What if states earned their Electoral College votes based on turnout?
1–10 of 61 posts
Re: What if states earned their Electoral College votes based on turnout?
#2Wouldn't that favor small states, who can mount a turnout campaign with far fewer workers?
Re: What if states earned their Electoral College votes based on turnout?
#3Wouldn't that favor small states, who can mount a turnout campaign with far fewer workers?
I think it would be proportional. Larger states have more workers to draw on. The question is, how are the 'get out the vote' drives funded? By the parties? The state?
It has an appeal though. You have to exercise your right to vote in order to be represented. Is that impacting your liberty to not vote if you don't want to?
Re: What if states earned their Electoral College votes based on turnout?
#4Some reasons we have the Electoral College:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_%28United_St...
Re: What if states earned their Electoral College votes based on turnout?
#5This can also lead to some less desirable outcomes, such as calls to make voting mandatory.
Re: What if states earned their Electoral College votes based on turnout?
#6Wouldn't this lead to a TON of games? Now if you're a Democrat in Nebraska, or a Republican in California, it's in your best interest NOT to vote. That way the winner-takes-all majority in your state would get less of an impact. On the other hand, all of the Democrats in California and Republicans in Nebraska would definitely want to show up to the polls.
Basically if you think your party will win, you want to show up. If your party will lose, you want to skip. There are basically 3 equilibria: 100% of either party votes and 0% of the other one, or exactly 50/50 with the outcome unknown to anyone.
Re: What if states earned their Electoral College votes based on turnout?
#7Wouldn't this just be a general election with sort of weird rounding rules?
edit: no, because of winner-takes-all nonsense. seems like a bad idea.
Re: What if states earned their Electoral College votes based on turnout?
#8Wouldn't this lead to a TON of games? Now if you're a Democrat in Nebraska, or a Republican in California, it's in your best interest NOT to vote. That way the winner-takes-all majority in your state would get less of an impact. On the other hand, all of the Democrats in California and Republicans in Nebraska would definitely want to show up to the polls. Basically if you think your party will win, you want to show u…
Which is why the votes ought to be pooled across states, so all the Republican votes in California don't get lost, just because the state majority ended up voting Democratic.
Re: What if states earned their Electoral College votes based on turnout?
#9Will never happen. The Republican Party has almost made it its official platform to make it very hard for voters to vote. They are opposed to a holiday for elections; they come up with all sorts of excuses to take people off electoral rolls; they raise the bogey of "voter fraud" each and every election, when there's not much evidence of any.
Re: What if states earned their Electoral College votes based on turnout?
#10Meh, why is turnout something one should encourage? Put another way, why should the voices of those who could barely be bothered to show up be amplified over those of those who really care?
I don't want 100% turnout; I do want the people who don't care to stay home. I'd also like to only allow people who can pass the citizenship test given to prospective naturalised citizens to be able to vote, but that's an entirely different discussion…