Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)

16. 7 EVs is a much bigger worry when CA has *just* 55

Reply to ipfilter (Reply #13)

Wed Nov 7, 2012, 04:04 PM

Nov 2012

Your argument doesn't hold water for a couple of reasons: (1) It applies to ANY state - there's nothing unique about OK or other state in that respect, and (2) CA is almost exactly 10 times larger than OK. If OK gets 7, CA should get 70. And if we're going to do it straight up proportional, shit can the damn electoral college.

Like I said above, the electoral college discourages turnout, which affects down ballot races, and if the 95% turnout, we don't ever have to worry about the 5%.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

32 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Should the Electoral College stay or go [View all] Renew Deal Nov 2012 OP

Just because we won doesn't mean it works properly. Fearless Nov 2012 #1

Agreed, based on the idea that everyone has the same worth as a person, their votes should GreenPartyVoter Nov 2012 #2

Well it probably was constitutional back then. white_wolf Nov 2012 #3

If there were no campaiging (everyone would receive a voters' guide instead) would there be a patrice Nov 2012 #4

Campaigns should be publicly funded and the Electoral College is an anachronism! LongTomH Nov 2012 #6

That is part of its purpose, but another part is to weight less populated areas patrice Nov 2012 #12

The Senate is more than sufficient with respect to your point WhaTHellsgoingonhere Nov 2012 #20

Yes - Or it would be if we had authentic public financed campaigns & NO dependence upon MSM patrice Nov 2012 #21

I think the United States is suffering from a lack of neutral news outlets. Selatius Nov 2012 #28

It should go but there need to be other changes to our elections jp11 Nov 2012 #5

It should go via an amendment FreeJoe Nov 2012 #7

Flush it! I don't ever... WhaTHellsgoingonhere Nov 2012 #8

What about proportional EVs? BadgerKid Nov 2012 #9

Maine & New Hampshire, I think, see the article I linked above. nt patrice Nov 2012 #23

This is f'ing interesting... WhaTHellsgoingonhere Nov 2012 #10

Being a resident of Oklahoma I say keep it. ipfilter Nov 2012 #13

7 EVs is a much bigger worry when CA has *just* 55 WhaTHellsgoingonhere Nov 2012 #16

The only change needed is make them actually filibuster madokie Nov 2012 #11

Tempted to say "keep it" after last night, but it should go. dawg Nov 2012 #14

I think it should stay treestar Nov 2012 #15

That's the problem today... WhaTHellsgoingonhere Nov 2012 #19

Go. It would be unconstitutional but for the fact.... Tommy_Carcetti Nov 2012 #17

I vote go but .. Ganja Ninja Nov 2012 #18

I see both sides, but can you imagine the pain of a recount? gollygee Nov 2012 #22

Good point! Without EVs, HOW could you do a recount if you needed to, unless we're using paper patrice Nov 2012 #24

never thought about it this way.... slutticus Nov 2012 #30

I think I'd like to see the states' electors unbunched (like Nebraska and Maine do). Bucky Nov 2012 #25

It's gotta go. trotsky Nov 2012 #26

Yes I think plcdude Nov 2012 #27

The question is moot IMO slackmaster Nov 2012 #29

One problem with abolition... leftlibdem420 Nov 2012 #31

I'd prefer to see states split up EV's like Maine does. hughee99 Nov 2012 #32