[EM] Re: Stabilizing the electoral college (was Re: electoral college)

[Rob Brown]

Steve Eppley <seppley <at> alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> Rob B asked:
> > Steve Eppley writes:
> > But recounts could still be important, you've just 
> > moved the line....what if it was a difference 
> > 0.49999% and the election hung on whether it 
> > was possibly really 0.5%?
> 
> I'm afraid I don't yet understand Rob's question.  
> My proposal doesn't keep the line vertical, it tilts
> it so that when the election is close the delegates
> aren't awarded winner-takes-all.  For instance, 
> if the state's final count is very close to 50-50, 
> then each of the two tied candidates would be 
> awarded half the state's EC delegates.  

I think you are missing my point.

You say that it is currently unstable, in that a small change in votes can 
cause a large change in electoral votes.

The same thing can happen in your system, since you need to have a cutoff 
point which determines whether it is "close to 50-50" or not.  A small change 
in votes could change it from being not close to 50-50 to being close to 50-
50.  That would result in a large change in electoral votes, because it 
suddenly tabulates things differently.

Regardless, I don't think the main problem with the electoral college is its 
instability, but the fact that it weighs the votes of those in divided states 
more than those in less divided states, which is inherently unfair. 

-rob