|
Re: Re: For US Citizens 18 or older
| quote: | Originally posted by TweeK
not really if you really think about it with the whole electoral vote.
state with the highest population gets more electoral votes.... so that statement isnt 100% true.
|
If you think about it logically this isnt really the problem. It makes sense that the states with higher populations have higher proportional votes. More people are represented and thus to give a state with a population of 8 million and equal amount of electoral votes as one that has 40 million seems kind of unfair (in my opinion). Also in my opinion, the problem with our current system is that winner-take-all feature of the electoral college. The winner of the popular voting takes all of the electoral votes of a state. Thus is CandidateA wins StateX (with 21 electoral votes) 48% to 42% for CandidateB (10% is reserved for error/non-major candidates), then Candidate A takes all 21 votes. I believe the solution to this is proportional awarding on electoral votes. In this system, CandidateA would take 48% of the states 21 votes, CandidateB would take 42%, etc. This seems like a proper and fair way to keep the electoral college in existence while also making it a more representational system...
EDIT: A certain 3rd party candidate supports this and other electoral reforms, but as I figure everyone has figured out whom I support by now, I wont bother plugging him here
|