As far as I understand the system in the US: with first-past-the-post and the gerrymandering that is possible these days with all the data gathered from social media, the only thing you're doing there is to throw your vote away.
Those two things would have to be broken down first. But unfortunately for the people in the US both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party would rather keep that system and abuse it towards their own goal than to get rid of it.
Gerrymandering refers to the drawing of congressional districts. It has nothing to do with presidential voting, which is by state.
Perhaps what you are referring to is 'winner-take-all'. That is not mandated by the Constitution, which says the states are to choose their electors 'in the manner of their choosing'. There is always a lot of wailing about winner-take-all. Of course, what the whiners really mean is OTHER states should get rid of winner-take-all. For instance, after the 2016 election there w
A constitutional amendment is not required. States are allowed to assign their electoral votes by whatever system they choose. Nebraska and Maine already apportion their electoral votes based on congressional district votes, rather than winner-take-all. 15 states have signed on to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact [wikipedia.org]. When enough states sign (enough to reach 270 votes), they all agree to apportion electoral votes based on statewide popular vote.
You've got it wrong. The pact is to assign all electors to the apparent winner of the national popular vote. This gives whichever party tries to be the most dishonest a substantial advantage.
I just asked myself... what would John DeLorean do?
-- Raoul Duke
green (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Those two things would have to be broken down first. But unfortunately for the people in the US both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party would rather keep that system and abuse it towards their own goal than to get rid of it.
I am not sure what could be done against that
Re: (Score:3)
Gerrymandering refers to the drawing of congressional districts. It has nothing to do with presidential voting, which is by state.
Perhaps what you are referring to is 'winner-take-all'. That is not mandated by the Constitution, which says the states are to choose their electors 'in the manner of their choosing'. There is always a lot of wailing about winner-take-all. Of course, what the whiners really mean is OTHER states should get rid of winner-take-all. For instance, after the 2016 election there w
Amendment not required (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)