GO TRUMPER! GO TRUMPER! GO TRUMPER!
November 9th, 2016 at 7:27:45 PM permalink | |
Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 |
States could enact laws to apportion electoral votes as a proportion of the state's popular vote, or to require a candidate to win a majority of the state's vote in order to get the EVs. In the latter, a run-off might be required. Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
November 9th, 2016 at 7:38:48 PM permalink | |
kenarman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 14 Posts: 4530 | The liberals proposal won't provide more coalitions it will merely entrench them as the ruling party until the system is changed again. Their proposal is to have a second choice system where you go to peoples second choices and count them if no one has a majority. As the middle of the road party the Liberals will always be the second choice for both the left and the right thus ensuring their election. "but if you make yourselves sheep, the wolves will eat you." Benjamin Franklin |
November 9th, 2016 at 7:45:16 PM permalink | |
TheCesspit Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 23 Posts: 1929 |
Gotcha, not seen the proposal yet, but yes, that would appear to be heavily in their favour. It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die.... it's called Life |
November 10th, 2016 at 4:04:41 AM permalink | |
Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 | Maine just voted for ranked candidates/instant runoffs. It applies to most races, but not for president. If no candidate has more than 50% of the vote, the votes of the lowest vote getter are discarded and those ballots go to their next highest ranked choice. "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
November 10th, 2016 at 6:35:29 AM permalink | |
AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 136 Posts: 19215 |
In such a system I would not give any second choices on my ballot. I tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution |
November 10th, 2016 at 8:02:58 AM permalink | |
Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 | Taking a page off trump's playbook, what are the chances the result of the election will be corrected by 2nd Amendment means? The first principle of politics indicates I should now be accused of grossly uncivilized behavior, if not worst things, even though I'm just asking a question. Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
November 10th, 2016 at 8:37:39 AM permalink | |
TheCesspit Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 23 Posts: 1929 |
You probably wouldn't need to in most races. And if you did get discarded, you'd be effectively saying 'anyone else will do if not this one'. It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die.... it's called Life |
November 10th, 2016 at 10:47:53 AM permalink | |
Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 | Yeah, I don't think there is anything to require you to rank more than one. In the triple-hypothetical Bush vs Clinton vs Perot run (hypothetial 1 - an instant runoff, hypothetical 2, that it would be allowed in a presidental race, hypothetical 3 that what I am about to describe is based on the popular vote rather than the electoral college) a couple of interesting scenarios emerge - to review, in that electon Clinton got 43% of the popular vote, Bush 37.4% and Perot 18.9% Perot could have won outright because people wouldn't have been scared of wasting their vote on a 3rd party candidate and could have put Perot 1 and Bush 2. Bush could have won, because presumably most of the Perot votes would have gone to Bush if Perot's votes were discarded and then the 2nd choice for most of them was Bush. Perot could have won, if people put Perot 1 and Bush 2 and then basically reversed the popular vote percentages of those 2 candidates, Bush's votes would have been eliminated and most of them would have gone to Perot. Another way to say it, using the basic assumption that everyone who put Bush at 1 put Perot at 2, and everyone who put Perot at 2 and Bush at 1, in this election you'd have Clinton at 43% and the person who was initially second in the 3 man race ending up at 56.3%. "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
November 11th, 2016 at 10:54:12 AM permalink | |
YeahBaby Member since: May 24, 2016 Threads: 5 Posts: 366 | watch dumbazz Hilary supporters destroy their own TV because they hate Trump HAHAHAHAHAHA |
November 11th, 2016 at 11:33:18 AM permalink | |
Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25212 | 3 days later they still won't give MI to Trump because it's put's him over 300 and gives him a mandate. He's ahead by almost 13,000 votes and 100% have been counted. They're frantically searching for the 'hidden' Hillary votes that somebody took home with them or got lost in the shuffle. You know, the dead people and illegal alien votes that were supposed to let her win. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |