• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

The US Electoral College

Status
Not open for further replies.

Silly Valley

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 11, 2019
Messages
28
Likes
46
Location
Silicon Valley
I take it that the founding fathers decided that the voters(white male landholders only) could not be informed enough across the vast country and/or reasoned enough(education) to make such an important decision as choosing a national President. Thus a system was created where they, the voters, elected representatives(their betters) for their own State who in turn voted for a President(of the representatives choosing).

In time, political parties formed, long distance communication evolved, the voting franchise widened and the populace became better educated. Notwithstanding, the Electoral college remains an electoral intermediary between citizen and President.
One of the main reasons was to prevent a small number of states with large populations from dominating the other states.

As for the populace becoming better educated and more informed that is up for debate and does not mean wiser. We are at a point today where information and news is filtered or distorted to fit narratives. Many form their opinions with less than the big picture. I would hardly say we are well informed. Much of the modern media no longer sees informing the public as its main mission. The American public is really at a disadvantage in making informed decisions and sadly, that is by design. Politics and power reign supreme and too many have put their lust for power and money ahead of the best interest of the nation. This is much more consequential than any of the nuances of the electoral college.
 

bobbooo

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
1,479
Likes
2,079
By the way, if anyone hasn't already, make sure to track your absentee ballot to check it's definitely been accepted and not rejected for some reason e.g. an invalid signature. Here are the tracking links for each state:

https://www.vote.org/ballot-tracker-tools/

If it has been rejected you can quickly and easily correct your ballot online here (no matter who you voted for):

https://ballotcure.com/

The deadline for this correction is as early as 5pm Friday 11/6 in some states like Georgia (which is still neck-and-neck). Better safe than sorry!
 
Last edited:
OP
Wombat

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
It seems anomalous that in a State vote that is 49/51 that the Electoral College is winner-take-all. Two States excepted, which indicates this doesn't have to be.

This winner-take-all approach is common in dual major party systems elsewhere. Disenfranchisement of the lesser group is a certainty.

Proportional representation gives voters some room to move but they don't determine the coalition deals.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 65

Guest
How come the senate has even number of seats & the elected reps? Wouldn’t odd numbers be better to avoid deadlocks?
 

March Audio

Master Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
6,378
Likes
9,317
Location
Albany Western Australia
If you think the US electoral college system is complicated, try explaining preferences and voting "above or below" the line in Australia :)
That blew my mind when we first voted here in Oz.

Its also totally pointless as people "tactically" rank their preferences to try and ensure the main opposition to their choice doesn't win.
 
Last edited:

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,524
Likes
37,057
Hard to believe after the USA showed how representative govt works, these other countries came up with parliaments and stuff like that.
 
OP
Wombat

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
Hard to believe after the USA showed how representative govt works, these other countries came up with parliaments and stuff like that.

Or how representative government works - for whom?
 

Katji

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
2,990
Likes
2,273
^^^"Thank you for your service."
 

A Surfer

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
1,125
Likes
1,230
Yes but PR also leads to a system where nothing gets done. Its inevitable that there is only a limited majority in the house (referring to UK). See Brexit as the ultimate example. There was nothing democratic about that progress being endlessly blocked by MPs.

Every decision is argued endlessly and diluted until acceptable enough to the various factions. So PR is no panacea.
The notion that PR leads to nothing getting done is mostly a myth, excepting a few very unique exceptions. The majority of Western democracies use some form of PR, the US, Canada, and Britain are the major (only) holdouts. Britain does not use a PR system unless something has happened that I do not know about.

I imagine talking electoral reform with many Americans will invoke notions of the boogie man of socialism because the power centers have done such a good job over recent years of falsely conflating a proper electoral system with the desire of PR supporters to give people everything and thus ruining their desire to work.

Those who like to spread misinformation deliberately, or who just don't really understand PR well like to point to countries like Italy and Israel as examples of the dysfunctional nature of PR. Those two nations are extremely unique in modern western democracies Italy was a nation cobbled together from quite few autonomous regions with striking degrees of division and competitive leanings and it has continued to play out that their parliamentary efforts which are still characterized by strong regional squabbling. Israel is a nation divided deeply over security and the question of expansion and occupation of territories surrounding their state. While we have regional differences here in North America they have historically not prevented a greater degree of cohesion around central issues. That is of course changing.

Do you believe that in Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, France and others that they get nothing done in their governance? All of those nations have PR systems. I think if you look at Germany you would have a terrible time proving that they get nothing done. I'm sorry if I sound argumentative, not at all my desire, but the notion trotted out that the US system is somehow a shinning example of a truly democratic electoral system is demonstrably a very, very flattering depiction. Do you think the Biden administration (if it comes to pass) will be able to get much done? I don't. I suspect American is in for some rough years on that front.

