***** Official Election Game Day Thread *****

[knapplc]

I'm not sure how to feel about this.

 

 

 

[Born N Bled Red]

So I'm not going to lie. I've always been amenable to the idea that high turn out benefits democrats and that new registered voters exercising their right fell in that line as well. However... I have been absolutely amazed by the number of previously civically unengaged and uniformed absolute morons that have become the most vocal Trump supporters I've seen. The reason I bring this up is my fear that an equal amount of these "new voters" are in that category as are in the other. Of course, I live in Nebraska, sooo... 

[knapplc]

Just now, Born N Bled Red said:

So I'm not going to lie. I've always been amenable to the idea that high turn out benefits democrats and that new registered voters exercising their right fell in that line as well. However... I have been absolutely amazed by the number of previously civically unengaged and uniformed absolute morons that have become the most vocal Trump supporters I've seen. The reason I bring this up is my fear that an equal amount of these "new voters" are in that category as are in the other. Of course, I live in Nebraska, sooo... 

 

Agreed. While typically younger voters would seem to indicate they'll vote Democrat, I don't think anyone can assume that in this case. 

 

We'll have to wait until all the votes are counted. But at least more people are voting. 

[Danny Bateman]

16 minutes ago, Minnesota_husker said:

Curious what states? If its in states like Texas, Florida, or other swing states--very meaningful. 

Not as meaningful(which is sad) if its in states like CA, IL, MA and other mainly blue states

 

Just assuming this increase would go blue.

 

From a week ago.

 

 

I've also seen a tweet somewhere that suggested youth turnout is up in NC as well.

[Minnesota_husker]

4 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Agreed. While typically younger voters would seem to indicate they'll vote Democrat, I don't think anyone can assume that in this case. 

 

We'll have to wait until all the votes are counted. But at least more people are voting. 

Still think it is time to do away with the electoral college. One reason some people dont vote is they think they cant flip a state they live in.

 

I would prefer more of a national election where most votes win.

 

 

[knapplc]

1 minute ago, Minnesota_husker said:

Still think it is time to do away with the electoral college. One reason some people dont vote is they think they cant flip a state they live in.

 

I would prefer more of a national election where most votes win.

 

 

 

Agreed. 1,000%.

 

It's an anachronism that has little relevance today.  And presidential elections are the only elections we use such a system. 

 

End it, make every vote count, and let the popular vote winner win. THAT is a representative republic.

[TGHusker]

2 minutes ago, knapplc said:

anachronism

 

Ok that is my Word of the Day courtesy of Knapp.    Had to look that one up.

 

noun

noun: anachronism; plural noun: anachronisms

1. a thing belonging or appropriate to a period other than that in which it exists, especially a thing that is conspicuously old-fashioned.

   "everything was as it would have appeared in centuries past apart from one anachronism, a bright yellow construction crane"

[Minnesota_husker]

8 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Agreed. 1,000%.

 

It's an anachronism that has little relevance today.  And presidential elections are the only elections we use such a system. 

 

End it, make every vote count, and let the popular vote winner win. THAT is a representative republic.

Does anyone smarter than me know how they would even go about doing that?

 

My guess is republicans would block it at all costs.

 

Just seems crazy to me that Hilary won by almost 3 million votes but lost electoral college by 74 points.

 

I get that states like Nebraska, Iowa and other swing voters with small populations would get forgotten but still just seems silly.

 

 

[JJ Husker]

I am just shaking my head at all this talk about voting lines and how tough and inconvenient it is some places. JFC, it doesn't have to be difficult. Is Colorado the only state that has it's sh#t together in this regard? Y'all need to force some major changes in your state if you have to go stand in line for more than 30 minutes. Absentee....Mail-In......early voting, ffs.

[TGHusker]

I'm warming up to the idea of abolishing the electoral college for the reason Knapp notes above.  However, us smaller states would argue that it would make us a fly over state as the candidates spend all of their time in the big states.  One could argue the other way around - that since ever vote counts, they would need my vote in Okla, @knapplc's vote in Nebraska, @RedDenver's vote in Colorado, @Minnesota_husker's vote in Minnesota, etc. 

Small states also argue that the electoral college gives them more power per vote - more representation per vote - which it does.  But one could argue, that the small states already have that advantage in the Senate.  My home state of S.D. has as many Senators as California. 

I think abolishing the elector college, which is a very long shot as it would have to be an amendment to the constitution, would force parties to be more representative of the people and to their desires.  As it stands now, the GOP can be filled with all of its Trumpism and still have a good chance to win - their is a path forward for them to 270 EC votes.  So the GOP can sit in their dumpster of ideas and still win.  If it was the popular vote only that counted, the GOP would have to change with the prevailing will of the people in order to be competitive.  The same is true for the Dems -   it may force the parties into a more moderate position. 

 

[JJ Husker]

6 minutes ago, Minnesota_husker said:

Does anyone smarter than me know how they would even go about doing that?

 

My guess is republicans would block it at all costs.

 

Just seems crazy to me that Hilary won by almost 3 million votes but lost electoral college by 74 points.

 

I get that states like Nebraska, Iowa and other swing voters with small populations would get forgotten but still just seems silly.

 

 

 

The States can circumvent the electoral college, and it is in the works. In Colorado we had a National Popular Vote amendment on the ballot this election. Basically, each individual state pledges their electoral votes to whoever wins the popular vote. It goes into effect once they have states worth at least 270 electoral votes signed up. IIRC the movement is up to about 185 electoral votes currently, and I think it is on the ballot in a few states this cycle.

[knapplc]

2 minutes ago, Minnesota_husker said:

Does anyone smarter than me know how they would even go about doing that?

 

My guess is republicans would block it at all costs.

 

Just seems crazy to me that Hilary won by almost 3 million votes but lost electoral college by 74 points.

 

I get that states like Nebraska, Iowa and other swing voters with small populations would get forgotten but still just seems silly.

 

 

 

It is crazy that not one, but two different Dem candidates won the popular vote, but due to this crazy system the Republican attained office. Gore in 2000 and Hillary in 2016. That means no first-time Republican candidate has won the popular vote in 30 years. 

 

Yes, Republicans will do everything they can to block elimination of the EC. It's their lifeline, and without major party reform they understand their grasp on relevance is tenuous at best. They'll similarly fight tooth & nail to prevent Puerto Rico and DC from achieving statehood even though denying them statehood flies in the face of everything this country was founded on. 

 

I don't know about rural states losing a voice. They're already over-represented via the Senate, but while rural state Conservatives may feel like their voice is lost, try being a moderate/liberal in a state like this. 

 

 

 

[GSG]

5 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

I am just shaking my head at all this talk about voting lines and how tough and inconvenient it is some places. JFC, it doesn't have to be difficult. Is Colorado the only state that has it's sh#t together in this regard? Y'all need to force some major changes in your state if you have to go stand in line for more than 30 minutes. Absentee....Mail-In......early voting, ffs.

 

The Elks Lodge down the street from my work had a lot of cars outside for voting, but no lines. It would be pretty great if voting was the same all across the country and as easy as it is here in CO.

 

[GSG]

One election that has been decided: Scholastic Student Vote

 

https://classroommagazines.scholastic.com/election/vote/student-vote-results.html

 

Quote

Since 1940, the results of the student vote have usually reflected the outcome of the actual election. In fact, Scholastic readers have been wrong only three times. In 1948, kids picked Thomas E. Dewey over President Harry S. Truman. In 1960, students selected Richard M. Nixon over the eventual president, John F. Kennedy. And most recently, students chose Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump in 2016.

 

 

 

[Born N Bled Red]

3 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

I'm warming up to the idea of abolishing the electoral college for the reason Knapp notes above.  However, us smaller states would argue that it would make us a fly over state as the candidates spend all of their time in the big states.  One could argue the other way around - that since ever vote counts, they would need my vote in Okla, @knapplc's vote in Nebraska, @RedDenver's vote in Colorado, @Minnesota_husker's vote in Minnesota, etc. 

Small states also argue that the electoral college gives them more power per vote - more representation per vote - which it does.  But one could argue, that the small states already have that advantage in the Senate.  My home state of S.D. has as many Senators as California. 

I think abolishing the elector college, which is a very long shot as it would have to be an amendment to the constitution, would force parties to be more representative of the people and to their desires.  As it stands now, the GOP can be filled with all of its Trumpism and still have a good chance to win - their is a path forward for them to 270 EC votes.  So the GOP can sit in their dumpster of ideas and still win.  If it was the popular vote only that counted, the GOP would have to change with the prevailing will of the people in order to be competitive.  The same is true for the Dems -   it may force the parties into a more moderate position. 

 

 

Agreed. Eliminating the electoral college would certainly dampen the importance of states like Iowa, Colorado, and Minnesota. Here in Nebraska, Wyoming, South Dakota, etc. we probably wouldn't even notice a difference when it came to the presidential election. The other thing that needs to happen to fix presidential politics is open ranked choice primaries. Everyone votes for their top 2 or 3 candidates, regardless of party affiliation. This would quickly pull politics back to the center.