In response to:

The Electoral College, Under Attack

NoProInc Wrote: Nov 02, 2012 3:04 PM
If your friend is correct that Mr. Romney wins the popular vote, then he basically cannot lose the Electoral College based on the 8 States you mention voting to give all their electors to the winner of the national popular vote. Pretty much every State you mention is considered a solid blue State going for Mr. Obama. How could he possibly recover losing just California's Electoral College votes, much less all 132 at stake under this misguided set of laws, even if he somehow won every currently contested swing State? I would be willing to wager that the forces behind this push cannot comprehend a scenario involving Bush/Gore in reverse. The first time California's EC votes go to a conservative, these laws will vanish in the mist.
Ben Linus Wrote: Nov 02, 2012 4:39 PM
I *love* the Electoral College. I think it is brilliant. The only things I'd change is actually removing individual human electors from the mix to eliminate faithless electors and idiots who incorrectly fill in their ballot and give EC votes to John Edwards like one moron from Minn did in 2004.

But it would be sweet justice if the popular vote idea swung the EC to Romney. :)

The problem with the idea now is I know people that don't vote in Texas because it doesn't matter. Texas will go all for Romney. I imagine Democrats in CA feel similar.

It makes the popular vote a poor and invalid metric.
Ben Linus Wrote: Nov 02, 2012 4:41 PM
Oh, I'd also base the EC votes on Congressional Districts. The popular vote winner in each district gets one vote. The popular vote winner in each state gets 2 votes. That way Democrats in TX and Republicans in CA are not disenfranchised by not being represented in the EC totals for their state.
Ben Linus Wrote: Nov 02, 2012 4:43 PM
Of course if the Blue states want to secede or let the Red states secede then we could all be happy. Those who were blue in red states or red in blue states could join the opposite nation as ex-patriots, till they move, if they chose too.

Why not? The Soviet Union has a mostly peaceful breakup. Why can't we???
ksatifka Wrote: Nov 02, 2012 8:19 PM
Ben, I floated this same idea in a prior post but then reconsidered due to excessive 'gerrymandering' in the states. As long as the party in power in that state controls setting the congressional borders this idea cannot work. It could easily happen that a candidate could lose the state but receive more EC votes.

As Tuesday’s election ticks ever nearer, my fervent wish is a solid electoral college win for Mitt Romney. Not to get greedy, but I’d like it in the bag before the wee hours of Wednesday morning.

I hope this is not asking too much. October’s poll swing and a broadening visceral sense tell me this election may not feature the nail-biting closeness we have been told to expect for months.

But if we are to be ensnared by a down-to-the-wire finish, get ready for the attendant micro-focus on the Electoral College, and the resulting debate over whether it should...