First-past-the-post electoral systems in all of their forms and guises were tools of the elite and wealthy that guaranteed that even if they let the people have a vote, while on the surface it is "democratic", ultimately nothing important in terms of their economic control and power would ever be threatened. This isn't theory, it is science and has been studied at great length and subjected to intense peer review. In political science and economy studies there is very robust study around democratic and electoral systems. It isn't just some crazy ideas hatched by a bunch of lazy hippies who don't want to work and dream up ways to get a free ride. I wonder how democratic Trump supporters will feel the process is if they lose?

And yes, first-past-the-post systems are associated with two party systems because over the time they essentially guarantee that will happen to one extent or another.
 

A Surfer

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
1,125
Likes
1,230
.... Politics and power reign supreme and too many have put their lust for power and money ahead of the best interest of the nation. This is much more consequential than any of the nuances of the electoral college.

The electoral system is the most important "legal" tool used to exert and retain control, but I totally agree with the substance of your arguments.
 

March Audio

Master Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
6,378
Likes
9,317
Location
Albany Western Australia
The notion that PR leads to nothing getting done is mostly a myth, excepting a few very unique exceptions. The majority of Western democracies use some form of PR, the US, Canada, and Britain are the major (only) holdouts. Britain does not use a PR system unless something has happened that I do not know about.

I imagine talking electoral reform with many Americans will invoke notions of the boogie man of socialism because the power centers have done such a good job over recent years of falsely conflating a proper electoral system with the desire of PR supporters to give people everything and thus ruining their desire to work.

Those who like to spread misinformation deliberately, or who just don't really understand PR well like to point to countries like Italy and Israel as examples of the dysfunctional nature of PR. Those two nations are extremely unique in modern western democracies Italy was a nation cobbled together from quite few autonomous regions with striking degrees of division and competitive leanings and it has continued to play out that their parliamentary efforts which are still characterized by strong regional squabbling. Israel is a nation divided deeply over security and the question of expansion and occupation of territories surrounding their state. While we have regional differences here in North America they have historically not prevented a greater degree of cohesion around central issues. That is of course changing.

Do you believe that in Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, France and others that they get nothing done in their governance? All of those nations have PR systems. I think if you look at Germany you would have a terrible time proving that they get nothing done. I'm sorry if I sound argumentative, not at all my desire, but the notion trotted out that the US system is somehow a shinning example of a truly democratic electoral system is demonstrably a very, very flattering depiction. Do you think the Biden administration (if it comes to pass) will be able to get much done? I don't. I suspect American is in for some rough years on that front.

First-past-the-post electoral systems in all of their forms and guises were tools of the elite and wealthy that guaranteed that even if they let the people have a vote, while on the surface it is "democratic", ultimately nothing important in terms of their economic control and power would ever be threatened. This isn't theory, it is science and has been studied at great length and subjected to intense peer review. In political science and economy studies there is very robust study around democratic and electoral systems. It isn't just some crazy ideas hatched by a bunch of lazy hippies who don't want to work and dream up ways to get a free ride. I wonder how democratic Trump supporters will feel the process is if they lose?

And yes, first-past-the-post systems are associated with two party systems because over the time they essentially guarantee that will happen to one extent or another.
Sorry but you have taken the comment too literally.

The impact of non majority governance is obvious. PR leads to that more often than not. As I said the result is a diluted negotiation system, deal making to appease all.

You may have missed my other post about the preference voting in Oz being a farce as it leads to tactical voting.

When the UK has had "hung" parliaments things have ground to a halt and the incumbent government has huge difficulty implementing policy. Brexit being a perfect example.

I dont think anyone has suggested the US system is "a shining example" but equally PR PR is no panacea

The UK is a first past the post system. Decided on number of seats won in the various regional areas. Can you explain how that is "a tool of the elite"?
 
Last edited:

PierreV

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
1,437
Likes
4,686
How come the senate has even number of seats & the elected reps? Wouldn’t odd numbers be better to avoid deadlocks?

When you give 2 anything to every parties, it's a bid hard to end up with an odd number. ;) Their VP breaks ties.
 

SIY

Grand Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
10,386
Likes
24,752
Location
Alfred, NY
How come the senate has even number of seats & the elected reps? Wouldn’t odd numbers be better to avoid deadlocks?

The president of the senate is the odd vote.

It is unaccountably difficult for people outside of the US to understand that it was created as a confederation of (mostly) independent states, and still exists that way to a large extent. The change to a more strongly federal system (for better or worse) came along much, much later. Our constitution is relatively short and simple, and it is spelled out quite clearly.

Anyone who has spent much time here will notice that, for example, Louisiana and Oregon are more different than Spain and Germany.
 

A Surfer

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
1,125
Likes
1,230
And yet the notion of one nation is put forward often.
 

A Surfer

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
1,125
Likes
1,230
Sorry but you have taken the comment too literally.

The impact of non majority governance is obvious. PR leads to that more often than not. As I said the result is a diluted negotiation system, deal making to appease all.

You may have missed my other post about the preference voting in Oz being a farce as it leads to tactical voting.

