[EM] The Electoral College could lead to civil war.

[robert bristow-johnson]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------

Subject: Re: [EM] The Electoral College could lead to civil war.

From: ⸘Ŭalabio‽ <Walabio at MacOSX.Com>

Date: Mon, November 21, 2016 2:01 am

To: "EM" <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>

"robert bristow-johnson" <rbj at audioimagination.com>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------



>

> This time around, the 6 3-electoral-vote states and the District of Columbia were either in-the-bag or out-of-reach, so were all ignored. A little state could be a swing state, but so could a big state.

>
New Hampshire was a swing state and it had only 4 electoral votes.  And both major-party presidential candidates spent a lot of time in New Hampshire.  In fact, Cap'n Combover's final rally was in New Hampshire.


>>> The loser pays 1 thousand registered voters who did not plan to vote 1 thousand dollars to vote for him and confirm the vote by taking a selfy with the completed ballot —— ?this is why BallotSelfies should be illegal, as they are in many places! The Looser now caries
California and wins the Electoral College 270 to 268.
>

>>> ?The Cheater just used the Electoral College as an huge ForceMultiplier!:
Only if California is close.  And it wasn't.  1000 bought votes won't change much in California.
Now in Florida it *would* have made a difference in the year 2000.  but not in
2016.
The candidates (or their surrogates buying votes) just don't know which state will be the closest.  Even with the help of 538.com .

>

>>> It would take changing 3 million popular votes under that scenario to achieve the same effect without the Electoral College. ?That is a 3-thousand-to-1 multiplier!
what if the popular vote is very very close, yet the electoral vote is not close and the state popular votes are not
close?  then, all of the problems you claim to be due to the electoral college is visited upon your popular vote.  and if the popular vote comes out very close (like less than 0.1%), then the recounts have to happen over the whole country, not just in any particular state.

>

>> you could have the Cheater cheating an election with popular vote, too. ?if it comes out close, with the popular vote the recount and re-examination would be nationwide.

>

> Certainly. The fact that the cheater would have to payoff 3 thousand times as many voters
your numbers are simply specific to a scenario of the present election.  it could be that the aggregate popular vote is close while not close in the individual states.
>——
¡even the Koch-Brothers could not afford that! —— to win the election is no problem at all.
>

> ¿What is the point of your criticism? Do not get me wrong; I need all of the constructive criticism I can get, but all you gave me are non sequiturs.
no, they are not non sequiturs.  I am responding specifically to claims you are making and showing they have nothing, in
general, to do with the popular vs. electoral vote controversy.  all of the "Cheater" complaints you direct toward the Electoral College *could*, under different circumstances, be directed toward the National Popular Vote.
There is a *very* good reason (that of majority-rule
democracy) for ditching the Electoral College (or making it moot with the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact), but this "cheater" thing is not the very good reason.  And that is because it does not specifically apply to the case of electing with electors.  It **could**
apply to the case of electing with the popular vote.
The reason that the Electoral College should be ditched is that Either the E.C. is ineffective (i.e. the E.C. vote agrees with the popular vote), or when the E.C. **is** effective, it **never** brings legitimacy to the election.  Only
assholes are saying now "Thank God for the Electoral College that saved our nation from the decision of the majority of its voters.".  When the E.C. is effective (i.e. it negates and nullifies the popular vote), it *never* makes the election more legitimate.  It *always* makes it
less legit.  That's the real reason.



--
r b-j                  rbj at audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20161121/e6b8f4e5/attachment.htm>