Electoral Vote

[Canada EH]

What is an Electoral College?

What is an Electoral Vote?

 

 

[Canada EH]

252 to 163, what a swing!!!!!!!!!

Clinton may win it. So close to 270 to take it.

Be good for the markets to calm down!!!!!

But the same ole paid off politician running the USA.

Be her one and only firm accomplishment in her life!

[Tocsin_786]

Basically, the electoral college votes on the behalf of the states populations, so you don't get democrats winning every election because California and NY have the most democratic and most populated statehood. This makes the voting process more fair for the states like Maine that only have like 5 people living there. 

   The current results as of 11/9/16 12:08 AM EST, has Trump with a lead of 244 compared to 209 from Clinton. Considering that the states left that have yet to show their results are mostly Republican states anyways; means that Trump is likely about to win the election. I could be wrong though. 

 

live poll results: https://www.google.com/search?q=poll+results&oq=poll+re&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j0j69i59j69i57j69i60j0.1137j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#eob=enn/p//0/0///////////

[Canada EH]

Good stuff, thanks!

[rmac52]

Sadly it also means people that live in a strongly one sided state might as well not vote.  I live in Massachusetts and there was no chance of clinton not winning the state.  So my vote was completely meaningless. 

[Ithanul]

There one thing that is crap about the whole thing.

 

Win/Loss all rule.

 

I am keeping an eye on Utah.  Very interesting poll going over their with Evan McMullin right on Hillary's heals.  Actually, seems he may pass her.  I really am hoping a third party wins that State.  Lets see the 12th Amendment come into action.

[DELTAprime]

Is it possible for the people of the Electoral College to go against the popular vote or are they bound by law to vote Trump into office?

 

I'm sure glad I don't have to put up with him running my country for 4 years, not that Clinton seemed much better.

[Yamoto42]

No, the electoral college is not bound to vote for a specific candidate.  The popular vote (in each state) is for the electors themselves.  It's for which ones get to vote, not who they vote for.  We basically vote for the people who actually vote, based on whom they have pledged to vote for.

Similarly about the "win/loss all rule"...that doesn't really exist.  Some states do it that way,  Some states do it other ways.  It's a state rule decided by each individual state.  There are absolutely no federal rules about how electoral votes must be decided, only the number each state gets.  It is perfectly legal (from a federal standpoint) for an elector to vote for whomever they wish, even if they initially pledged their vote to a different candidate.  Only about half the states actually legally require the elector to honor their pledge.

 

Since the number of electoral votes is equal to the number of congressional representatives for a state, some states (Maine and Nebraska), give the two senate votes to the popular vote winner, then the remaining votes are decided by who won the popular vote in each house district.

Fun fact:  The president doesn't actually get to decide who the vice president is.  There is actually a separate vote (by the same electors) to elect the vice president.  It typically turns out to be who they [the president elect] want, but it is not constitutionally guaranteed to.

[themaniac]

18 minutes ago, DELTAprime said:

Is it possible for the people of the Electoral College to go against the popular vote or are they bound by law to vote Trump into office?

 

I'm sure glad I don't have to put up with him running my country for 4 years, not that Clinton seemed much better.

its been done a few times even this election Hillary has about 130000 more than Trump in popular votes, but really its determined by how many states(and electoral votes each state has) each candidate has won, so winning over Texas, Californa, Florida, and New York(about 151) can get more electoral votes then winning over the Midwest which has Minnesota, Illinois, North and South Dakota, Michigan, Iowa, and wisconsin(about 68).

[Yamoto42]

@themaniac And interestingly all 4 times it's been a Republican that was elected president...even the one time it did go to congress...

 

So much for a rigged system.

[Yamoto42]

What I'd really like to see some states implement (or at least some studies on) though is a voter run-off system.  Basically it solves the problem that the winning candidate typically has less than 50% of the popular vote, meaning more than half the people don't like them.

 

How they typically work is everyone gets two votes, with the stipulation that they cannot use them both on the same candidate.  It ultimately the idea is that even if no-one gets their preferred choice, almost everyone get's someone they can tolerate...

[Canada EH]

@Yamoto42 The whole system is so confusing, I dont bother to learn. Just want to know the major info.

[Ithanul]

This video can help:

 

 

[Canada EH]

3 hours ago, Ithanul said:

.

 

They got to make it complicated. Typical government!

[Ithanul]

Hell, you think that complicated be a member of the Guard.  Depending on what order we get when put on active status stats either the main command structure fully controls us or our home unit does.  Reason in Tech School they can't really punish us unless they want to bother taking the time to phone back to the home unit.     Military rules can get severely complicated especially when it comes to a State's Guard units.  Since we are the odd ball out of the military branches because of our status as State reserves and National federal funded (Yep, our branch double dips).

[Canada EH]

28 minutes ago, Ithanul said:

Hell, you think that complicated be a member of the Guard.  Depending on what order we get when put on active status stats either the main command structure fully controls us or our home unit does.  Reason in Tech School they can't really punish us unless they want to bother taking the time to phone back to the home unit.     Military rules can get severely complicated especially when it comes to a State's Guard units.  Since we are the odd ball out of the military branches because of our status as State reserves and National federal funded (Yep, our branch double dips).

You lost me

[Ithanul]

7 minutes ago, Canada EH said:

You lost me

A State's Guard unit members can receive two different type of orders when activated.  One order puts us under the full command of active duty branch (Title 10 orders), the other order has us serve under the active duty branch filling a slot but not under their full command structure (Title 32 orders).  Then we also have SAD orders.

 

http://www.ngaus.org/sites/default/files/Guard Statues.pdf

 

On funding, the Guard units receive both State and Federal funds.  The Reserves receive State funds.  The active duty branches of the Air Force, Army, etc. receive only Federal funds.

[Canada EH]

I clicked informative, but I dont get where you are going with that.

You seem like a knowledgable bloke (a kind gesture used by Brits).

[Ithanul]

On 11/10/2016 at 2:26 PM, Canada EH said:

I clicked informative, but I dont get where you are going with that.

You seem like a knowledgable bloke (a kind gesture used by Brits).

Our system not the easiest to understand.

 

Just noticed that youtuber put a new video up.  Very interesting.

 

December may be an interesting month here.