Winner-Take-All or Proportional: Which is Better?

Watermark said:
LOL. Allocating electoral votes proportionally would VASTLY reduce the importance of large states. Just think about it - in the 50's, a constitutional ammendment to allocate votes proportionally passed the senate, but died a bitter death in the house. The one saving grave of the current system to large states is that, by throwing all of their votes together, they get a much larger voice. The extra votes smaller states is actually probably a smaller part of the system.
Click to expand...
No, it wouldn't. It would effectively make it a "popular vote" election, only the larger population states would hold importance for those running while only two candidates have a valid shot at winning.

The reality is, under our current system, the only way to ensure smaller states are ignored would be to implement such a voting system.
 
Damocles said:
No, it wouldn't. It would effectively make it a "popular vote" election, only the larger population states would hold importance for those running while only two candidates have a valid shot at winning..
Click to expand...

Errr.........

You've just described what's happening right now, Damo. Swing states are what matter in the current system. Large swings states, that is, not small ones. The rest of the states can go eat shit.
 
Watermark said:
Errr.........

You've just described what's happening right now, Damo. Swing states are what matter in the current system. Large swings states, that is, not small ones. The rest of the states can go eat shit.
Click to expand...
They would have to just eat more sh*t under your system. They would have even less importance than before.
 
Damocles said:
They would have to just eat more sh*t under your system. They would have even less importance than before.
Click to expand...

You're a fucking idiot. You can't even understand basic concepts. THere's no point in even arguing you. I could prove my point 1000 times over and you'd still be like the church telling Galileo that the sun orbited the Earth.
 
Watermark said:
I've seen some people critiscize the proportional system as the Democrats "child-like" mentality, where they want to give everyone a gold star and be nice.

But it's not like they split it even. They give to each what each deserved, no more, no less. If one person "Won" 55% of the vote, they get 55 of the gold stars, and the other guy gets 45. Under winner take all, Republicans give a person who deserved 55 gold stars all of them. And maybe that does tell you the Republican mindset.

Besides that, winner take all is just like giving the majority the right to cast the vote of the minority.
Click to expand...

Ironically, your attack on WTA is childish...
 
Watermark said:
You're a fucking idiot. You can't even understand basic concepts. THere's no point in even arguing you. I could prove my point 1000 times over and you'd still be like the church telling Galileo that the sun orbited the Earth.
Click to expand...
Wow, salient point there Emoboy! I am thoroughly chastised by your....

Awww heck! I can't keep a straight face and do that!

Does anybody else picture a guy wearing his underwear on the outside of his tights when somebody types Emoboy? Wearing a Black shirt with a dripping red EB on the front of it?
 
Damocles said:
Wow, salient point there Emoboy! I am thoroughly chastised by your....

Awww heck! I can't keep a straight face and do that!

Does anybody else picture a guy wearing his underwear on the outside of his tights when somebody types Emoboy? Wearing a Black shirt with a dripping red EB on the front of it?
Click to expand...

Fuck you you patronizing emo bitch. Go kill yourself.
 
should be popular vote straight up. but between the two options i would go with proportional minus the super delegates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top