Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lou Weed who wrote (252022)	12/21/2007 3:17:42 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 281500

winner in the state gets all the electoral votes in that state. Problem is that smaller states are way overrepresented because electoral vote is the som of senators plus representatives. Small state with one rep gets three votes. Big state like CA gets screwed. More red states are small than blue so thats how gore lost. But of course if kerry got 50k more votes in ohio he would have been even a bigger minortiy pres than bush because he was beaten 52-48 in pop vote.

To: Lou Weed who wrote (252022)	12/21/2007 5:08:20 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

But it certainly could be. The electoral college has the right to go against the popular vote in its state...right? No, not really. Could happen in theory but there hasn't been a "faithless elector" in over a hundred years, I believe. The electoral college is a pro forma thing nowadays. Looks like its time for all states to be consistent so as not to have this happen. Has any other democracy had a candidate that lost the election even though he/she won most votes? No, the states are not all going to be consistent. The system wasn't designed to make the states consistent. It was designed to let the states do their own thing, and to over-represent the small states, as mike pointed out. The Founders were very worried about the large states trampling the wishes of the small states so they deliberately made the small states punch above their weight in terms of representation. As for any other democracy, I'm sure you can find many examples. All you need is a system where elected representatives of any kind choose the national leader, and where different voting districts are not apportioned purely on the basis of population numbers.