Reply #32

In the discussion thread: Al Gore Calls for End of Electoral College [View all]

Fri Aug 31, 2012, 01:04 AM

jeff47 (7,460 posts)

32. It's a zero sum game.

Last edited Fri Aug 31, 2012, 01:06 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

If I abandon Los Angeles, my opponent gets a whole lot more votes for a whole lot less effort and money while I desperately try to claw together scraps by traveling thousands of miles and talking to 1/100th the people.

For example, the advertising cost might be lower in the less populated areas.

Yes, but I'm only reaching 1/100th the people. Woot! I got 1 more electoral vote while my opponent got 100 more.

I strongly recommend that you take a few days to game this out rather than reacting immediately.

I don't need to game this out. I'm living it. That's why I bothered explaining New York state government history.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

137 replies	Author	Time	Post
Al Gore Calls for End of Electoral College [View all]	cal04	Aug 2012	OP
It will never happen. The south won't let it /nt	still_one	Aug 2012	#1
For once I agree with the south	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#10
That was not the intent of the electoral college. That is why they have 2 senators from every state	still_one	Aug 2012	#14
You began with a completely unargued statement and ended with an unargued opinion...	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#21
No matter what my view is, the fact is it won't go away, it is here to stay /nt	still_one	Aug 2012	#22
Maybe, but anything can be changed..	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#24
In theory yes. Either way I hear you /nt	still_one	Aug 2012	#34
Look, Arkansas has slightly fewer people than Chicago, but Arkansas voters have more power	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#40
You are comparing a city to a state..	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#41
look it's not the way democracies do things	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#43
I'm not speaking in favor of EC, I'm advocating against popular vote.	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#44
I'm not arguing for pure democracy, but the voters should have equal power	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#48
There is more involved in changing the system than just getting rid of bad policies	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#45
the popular vote to elect the president and vice president	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#49
This is a republic not a democracy, like it or not...n/t	pipoman	Aug 2012	#119
A republic is a form of democracy.	tabasco	Sep 2012	#128
And I tire of people ascribing the dictionary definition of 'democracy'	pipoman	Sep 2012	#129
No,	tabasco	Sep 2012	#135
So you think it is a good	xxqqqzme	Aug 2012	#58
Then address the filibuster policies	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#59
No, it's about giving equal power to all voters	cpwm17	Aug 2012	#76
People in Arkansas have a tradition of voting only once	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#78
If we did away with the electoral college, then each voter in your state would have the	JDPriestly	Aug 2012	#47
Nothing wrong with that, each voter having the same power	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#51
Sounds reasonable...	onpatrol98	Aug 2012	#112
In a democracy, sheer numbers decide a lot of things like whether tax money goes to fund or	JDPriestly	Sep 2012	#120
not necessarily	DonCoquixote	Aug 2012	#64
You are confusing Congress with the EC	apnu	Aug 2012	#65
Yeah, why should more than half the goverment be based on voters	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#94
In a popular vote system, it would not be decided in any areas	treestar	Aug 2012	#74
They are already ignored	Floyd_Gondolli	Aug 2012	#81
I am 31 and Clinton carried AR in 1992 & 1996	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#97
I don't like...	GTurck	Aug 2012	#75
I agree that it will never happen, but the Southern states are not the issue	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#77
electoral college is a fraud	Dkc05	Aug 2012	#2
There are about 40 states that are either BLUE or RED	XemaSab	Aug 2012	#3
At the very least, we can push	Ken Burch	Aug 2012	#4
btw, is that an old file photo, or did Al grow another beard?	Ken Burch	Aug 2012	#5
He didn't say what solution he preferred. Popular vote is absulutely the wrong answer.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#6
Yes, Texas, Georgia, New York and California would be worth campaigning in	jeff47	Aug 2012	#8
No. I do not agree with your statement	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#11
Let me give a little example.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#17
Now do the math for the large cities.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#23
But the other side wants to win also.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#30
It's a zero sum game.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#32
The flaw is you're still thinking states.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#18
There's nothing wrong with that. My system would be an improvement.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#31
Wow are you wrong.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#35
That's why we have Congress	cpwm17	Aug 2012	#79
One house of Congress represents the states.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#88
California only gets attention as a place to get money.	JDPriestly	Aug 2012	#50
Exactly. There is no real incentive for EITHER Rs or Ds to vote	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#67
That's why they don't want proportional voting.	Sirveri	Aug 2012	#98
I think they would spend time here	JonLP24	Aug 2012	#71
Phoenix would get attention. The rest of the state would be ignored. (nt)	jeff47	Aug 2012	#87
California gets 55 EV and my state gets 6	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#16
And the problem with majority rule is ... ?	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#19
The problem would be that a person could be	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#29
Can you please illustrate that with a scenario?	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#33
Majority vote is about numbers.	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#37
To add some numbers to this	jeff47	Aug 2012	#39
Thank you.	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#42
those 9 states have 18 senators, the other states have 82	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#53
You're looking at states as monolithic entities	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#56
How their EC votes are given is determined by the state.	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#60
Using a popular vote treats each citizen like an individual	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#66
Right, but that gives too much of an advantage to election-riggers	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#69
There's no advantage to a proportional EC	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#80
There is an advantage to a firewall.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#82
If a corrupt state alters, say, 10% of its individual votes	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#83
No. That is not "my system"	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#84
Right, using your example numbers	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#90
I don't follow your numbers, but it isn't about the numbers anyway.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#91
Your scenario is one in which the total vote is very close, but the electoral college is not	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#93
You don't seem to understand the concept of "firewall"	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#106
Ohio's electors are part of the election of the president	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#109
Cities would elect the candidates because most "individuals" live in them	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#99
Most individuals in the US are white; would you say it is white people who elect candidates?	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#107
Sometimes it is. Obviously you can win elections without the minority vote or repubs would never win	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#115
Exactly. Proportional electors REDUCES the dominance of the big states	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#68
The problem is that sometimes the majority tramples legitimate interests of minorities	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#85
so the minority should get the right to win elections with less votes than the majority?	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#108
A simple majority of ELECTORAL votes is required to elect the President	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#110
We were talking about what you think, not how it works	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#111
What I think doesn't matter. The EC is intended to protect the interests of small states.	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#113
"what I think doesn't matter"	CreekDog	Aug 2012	#114
I used to want to end the Electoral College	jeff47	Aug 2012	#7
Re: the empty state problem	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#9
I'm using 'state' as a convenient grouping mechanism.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#15
In my system, the non-urban areas get MORE of a voice	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#20
Only because you haven't done the math yet. (see my other reply)	jeff47	Aug 2012	#26
And remember the "empty states" get 2 Senators. That is a huge amount of power.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#25
Assuming the filibuster will remain is not a good idea.	jeff47	Aug 2012	#27
You do know, don't you, that NYC . . .	markpkessinger	Aug 2012	#117
Link? (nt)	jeff47	Sep 2012	#122
Here ...	markpkessinger	Sep 2012	#125
Ah, there's the problem	jeff47	Sep 2012	#134
Okay, but after this election	shawn703	Aug 2012	#12
I see that happening also	Freddie	Aug 2012	#62
Therein lies the key hypocrisy of many people who wish to end the Electoral College	slackmaster	Aug 2012	#86
The easy way to do is is proportionate delagations at the state level	bhikkhu	Aug 2012	#13
As a practical matter, it would have to be done nationally.	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#28
If California abandoned the electoral college we could say goodbye to ever electing a Democrat again	cpwm17	Aug 2012	#95
I'm for a direct democracy. None of this republic shit. nt	Comrade_McKenzie	Aug 2012	#36
Yeah - why waste time with the Constitution - just do it like you want it...not! Direct Democracies	24601	Sep 2012	#123
My beef with the EC	TexasBushwhacker	Aug 2012	#38
It is a virtue of the EC to negate the factor of turnout	BlueStreak	Aug 2012	#70
Not only does it not count, it goes to Rmoney	treestar	Aug 2012	#73
We in California don't count nearly as much as the voters in Rhode Island or Wyoming or	JDPriestly	Aug 2012	#46
That makes little sense.	JoePhilly	Sep 2012	#127
This just occurred to him now?	jberryhill	Aug 2012	#52
Oddly, the EC will probably benefit Obama this election season...	Drunken Irishman	Aug 2012	#54
Eventually, the EC may become Proportional But	LarryNM	Aug 2012	#55
Winning the popular vote and "losing" the election	xxenderwigginxx	Aug 2012	#61
It didn't start with California	karynnj	Aug 2012	#57
Well, now Republicans must support the electoral college, since they cannot ever agree with Al Gore.	tclambert	Aug 2012	#63
Popular vote makes more sense considering we are a democracy.	bamacrat	Aug 2012	#72
Thank you Al Gore n/t	librechik	Aug 2012	#89
One voter, one vote. What's not to like?	Throd	Aug 2012	#92
Exactly	TexasBushwhacker	Aug 2012	#100
No, I'd limit absentee ballots to legal voters, not just anyone who asks. I don't want 8 year olds	24601	Sep 2012	#124
Until we have a better way of counting votes	MurrayDelph	Aug 2012	#105
I think it should be abolished too!	Liberalynn	Aug 2012	#96
I'll second that.	Cleita	Aug 2012	#101
Or in other words	sgsmith	Aug 2012	#103
I don't think there would have been a majority nationwide.	Cleita	Aug 2012	#104
I agree	Auggie	Aug 2012	#102
The electoral College is fucking stupid...	and-justice-for-all	Aug 2012	#116
Just want to be careful what we change it to	Billy888	Aug 2012	#118
One person one vote. No taxation without equal representation.	Exultant Democracy	Sep 2012	#121
The Electorial College is a firewall against state-level election fraud.	w4rma	Sep 2012	#126
watch this video on the electoral college	wilt the stilt	Sep 2012	#130
Thank you wilt the stilt for the link	cal04	Sep 2012	#132
As long as the electoral college remains, your vote is merely a suggestion. Dump it.	humblebum	Sep 2012	#131
Generally, Californians hate the EC	taught_me_patience	Sep 2012	#133
I'd favor preference voting and getting rid of the EC.	roamer65	Sep 2012	#136
If you want to read about something very fraudulent and undemocratic about the EC...	roamer65	Sep 2012	#137

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.