Now 28,836 votes in front.watt price tully wrote:Over 20,000 lead to the winner Biden over the loser Trump and going stronger in Pennsylvania.
2020 US election results
Moderator: bbmods
-
stui magpie
- Posts: 54842
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 10:10 am
- Location: In flagrante delicto
- Has liked: 132 times
- Been liked: 168 times
Yet Trump still won at least 25 of the 50 states.Pies4shaw wrote:At the moment, if the likely vote holds, Biden will have 306 electoral college votes and Trump will have 232 (he should win 3 in Alaska and 15 in North Carolina).
Biden has the most votes ever in a presidential election and leads the popular vote count overall by over 3.86 million votes. To put that in context, that lead is more votes than Trump got in total (not the margin - his total vote) in the whole of Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Idaho, Utah, Alaska and Kansas. That is, Biden leads by more than the entire vote Trump received in 9 States that delivered him 36 electoral college votes.
To put that 3.86 million votes in context, Biden won California by over 4 million votes. So apart from California, Trump wins the popular vote across 49 states.
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
-
stui magpie
- Posts: 54842
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 10:10 am
- Location: In flagrante delicto
- Has liked: 132 times
- Been liked: 168 times
All well and good to argue to abolish something, I didn't see an alternative option there?Pies4shaw wrote:^ Hence: https://jacobinmag.com/2020/11/abolish- ... rump-biden
If, for arguments sake, the existing counties that manage votes became the equivalent of Aus electorates but without MP's how would that work?
ie, instead of giving all the electoral collage votes to the state, divide the states into counties and give 1 "seat" per county, balanced out per population.
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
-
stui magpie
- Posts: 54842
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 10:10 am
- Location: In flagrante delicto
- Has liked: 132 times
- Been liked: 168 times
I'm not a fan of the nationwide thing, it gives inner city **** too much control and renders the rural people basically voiceless.
True representative democracy should take into account the difference in people in different areas.
True representative democracy should take into account the difference in people in different areas.
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
-
stui magpie
- Posts: 54842
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 10:10 am
- Location: In flagrante delicto
- Has liked: 132 times
- Been liked: 168 times
Last time I checked the county was the USA, not the country of California, although if you're arguing that we should just let NSW pick the federal government the way they do the test Cricket team, I'm open to discuss.Tannin wrote:Because the biggest and most successful state in the USA doesn't count. Yer right.
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
I don't think the present system achieves that. If you have a majoritarian system, every vote counts. At the moment, no-one cares really about what happens in California or Idaho or Alaska - they're too "safe" to be targets. The winning of the election is about trying to persuade 75 people in Pennsylvania to vote 1 way, rather than the other - hence the temptation for Trump to lie so vigorously about fracking - even if 750,000 other people don't fall for it, he only needed the 30,000 who do. If everyone's vote could influence the outcome, the candidates would be worried about the whole of the country. Imagine if a vote in Alaska mattered as much as a vote in Georgia. Plainly, at present, that isn't the case. The present system gives the nasties too much influence. Start from the proposition that most people in rural America are probably not neo-Nazis, then ask why Trump was playing their tune so vocally. There, in my view, is the essence of the problem. The pollsters work out which elements of which State are going to determine things and then help the politicians amplify what is needed to woo those people. At the moment, everyone is voiceless unless they're in a "swing" State and if they're in a "swing" State they're still largely voiceless unless they can be swung.stui magpie wrote:I'm not a fan of the nationwide thing, it gives inner city **** too much control and renders the rural people basically voiceless.
True representative democracy should take into account the difference in people in different areas.
As an alternative, a proportional allocation to the electoral college might be preferable. Maybe Biden shouldn't get 55 electoral votes if he wins California by 3 votes. Maybe, on this year's voting, he should get about two-thirds and Trump should get a third (give or take - I'm speaking generally, here). Maybe if, within some reasonable degree of tolerance, the candidates get the "same" vote (say within some small percentage, or fraction of a percentage) they should get the same electoral votes. Does it really make sense that Biden gets all 20 if he holds on to Pennsylvania by a whisker? The present system seems to me to be a reasonable way to decide a game of footy but I'm not sure it's a way to give all the people a "voice".
If you look at how the 2016 election was decided, it was (more or less) by "flipping" a couple of States in the north-eastern part of the country. It looks like this one is going to be decided by flipping a few of those back and, as an add-on, flipping a Southern State and two more western ones. Ignore Georgia, Arizona and Nevada - if you look at what was "done" to win this election, essentially flipping Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania was all that was needed. So, the Democrats just had to do enough messaging to the States they held last time and push hard at winning back those three States.
There is always some "tipping point" or "points" that will get extra attention but at the moment it seems to me that both sides can take almost all of the country for granted in the Presidential election. True, which little bits of the country matter shifts around, gradually, as the demographics and economies alter (there was a time when the Republicans could take California for granted, eg) but it does have the feel of a system that can be manipulated by tiny voting blocks of ratbags on the margins.
-
pietillidie
- Posts: 16634
- Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:41 pm
- Has liked: 14 times
- Been liked: 28 times
Yes, so you might want to support a serious version of it. It's about the fair weighting of 'cities' not 'inner cities', which is a deflection to conjure up a handful of dreadlocked latte-sipping greens, who are but a tiny, tiny percentage of 'cities'. We all know full well that the average person lives in a 'city'.stui magpie wrote:I'm not a fan of the nationwide thing, it gives inner city **** too much control and renders the rural people basically voiceless.
True representative democracy should take into account the difference in people in different areas.
It is important to look after every minority, and to make space for every minority. That's part of multiculturalism, and that now encompasses rural and lower-density areas. But the world has changed since the agricultural age, and the over-weighting of a rural minority is outright undemocratic and indeed socially and economically destructive because that culture is not fit for purpose in cities, where most people live.
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
-
watt price tully
- Posts: 20842
- Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 1:14 pm
Yes Trump won big, he keeps on telling us.stui magpie wrote:Yet Trump still won at least 25 of the 50 states.Pies4shaw wrote:At the moment, if the likely vote holds, Biden will have 306 electoral college votes and Trump will have 232 (he should win 3 in Alaska and 15 in North Carolina).
Biden has the most votes ever in a presidential election and leads the popular vote count overall by over 3.86 million votes. To put that in context, that lead is more votes than Trump got in total (not the margin - his total vote) in the whole of Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Idaho, Utah, Alaska and Kansas. That is, Biden leads by more than the entire vote Trump received in 9 States that delivered him 36 electoral college votes.
To put that 3.86 million votes in context, Biden won California by over 4 million votes. So apart from California, Trump wins the popular vote across 49 states.
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman