Read on Twitter
Thread: the electoral college is fixable.
Currently, the EC gives a pretty tangible benefit to GOP. In 2016, Trump's Evote outperformed his pop vote by 10.8%, while Hillary under-performed by 5%.
2 main reasons for this:
Winner Take All EVs &
Reapportionment Act of 1929
Currently, the EC gives a pretty tangible benefit to GOP. In 2016, Trump's Evote outperformed his pop vote by 10.8%, while Hillary under-performed by 5%.
2 main reasons for this:
Winner Take All EVs &
Reapportionment Act of 1929
Winner Take All EVs is pretty self explanatory, but it's the process where a states winner gives ALL of their electoral votes to the winner, no matter how close it was.
Win MI by 10k? All 16 EVs!
Win CA by 3M! Still all 55.
This... has an effect on the results.
Win MI by 10k? All 16 EVs!
Win CA by 3M! Still all 55.
This... has an effect on the results.
The Reapportionment Act of 1929 sets the limit on the US House at 435 Representatives. This means states have to not only grow, but vastly outpace the nations growth to get more reps but small states are locked at 1 or 2. This widens the gap of representation, esp in the ECollege
"But Robin what about counting Senators in the EC?"
A:There are 13 states with only 1 or 2 rep(s). 6 are red and 7 are blue. 5/6 Red states are 3 EVs, 3/7 Blue "states" are 3 EVs. Kinda a wash.
The GOP senate advantage is mostly in the sheer number of 5-8EV red states.
A:There are 13 states with only 1 or 2 rep(s). 6 are red and 7 are blue. 5/6 Red states are 3 EVs, 3/7 Blue "states" are 3 EVs. Kinda a wash.
The GOP senate advantage is mostly in the sheer number of 5-8EV red states.
So what are the solutions?
1st is simply allocating state EVs proportionally. Chuck out candidates who don't reach the 1 EV threshold, then do some rounding.
This changes the 2016 Election result from
306-DJT, 232 HRC to
267-DJT, 266-HRC, 3-GJ, 1JS, 1, EM.
Closer to actual!
1st is simply allocating state EVs proportionally. Chuck out candidates who don't reach the 1 EV threshold, then do some rounding.
This changes the 2016 Election result from
306-DJT, 232 HRC to
267-DJT, 266-HRC, 3-GJ, 1JS, 1, EM.
Closer to actual!
Next you want to raise the House Reps to better reflect population. There is a proposal called the Wyoming Rule, which would state that the # of people per rep is set at smallest possible entitled unit, currently WY. So 500k per seat instead of 700k
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_Rule
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_Rule
This would raise the house to 547 seats. This doesn't do a whole lot by itself, 2016 election looks about the same, but coupled with proportional EV allocation, the 2016 Election looks like
325-HRC, 319 DJT, 3 GJ, 1 JS, 2 EM.
For fun, I made a Chart of the 2016 & 2000 Elections
325-HRC, 319 DJT, 3 GJ, 1 JS, 2 EM.
For fun, I made a Chart of the 2016 & 2000 Elections
Why keep the EC?
Well, for one, it would require a constitutional amendment to abolish it.
Two, 50 state elections seem less susceptible to manipulation, especially when thousands of votes only move 1 or 2 EVs.
Three, EVs are based on *total* population, not just who shows up!
Well, for one, it would require a constitutional amendment to abolish it.
Two, 50 state elections seem less susceptible to manipulation, especially when thousands of votes only move 1 or 2 EVs.
Three, EVs are based on *total* population, not just who shows up!
Our Gov is kinda like a car or a house. Without some routine maintenance, everything starts to look so busted we think a complete replacement is necessary.
I'm not saying this is the end all, I'm for a huge overhaul (RCV, Multi Seat districts, 10 amends), but its a start!
I'm not saying this is the end all, I'm for a huge overhaul (RCV, Multi Seat districts, 10 amends), but its a start!
Adding onto this thread a little bit. My ideal gov is RCV with multi seat districts, with a minimum of 3 seats for like Wyoming, so it could be proportional. Total? 1646 Reps.
Before you think "that's crazy!" UK House has 650 with a sixth of our population.
Before you think "that's crazy!" UK House has 650 with a sixth of our population.
Ideally, you'd district it up so what's a house district today would be 3-5-7 seats, all voted on together, using RCV. Example: Milwaukee County would perfectly fit to have 5 US Reps. Using the vote breakdown from 2016/2018, you'd have 4 Dem Reps and 1 GOP rep. Neat!
This will net you conservative representatives who care about cities, and liberal representatives who care about rural areas, opening up avenues of compromise and deal making.
Not to mention 1 of those 4 MKE Dems could easily be a Green or DSA member!
Not to mention 1 of those 4 MKE Dems could easily be a Green or DSA member!
Another bump (post 2020 election).
Here's another reason for keeping the EC (or a version of it).
Keeping 50 state elections instead of 1 federalized election lowers the chance of top level subversion.
Imagine if Trumps goons were in charge of running the whole thing?
Here's another reason for keeping the EC (or a version of it).
Keeping 50 state elections instead of 1 federalized election lowers the chance of top level subversion.
Imagine if Trumps goons were in charge of running the whole thing?
The only issue with a national popular vote is that it becomes kinda a house of cards (pun intended). Single party states get really incentivized to (perhaps illegally) rack up the score or suppress the vote. https://twitter.com/jgt1960/status/1294260390595977216?s=20
With a more proportional EC, there's an upper threshold there
That & a state's electoral count is based on *ALL* of its residents, not just the ones who vote. When you notice that the states with the highest turnout % are the whitest states, you can see why that may be important.
That & a state's electoral count is based on *ALL* of its residents, not just the ones who vote. When you notice that the states with the highest turnout % are the whitest states, you can see why that may be important.
More Q&A! Which would make the problem even worse, because you're allowing political parties to gerrymander electoral votes.
It's be like the Snake tempting Eve, but instead of an apple it's Cotton Candy laced with cocaine. https://twitter.com/ckieser13/status/1301998700579958784?s=20
It's be like the Snake tempting Eve, but instead of an apple it's Cotton Candy laced with cocaine. https://twitter.com/ckieser13/status/1301998700579958784?s=20
Q&A:
That's one interpretation, for sure. it says "may" not "shall". I'm not a constitutional legal scholar. However, I believe winner take all EVs is a violation of the Equal protection clause of the 14th amend. States could also pass the laws themselves https://twitter.com/taliesinSF/status/1302685209360392192?s=20
That's one interpretation, for sure. it says "may" not "shall". I'm not a constitutional legal scholar. However, I believe winner take all EVs is a violation of the Equal protection clause of the 14th amend. States could also pass the laws themselves https://twitter.com/taliesinSF/status/1302685209360392192?s=20
RCV is ranked choice voting. Also Called Instant Runoff Voting. It's a system where voters rank their preferences and the voting system takes care of the rest.
This series of videos is the best explanation I've found.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNCHVwtpeBY4mybPkHEnRxSOb7FQ2vF9c https://twitter.com/jcoffin42/status/1326986660320571395?s=20
This series of videos is the best explanation I've found.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNCHVwtpeBY4mybPkHEnRxSOb7FQ2vF9c https://twitter.com/jcoffin42/status/1326986660320571395?s=20
RCV by itself should eliminate the need for party primaries (which are low turnout, partisan, & discourage compromise), RCV coupled with multi seat districts (aka STV) would also allow for more proportional representation. Currently a 55% winner ignores 45% of the voters often.
Some additional analysis from 2020 to compare. As expected, the 3 razor thin state wins in AZ, GA, and WI by 43k total votes allow Biden's EC count to outperform his Popular vote %, thanks to WTA EV allocation.
Proportional and Wyoming + Proportional fare better.
Proportional and Wyoming + Proportional fare better.
"But Robin! Doesn't this prove that the EC isn't biased for the GOP! It's giving Biden a 5% boost!"
On the contrary, dear Twitter.
The fact that 2020 is a bizarro version of 2016 leads to some easy comparisons. Each had a score of 306-232, and each had 3 razor thin states.
On the contrary, dear Twitter.
The fact that 2020 is a bizarro version of 2016 leads to some easy comparisons. Each had a score of 306-232, and each had 3 razor thin states.
When Trump did it in 2016, his EC total outperformed his popular vote total by 10%, double that of Biden 2020. Trump lost the popular vote both times.
If Trump wins 0.3% of Biden's votes in 3 states, we're looking at a 269-269 tie, despite Biden winning 4% more votes.
If Trump wins 0.3% of Biden's votes in 3 states, we're looking at a 269-269 tie, despite Biden winning 4% more votes.
Aside from the completely absurd turnout in 2020, another huge factor is the complete cratering of the 3rd party vote, and how much of that went to Biden, not Trump.
A big reason to change up how the EC works is to address 3P candidates to give them a fair shake w/o spoiling it.
A big reason to change up how the EC works is to address 3P candidates to give them a fair shake w/o spoiling it.
