Electoral College revolt?

[BobLibDem]

@Bridget_Burke

The Founders were remarkable in many different ways but also flawed–as I’ve noted. However, do not blame them for the current imbalance in Representation–and the Electoral College.

The Apportionment Act of 1911 set the maximum number of Representatives at 435. In previous posts, others have shown how representation truly based on population would be more equable. Yes, we’d need a bigger chamber for meetings. But the 435 member limit was not written into the Constitution, nor was it an Amendment. It’s just a law. (And, yes–rural interests favored it because they think their people are worth more than them city folk.)

Excellent point. I wish they would have said that the smallest state gets 1 rep and everyone else gets their population divided by the smallest state’s population, rounded to nearest seat. Do that and eliminate the 2 EVs per Senator, and we can keep the EC.

[k9bfriender]

@Okrahoma

That’s incorrect.

The biggest congressional district by population is in Montana: 994K. The smallest is in Rhode Island: 526K.

Wyoming’s congressional district is 563K people. California has on the average about 700K people per congressional district. So a voter in Wyoming has about 24% more “HOR voting power of a person from California”. Not 3 times.

Okay, so I rushed some points, and seem to have conflated EC and HOR in my head… I probably was counting Wyoming as having 3, as in 3 electors. So, they do have over 3 times the voting power for president than Cali does.

You are correct that they are only over represented in congress by a smaller, but not insignificant, amount.

@Okrahoma

Since Greece gets 1 vote in EU, and Germany gets 1 vote in EU, yes, a Greek’s vote is counted for more than a German’s.

How much more powerful is a Greek citizen’s vote for the president of the real European Federation than a German’s? In fact, who is the current president of the European Federation? I thought octopus was talking about the formation of a hypothetical European Federation, not the current loose partnership known as the EU. I don’t think that the EU has nearly the control over the member countries as the US has over its United States, so non-proportional voting is a bit different, and not as big a deal.

As I thought octopus was hypothesizing the creation of a new “real European Federation” that would be similar in nature to the US. I would hypothesize along with it that Germany, being the more powerful nation in most ways, would not allow Greece, a bankrupt nation, to have greater voting power than itself upon formation. Greece would not get to leverage their position to hold out for that disproportional vote, as Greece would need the EF more than the EF needed Greece. This is unlike the founding of the US, where the US needed all of its states to stand together, and as such was willing to make compromises that were not necessarily in the nation’s best long term interest in order to get them on board.

[Okrahoma]

@k9bfriender

How much more powerful is a Greek citizen’s vote for the president of the real European Federation than a German’s? In fact, who is the current president of the European Federation?

The current President of the EU is Jean-Claude Juncker. From Luxembourg. A country of 500,000 people.

[k9bfriender]

@Okrahoma

The current President of the EU is Jean-Claude Juncker. From Luxembourg. A country of 500,000 people.

That’s an interesting and unrelated fact about the European Union. Now who is the president of the European Federation?

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@aldiboronti

Or if a substantial number of electors come to believe the moon is made of green cheese? One wonders where the desperation of Democrats will turn for help when Trump is finally inaugurated.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Monday it “defies belief” that Republican politicians would hesitate to review Russia’s intrusion. Former acting CIA director Mike Morrell called the Russian interference “the political equivalent of 9/11.”

From the previously cited article

This is not your party anymore, Mitch.

[elucidator]

@HurricaneDitka

…And if it were actually important for some of them, they have an easy solution: move to Wyoming.

And do what, graze? Get real.

[elucidator]

@Euphonious_Polemic

…This is not your party anymore, Mitch.

The Turtle sure did the turn-around, didn’t he. Couple days back, it was not just no but hell no! Now he has seen the light! What I’m wondering is “why”? Right now, I’m guessing it has something to do with money and/or power. Call it a hunch.

[octopus]

@k9bfriender

You are discounting the people part of the united states.

The Constitution did not say that smaller states would get more per voter voting power for the president. Can you show me where it states that? They get disproportionate representation in the senate, that was the compromise that was made. There is nothing in the constitution that also means that the house of reps and the president should also be disproportionately beholden to the smaller states.

Not sure what you mean by the last part. Are you saying that the Greeks would only join the federation if their vote counted for less than a German’s? Do you think that Germany would let Greece join if a Greek’s vote counted for more than a German’s?

I’m not discounting anything. The country wasn’t founded with direct election of the president by popular vote. There were necessary compromises to form the nation and among them are states are real political entities and have rights.

That’s reality. I guess in this case reality doesn’t have a liberal bias. Now, what people can do is work to amend the constitution or fight a civil war. So gather some signatures or rifles.

@iiandyiiii

Because I value individual rights far more than states’ rights. I understand that mine is not the only position, but I think it’s a reasonable one. Why do you disagree?

Because I’m a realist. I would rather have a strong nation and with the reality of states as political units with real reserved rights and powers I don’t see a realistic way to get rid of something that doesn’t really need to be changed by amendment but can be changed by law which restricts the house of representatives. The Pentagon and NSA are huge buildings. I’m sure we could build a proper sized house of representatives.

@k9bfriender

Strange. I did not see where in the text it says that smaller state voters get more voting power than larger state voters for president. I even read it twice.

You point to the senate, which is the great compromise that I talked about in the post you replied to, so I assume you are trying to make a point that I already didn’t make. I am not sure what that would be.

Did you check out Article I Section 2? It implies that the house of representatives should be based on the population of the state, and that the population should be proportionally represented. As a voter in Wyoming has over 3 times the HOR voting power of a person from California, can you show me where that is stated in the Constitution? It calls for one rep for every 30,000 population. Because we have decided to limit the reps to 435, in spite of the outline given in the constitution, this allows small states to have disproportionate power in the branches of govt that they were never supposed to have disproportionate amounts of power.

@k9bfriender

So, you didn’t check out the article that sets up the HOR then?

If we followed the founder’s original template for it, California would have around 1293 representatives, and Wyoming would have 19.

In terms of electors, California would then have 1295, and Wyoming would have 21. So California would have 60 times more electors than Wyoming (California’s population is 65 times that of Wyoming.), rather than the current 18 times. This would be in keeping with the proportional representation that was originally written into the constitution.

Wyoming would get a slight advantage from the senate count, but its advantage is greatly magnified currently with how we allocate representatives.

Then there’s the fact that the way it all works out is that my vote is actually more important than either of theirs. I live in a swing state, so national politicians actually care about what I have to say. They don’t so much care or cater to those in the “safe” states.

@BobLibDem

Amazingly, the founders were not gifted with perpetual righteousness and their every utterance is not the way things should be until the end of days.

In the 1790 census the smallest state, Delaware, had about 59,000 people. The largest was Virginia (including what is now WV) with about 748,000 people. Thus the largest state had a little less than 13 times the population of the largest. In the 2010 census, Wyoming has about 564,000 residents to California’s 37,254,000. The largest state is not over 65 times that of the smallest. The size ratio from biggest to smallest went up fivefold, making the electoral college much more skewed toward the small states than originally designed. Results such as this year’s where the “winner” had over 2 million less people supporting him than the “loser” make for an illegitimate presidency, particularly when the KGB and FBI were teammates in taking down one of the candidates.

It’s easier to change a law and build a building than to amend the constitution. Start lobbying.
And there is nothing illegitimate about winning by the rules. Don’t be a sore loser.

[HurricaneDitka]

@octopus

I’m sure we could build a proper sized house of representatives.

In this day and age, I don’t know why we need a single building anyways. Let them all live at home in their districts and attend sessions via video conferencing / telepresence technology.

[HurricaneDitka]

I came in here to post this:

http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/pleading-with-florida-electors-not-to-elect-donald-trump/2306243

Some silly Democrat from California is buying full page ads in newspapers around the country to plead with Republican electors to vote against Trump. It smacks of that awkward, girlfriend-that-just-got-dumped-but-won’t-go-away desperation. I expect more ugly crying from Democrats next week.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@HurricaneDitka

I came in here to post this:

http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/pleading-with-florida-electors-not-to-elect-donald-trump/2306243

Some silly Democrat from California is buying full page ads in newspapers around the country to plead with Republican electors to vote against Trump. It smacks of that awkward, girlfriend-that-just-got-dumped-but-won’t-go-away desperation. I expect more ugly crying from Democrats next week.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Monday it “defies belief” that Republican politicians would hesitate to review Russia’s intrusion. Former acting CIA director Mike Morrell called the Russian interference “the political equivalent of 9/11.”

Let’s just try to ignore what happened, amIright?

[HurricaneDitka]

@Euphonious_Polemic

Let’s just try to ignore what happened, amIright?

What happened? Do you mean Trump winning the election? Or the fact that John Podesta is a bit of a dunce that fell for a phishing scheme and got his emails posted on the Internet? Or do you believe there’s evidence of something more sinister than that?

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@HurricaneDitka

What happened? Do you mean Trump winning the election? Or the fact that John Podesta is a bit of a dunce that fell for a phishing scheme and got his emails posted on the Internet? Or do you believe there’s evidence of something more sinister than that?

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Monday it “defies belief” that Republican politicians would hesitate to review Russia’s intrusion. Former acting CIA director Mike Morrell called the Russian interference “the political equivalent of 9/11.”

Must be something wrong with your browser. Is it cutting off everything in quote tags?

[HurricaneDitka]

@Euphonious_Polemic

Must be something wrong with your browser. Is it cutting off everything in quote tags?

I got to the second paragraph on your source and quit reading. Anyone that calls the group of electors asking for a CIA briefing “bipartisan” without further explanation is being intentionally deceptive.

[foolsguinea]

@elucidator

The Turtle sure did the turn-around, didn’t he. Couple days back, it was not just no but hell no! Now he has seen the light! What I’m wondering is “why”? Right now, I’m guessing it has something to do with money and/or power. Call it a hunch.

At a guess, survival. Mitch isn’t a hard-right nationalist. Note that his present wife is a Chinese immigrant, and his first wife was a feminist. If Trump gets to the “Night of the Long Knives” part of the nationalist dictator playbook, Mitch is dead.

Mitch going along to this point, that was for power. But right now, he has to resist the crazies in the potential Trump administration. If Trump thinks he’s above the law, then all bets are off as to the safety of other GOP leaders.

What’s that, you say, this isn’t a banana republic? If Trump stole the election somehow, isn’t it?

[HurricaneDitka]

@foolsguinea

What’s that, you say, this isn’t a banana republic? If Trump stole the election somehow, isn’t it?

“If”

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@HurricaneDitka

“If”

“If”

And the Trumpistas want to keep it that way. There is NO WAY they want it to progress beyond “if”. Investigation? No way. Trump has already decided there is no need.

[HurricaneDitka]

@Euphonious_Polemic

“If”

And the Trumpistas want to keep it that way. There is NO WAY they want it to progress beyond “if”. Investigation? No way. Trump has already decided there is no need.

What would you like someone to investigate that’s not already being investigated?

[Okrahoma]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ec578b86110043f59def592d1f178be1/electoral-voters-speak-and-theyre-not-out-revolt

“The electoral voters speak, and they’re not out for a revolt”
…
“Only one Republican elector told AP he won’t vote for Trump.”
…
"But if the effort fails, it won’t be from lack of trying. Most of the pleas to reject Trump are coordinated, automated, professionally generated and, for those reasons, none too persuasive.

“We got a stack of letters from idiots,” said Republican elector Edward Robson, 86, a Phoenix, Arizona, homebuilder."

[Bridget_Burke]

@octopus

…
And there is nothing illegitimate about winning by the rules. Don’t be a sore loser.

The role of the Electoral College (as changed from its Constitutional basis by the Apportionment Act of the great minds serving in Congress back in 1911) does not make me happy.

What really makes me sore are the dunderheaded appointments Trump is making to his cabinet. And his dodging of the conflict of interest questions. And his preferring Twitter to press conferences.

If you really want to propagandize Your Guy, drop the Electoral College debate & start telling us how wonderful the Trump Presidency will be. Let us know about his ethics, his wisdom & wit. .

Actually, I can see why you’d rather discuss something more abstract.