Electoral Vote Idea

Dirtie_Frank

Now I do not know what the outcome would have been if this happened but this is just an idea I thought of. Instead of the winner take all for the states electoral votes why not spit it by the percentage that the president won.

For example California has 55 electoral votes and say Candidate X Beat Candidate Y by 55% to 45% so Candidate X would win 30.25 votes and Candidate Y would have 24.75 votes. I know changing it to popular vote is the common argument just a thought. What are your thoughts?

Commy

Dirtie_Frank wrote:

Now I do not know what the outcome would have been if this happened but this is just an idea I thought of. Instead of the winner take all for the states electoral votes why not spit it by the percentage that the president won.

For example California has 55 electoral votes and say Candidate X Beat Candidate Y by 55% to 45% so Candidate X would win 30.25 votes and Candidate Y would have 24.75 votes. I know changing it to popular vote is the common argument just a thought. What are your thoughts?

I think the election process in the US needs reform, not sure about splitting up the electoral votes, you might as well go by popular if you're going to do that.

I think it should be more representative of the vote though. Say you have a Congressional race in your state, and 5 congressmen are up for election-if the GOP gets 40%, Dems get 40% and a third part gets 20%-each party should be represented fairly, so 2 dems, 2 Gop and 1 third party. Instead of voting for a individual candidate you vote for a party. would be a little more accurate interpretation of the voters.

beachdweller

Dirtie_Frank wrote:

Now I do not know what the outcome would have been if this happened but this is just an idea I thought of. Instead of the winner take all for the states electoral votes why not spit it by the percentage that the president won.

For example California has 55 electoral votes and say Candidate X Beat Candidate Y by 55% to 45% so Candidate X would win 30.25 votes and Candidate Y would have 24.75 votes. I know changing it to popular vote is the common argument just a thought. What are your thoughts?

why change something that has worked for 221 yrs? the only problems we've had is with uneducated voters, and votes that can't figure out how to vote properly, or at least ask for help.

Uncle Leo

I agree 100%. The idea that you can win California by 1 vote and get about 20% of the way to election is comical.

My dream scenario was that Obama would win the way Bush did in 2000--by losing the popular vote. If it happened to both parties in a decade maybe there'd be some outrage. At the very least, i'd like to see the Maine/Nebraska way that allows for splitting. I think it's that each congressional district controls its own electoral vote (for the representatives) and then the statewide winner gets two (for the senators).

Of course, I'd rather just go popular vote, but I'm pretty much alone.