512 Paths to the White House

The Constitution doesn't mandate how electoral votes are allocated. Maine and Nebraska, for example, distribute the electoral college votes by congressional district. So the winner take all policy of most states isn't due to the electoral college itself, but how the states choose to implement it.

I'd argue that passionate people are more likely to vote. Arguably, they deserve to be heard, since they care so much about politics. On the other hand, they may be brainwashed idiots.

It also creates a lot more divisive candidates. Obama is a far-left (by US standards, in Australia or Europe he'd be center-right). Bush was far-right. You need to be extreme to win the primaries, and need to stay extreme to get your base excited enough to vote. Polarising candidates encourages debate (which is good), but also encourages group-think.

> As for (2) the problem is that this reinforces a two-party system. A vote for a minor party is often a vote for the other side (eg voting for the Greens is a vote that would probably otherwise go to a Democrat so is effectively a vote for the Republicans).

Once again, this makes it hard for a compromise candidate to win, and makes it hard for extreme groups to win anything more than a small percent. It's the worst of both worlds - less debate, and more extreme Presidents.

Intrade http://electoralmap.net was pretty accurate in 2008. Also predicting an obama victory.

So, you want to ban free speech in an election?

Let's say Bill Clinton wants to appear at a pro-choice rally in Ohio, in the run-up to an election. Can he do so? Can he talk about "extremists" who are trying to ban abortion, even in cases of rape, incest, and for medical reasons? He won't mention Obama or Romney, and might not even refer to their exact positions (attacking a straw man is more fun anyway), he's just a guy exercising his right to speak about political issues.

Can Republican supporters fund an ad about the dangers of socialised healthcare?

What is "communicating bias"?

>- The publication of poll data is illegal

I'm not even sure what problem you are trying to solve. Can parties conduct opinion polls for internal use? Can they talk to people in the mall about what issues they care about?

>- A candidate must post a huge bond. If he or she is found telling lies they end-up in prison and have huge financial consequences. > >- Campaign promises are recorded and signed in a document that is publicly available. A politician that does not deliver on promises made is exposed to financial and criminal liability. Don't make promises you can't keep.

So, you want candidates to deliberately be even more vague than they already are?

I guess more red states will get behind this if Obama wins the election, but loses the popular vote.