cruz
Vote straight GOP= gov vote changed to none.

This "glitch" seems extremely biased.
One of the basic principles of good ballot design is that the names should not all be in the same order on all ballots, but should have multiple orderings, randomly selected. This would have prevented (or at least, significantly mitigated) both this problem, and the 2000 butterfly ballot problem. And people have known that this is good practice for ages.
  #58  
Old 03-05-2019, 09:33 AM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 84,469
Bumped.

A big gerrymandering lawsuit in Ohio is now getting underway: https://www.cleveland.com/open/2019/...kicks-off.html
  #59  
Old 03-05-2019, 11:20 AM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 31,826
Why do they even have “Straight Democrat” and “Straight Republican” buttons?
  #60  
Old 03-05-2019, 11:55 AM
Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 13,348
May I hijack this thread for a moment and point out that this discussion is why the law mandating election by districts should be repealed and states allowed to use at-large proportional representation.
__________________
If all else fails, try S.C.E. to Aux.
  #61  
Old 03-05-2019, 12:15 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,363
Probably not a bad idea, but even if it were allowed, would any state actually implement it?
  #62  
Old 03-05-2019, 12:33 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
May I hijack this thread for a moment and point out that this discussion is why the law mandating election by districts should be repealed and states allowed to use at-large proportional representation.
I think the two main problems with that are, how do you implement it so that there is "local representation" (i.e. there needs to be someone for each person in the state to be able to call "my" representative), and how do you prevent an area where most people belong to one party from having a representative representing not only the other party, but acting in the interests of an entirely different section of the state?
  #63  
Old 03-06-2019, 02:14 PM
Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 13,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
I think the two main problems with that are, how do you implement it so that there is "local representation" (i.e. there needs to be someone for each person in the state to be able to call "my" representative), and how do you prevent an area where most people belong to one party from having a representative representing not only the other party, but acting in the interests of an entirely different section of the state?
1) You could create the districts after the election for representation but ...

2) Why do you need districts? Wouldn't "your" representative be the one that best represents your interests? Kind of like how your state's two Senator works.
__________________
If all else fails, try S.C.E. to Aux.

Last edited by Saint Cad; 03-06-2019 at 02:14 PM.
  #64  
Old 03-06-2019, 02:15 PM
Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 13,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Probably not a bad idea, but even if it were allowed, would any state actually implement it?
It would probably set through the initiative process.
__________________
If all else fails, try S.C.E. to Aux.
  #65  
Old 03-07-2019, 02:05 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
1) You could create the districts after the election for representation but ...

2) Why do you need districts? Wouldn't "your" representative be the one that best represents your interests? Kind of like how your state's two Senator works.
I'll answer #2 first; you pretty much answered it yourself - your Senators are who you turn to for "statewide" matters; your Representative is there to handle concerns on a more local level. This is why the Constitution says that bills to raise revenue have to start in the House; it's the chamber "closer to the people."

As for #1, I did have one idea:
1. Voters don't vote for specific candidates, but for a party. This also prevents the situation where, in a large state, somebody is going to complain, "If I get 50 votes (because the state has 50 Representatives), then I want to be able to cast all 50 for a fringe candidate." (This is quite common among people who, among other things, try to get "dissenting voices" onto major corporations' Boards of Directors.)
2. Have somebody draw up the districts for that state.
3. Each party submits a list of districts in "preference order," with one candidate specified per district.
4. Use a method similar to the one used to determine how many seats in the House each state gets to determine which party gains seats, one at a time; as each seat is awarded, the district that is highest on that party's list among those that have not been assigned yet is given to that party's specified candidate for that district.
Yes, it is possible for a party's list to include candidates who not only do not live anywhere near the district they are assigned to, but have no connection with that area; how is that different from how it works now? (The only requirements are, a Representative has to be at least 25 years old, a citizen of the US for at least the past seven years, and a current resident of the state.)
  #66  
Old 03-07-2019, 06:04 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,363
Personally, I'm fond of the idea of Monte Carlo democracy, at least for the House. If your state has 10 Representatives, then you pick 10 citizens at random. Though, I'd actually tweak it slightly, that each of the randomly-picked citizens can choose to serve themself, or they can name some other person they think would be better for the job.

This way, you get fair representation of all demographics, based on geography, political views, age, race, sex, whatever, and you bypass Arrow's Theorem.

Though, I suppose that in practice, you'd have to make very certain that the random selection process was both perfectly transparent and bulletproof secure, because it'd probably be easy to corrupt.
  #67  
Old 03-07-2019, 06:06 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Personally, I'm fond of the idea of Monte Carlo democracy, at least for the House. If your state has 10 Representatives, then you pick 10 citizens at random. Though, I'd actually tweak it slightly, that each of the randomly-picked citizens can choose to serve themself, or they can name some other person they think would be better for the job.
Though, I suppose that in practice, you'd have to make very certain that the random selection process was both perfectly transparent and bulletproof secure, because it'd probably be easy to corrupt.

Very easy- as those randos would then simply sell their seat to the highest bidder.
  #68  
Old 03-07-2019, 06:58 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
2) Why do you need districts? Wouldn't "your" representative be the one that best represents your interests? Kind of like how your state's two Senator works.
Interests do vary by location. There are real geographic inputs to economies that might only affect those in the area. Something that might be economically devastating in in a small part of the state could be a tiny issue in the overall statewide interests.

Imagine a district that is heavily involved in shmoo mining/farming or relies heavily on tourism to the wild areas inhabited by the highly sought after but reclusive wild shmoos. A relatively centrist candidate who's got a well thought out shmoo position might be able to clean up as they attract voters from both parties who heavily weight those issues. Finding a candidate who puts time and effort into developing sound shmoo related policy is likely tough in a statewide race. Many statewide voters may not know enough, or care, about shmoos. It's reasonable to expect most statewide candidates to mirror that broader electorate's ignorance and lack of concern.
  #69  
Old 03-08-2019, 07:39 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Personally, I'm fond of the idea of Monte Carlo democracy, at least for the House. If your state has 10 Representatives, then you pick 10 citizens at random. Though, I'd actually tweak it slightly, that each of the randomly-picked citizens can choose to serve themself, or they can name some other person they think would be better for the job.

This way, you get fair representation of all demographics, based on geography, political views, age, race, sex, whatever, and you bypass Arrow's Theorem.

Though, I suppose that in practice, you'd have to make very certain that the random selection process was both perfectly transparent and bulletproof secure, because it'd probably be easy to corrupt.
I've been calling that sortition, or demarchy, and those of us who like it are regretfully few in number.

However, I would have a two-tiered lottery and wouldn't allow a selected representative to hand off the job. If you want to participate, then you have to be willing to do the job yourself. Pick about a hundred candidates from the pool. Then I would have a voir dire process to eliminate at least some of the crazies before a final drawing for the 10 representatives.

I haven't worked out yet who would process the voir dire.
  #70  
Old 03-14-2019, 07:25 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 11,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Why do they even have “Straight Democrat” and “Straight Republican” buttons?
Because most people vote that way, and it makes sense to offer a simple option for lots of people to use.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:10 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017