Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Tramps Like Us (Read 6851 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #15 –
Quote from: PaulP on
The yanks are sick of mega rich celebrities telling them who to vote for. They're not sick of voting them into power. Or should I say, they're not sick of a system where someone with less actual votes can win office.

You can knock Trump for a multitude of things (and we'll continue to do so) but one thing you cant get him and his team on is election strategy

More often than not the electoral college system will produce a President with the greatest number of popular votes as well as the electoral college votes.
This was a bit of an anomaly.
It's only happened a handful of times (four or five in history)....but that was the system and everyone knew it.
Campaigning would have been different with a different system.

Much was made of the Democrats ground game before the election.
They were going to win because they were much better organised at local levels, while the Republicans were a divided rabble.

In the end the reverse happened and the Trump camp "done them like a dinner"
In the final days Trump bounced around the key states and managed to lock them away.
Complacency and a lack of preparation will nearly always get you in the end.

Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #16 –
Lods. The system is dopey and regressive, and I would think that even if Bernie Sanders was elected Prez.

If "democracy" means anything, it means majority rules. One vote should count as one vote, at least at the primary level.

Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #17 –
Quote from: PaulP on
Lods. The system is dopey and regressive, and I would think that even if Bernie Sanders was elected Prez.

If "democracy" means anything, it means majority rules. One vote should count as one vote, at least at the primary level.

Doesn't really matter what the system is that's the one you play by.

The thing about the USA is that you get much more diversity across the different states in terms of values and attitudes.
I go to Victoria and I've just got to make sure I ask for a potato cake when I want a scallop. ;D

Life in New York would be very different from life in Mississippi. Life in Montana different from life in Florida. Life in Alaska different from life in Hawaii....I suspect they don't want California deciding every President...In that respect the electoral college system works pretty well in providing a balanced (or in this case unbalanced) candidate.
If Trump had won the popular vote and not the electoral college I'm sure his supporters would be just as critical...I just wonder whether the independent observer would be though.

Four times in over two hundred years the candidate with the popular vote has not won the electoral college.....four times!
Hardly something to get too worked up about.
Hardly a flawed system.


Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #18 –
I'm not critical of the system because I don't like the victor, I'm critical of the system full stop. The diversity that you refer to would be more easily dealt with on a political level if voting was compulsory and if one vote counted as such.

Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #19 –
Quote from: PaulP on
I'm not critical of the system because I don't like the victor, I'm critical of the system full stop. The diversity that you refer to would be more easily dealt with on a political level if voting was compulsory and if one vote counted as such.

No it wouldn't

Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #20 –


It's a fairly asanine argument to go with most votes win with such an unfair distribution of voters.

Realistically our situation isn't much different.   Win the majority seats and you're going to be invited to form government,  and that doesn't mean more votes,that just means more seats.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #21 –
If it's a democracy, then the majority must rule. If 90% of the US population live in Alabama, or California, then so be it. Trying to doctor a system that evens the score because some states will be ignored leads to results like this one. You either get penalized because you're too small, or you get penalized because you're too big.

If politicians weren't so crap, those in power would make decisions that benefit the entire country, including smaller states, and not simply decisions that appeal to their particular constituents.

Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #22 –
Quote from: PaulP on
If it's a democracy, then the majority must rule. If 90% of the US population live in Alabama, or California, then so be it. Trying to doctor a system that evens the score because some states will be ignored leads to results like this one. You either get penalized because you're too small, or you get penalized because you're too big.

If politicians weren't so crap, those in power would make decisions that benefit the entire country, including smaller states, and not simply decisions that appeal to their particular constituents.
Far be it from me to try and explain politics but isnt the system largely similar to what we have here? That is, you vote at council/geographical level and most votes in each section wins the section....and most sections wins overall.
Some sections are smaller due to having more voters.

If there are 10 sections and 9 win by a single vote (say x) and the other one wins by 10,000 votes (say y).
X wins 9 out 10.
Y gets more overall votes but wins only 1/10 sections.

How is this different?

Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #23 –
Quote from: PaulP on
If it's a democracy, then the majority must rule. If 90% of the US population live in Alabama, or California, then so be it. Trying to doctor a system that evens the score because some states will be ignored leads to results like this one. You either get penalized because you're too small, or you get penalized because you're too big.

If politicians weren't so crap, those in power would make decisions that benefit the entire country, including smaller states, and not simply decisions that appeal to their particular constituents.

One vote one value is a fine principle...but it's not the ideal.

The electoral college system (and also ours) isn't that different to a "one vote, one value" system.
Both 'electoral college votes per state' and (and our own electorates) are largely determined by population.

Win most electoral college votes and it usually means you've also won the popular vote (4 times in  Presidential history has this not been the case)
Winning most electorates in an Australian election usually means you've won the popular vote.
So it's not the huge issue it's being made out to be.

But what the American system (and our one) does do is make parties and candidates give some attention to all areas of a country.
Taking this to an extreme.....
In a popular vote election in the US a candidate would spend all their time in just half a dozen states, "pork barelling" those particular areas... That's where nearly half the votes are.....you wouldn't see them in the "Other" States on that pie chart.

In Australia under a popular vote system parties and candidates wouldn't spend any time (or money) outside of the Capital cities....other than perhaps roads connecting them.

Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #24 –
Yes, those are all fair point lods. I can't disagree with any of that.

I note in my brief research that in our 1998 election, Labor won the popular vote, but failed to win government.

Re: Tramps Like Us

Reply #25 –
Quote from: PaulP on
If it's a democracy, then the majority must rule. If 90% of the US population live in Alabama, or California, then so be it. Trying to doctor a system that evens the score because some states will be ignored leads to results like this one. You either get penalized because you're too small, or you get penalized because you're too big.

Ridiculous post. You may as well say the "deplorables" from the country don't matter.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!