When the UK has had "hung" parliaments things have ground to a halt and the incumbent government has huge difficulty implementing policy. Brexit being a perfect example.

PR is no panacea.

The UK is a first past the post system. Decided on number of seats won in the various regional areas. Can you explain how that is "a tool of the elite"?
Some truth for sure, but who ever said the real role of a government is too make quick decisions over inclusive decisions? Again, in Canada national health care was brought forward in a minority government and it was hotly resisted by the medical establishment as they favoured the status quo which had served them well. I am not saying PR is a panacea, but it is without a doubt more democratic than any type of first-past-the-post which is well established to deepen regional disparities. And while your point about tactical voting has nuance, I would ask you if you don't think that the mechanisms of packs and super packs and other macerations of the US system is not actually tactical voting? All the mechanisms are designed to make one of two possibilities a reality while limiting variance of outcomes. That sounds pretty tactical to me.

Anyway, I will stop now as this is moving towards argument and I actually feel very bad for Americans right now. It is a shame to see our friends and neighbours so divided and hurting. I am truly sorry for the terrible challenges ahead and a friend would try to support rather than chide. I wish nothing but the best for my American neighbours. My paternal grandfather died a US citizen despite living here in Canada much of his life. He was very proud and often told me stories of growing up as a young man in New York City. I have several American relatives and friends and I truly feel pained watching the turmoil and deep divisions. I hope that this period of trial and pain leads to some deep reflection and healing. I do not think America is perfect at all, but it doesn't have to be, but imperfect or not, the world needs the counter balance that the US clearly anchors in geopolitics.
 
Last edited:

March Audio

Master Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
6,378
Likes
9,317
Location
Albany Western Australia
Some truth for sure, but who ever said the real role of a government is too make quick decisions over inclusive decisions? Again, in Canada national health care was brought forward in a minority government and it was hotly resisted by the medical establishment as they favoured the status quo which had served them well. I am not saying PR is a panacea, but it is without a doubt more democratic than any type of first-past-the-post which is well established to deepen regional disparities. And while your point about tactical voting has nuance, I would ask you if you don't think that the mechanisms of packs and super packs and other macerations of the US system is not actually tactical voting? All the mechanisms are designed to make one of two possibilities a reality while limiting variance of outcomes. That sounds pretty tactical to me.

More democratic? That may be your interpretation.

So what was democratic about the majority of people in the UK voting to leave the EU and that clearcinstruction being frustrated and undermined by a non majority house?

Of course its inclusive. You can vote for whoever you choose, but the majority wins.

Considering how often the UK has flipped between government of Conservative and Labour you can't claim that there is some kind of fundamental regional or class based disparity.

I think what you are objecting to is Majoritarianism.
 
Last edited:

BDWoody

Chief Cat Herder
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
6,948
Likes
22,627
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
And yet the notion of one nation is put forward often.

Are you saying that is contradictory?

The states comprise one nation...obviously. That gives room for a huge country with varied interests to exist under the umbrella of an overall constitution that they all signed up under. That's about as far as we generally want our collective agreement to go.

Each state sends 2 senators (6 year terms) and however many congressmen (2 year terms) their population dictates, and they go do their thing in DC.

To most of us here, it's 50 very different state governments (separate tax rates, speed limits, gun restrictions, etc) with a federal government we hope stays as much out of the way as possible.

I live in Maryland. Overwhelmingly Democratic state. Popular Republican governor. Hard for many to get it.
 

tmtomh

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
2,636
Likes
7,497
That blew my mind when we first voted here in Oz.

Its also totally pointless as people "tactically" rank their preferences to try and ensure the main opposition to their choice doesn't win.

Actually, what you describe as pointless is precisely the entire purpose of ranked choice voting. There is nothing sketchy, anti-democratic, or pointless about giving people political power to vote based on the policies they want to see, or want to prevent, by allowing them to use their vote to say, "I would like to be governed by Candidate A, but if not enough of my fellow Citizens agree with me, then can we agree on Candidate B, because I think they'd still be a lot better than Candidate C." To the contrary, it's a very good way to find consensus and to enable voters to participate in the kind of compromise and moderating influences that elected officials themselves usually have to engage in if they want to get anything done.

It's also how candidates have been selected for much of American history, and it's still how much of civic and political life gets conducted at the everyday, grassroots level. It's also how political caucuses work - and for the first 200 years or so of American history, the caucus system was how Presidents were selected. The Primary system is relatively new historically.
 
Last edited:

A Surfer

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
1,125
Likes
1,230
More democratic? That may be your interpretation.

So what was democratic about the majority of people in the UK voting to leave the EU and that being frustrated by a non majority house?

Of course its inclusive. You can vote for whoever you choose, but the majority wins.
Not going to go about in a circular discussion, I respect your opinion although I do not agree with your position, that doesn't matter, we are both entitled to hold our views. I am pretty confident there is nothing I could say or do to change your mind and I am pretty sure that the reverse is true. I think I'll step away and focus on audio discussions. Thank you for the conversation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom