OT: National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 7:02:45 AM UTC+11, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 9:28:22 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 9:07:07 PM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:
The country was formed as a union of states and people mistakenly think this is >about the states. It isn't. It's about the people of the country electing a >President, not states. As it stands people do not all have the same voting >power for the President. People in large states have too much of the power, but >more importantly people in swing states get all the attention during an >election.

When you vote for President, you're actually voting to select the electors from your State - not necessarily the President. (You're telling your State which candidate you want to the State to vote for.)

I assume you know that, so let's move on...

The Electoral College was a compromise from the beginning.
But, today's technology does indeed allow (or would allow) for the direct election of a President by the people - bypassing the States and the Congress.
(Ignoring for the moment, that the "tech" didn't work too well in Iowa!)

So, the salient questions revolve around whether a direct election would be, on balance, a desirable outcome, or not.

It would be until the Democrats lost again, then they want to change
it again to something else.

In the same way that the Republicans keep on fiddling with the electoral rolls in the hope of excluding even more people who might vote for the Democrats?

The difference is that the Electoral College is a uniquely American invention, and dumping it would bring the American system back into line with what everybody else does.

Though they might go for the French refinement - which is a two stage electoral process for selecting the President, where the first stage picks out just two front-runners, and the second stage chooses between them.

That does have it's problems - as on the occasion when the final choice was between Chirac and Le Pen, the crook and the thug.

The US system of primary elections to select the Democratic and Republican candidates has the same kind of problem. "Neither of the above" isn't an option there either.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christense]

lørdag den 15. februar 2020 kl. 01.40.02 UTC+1 skrev DecadentLinux...@decadence.org:

mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote in
news:5f8e91f2-fe2c-431e-8d34-003abcbc306f@googlegroups.com:

On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 11:29:18 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman
wrote:

Pencil and paper is even simpler, and still works fine in
Australia and in England.

Florida would find a way to fuck that up, too.

BTW: Thanks for the word-of-the-day "scrutineer".
Not a word we hear too often in the states.


Bank online apps ask for two authentication steps.

We are in a big hurry to vote and count on the same day.

What we need to do is have a hard copy pencil and paper vote and
the vote sheet gets optically copied and printed and the copy given
to the voter. He or she then goes home and gets online to do a
verify of the vote and the IP addy that is tied to it. The same addy
that gets registered prior to all this.

won't work, it is vitally important that it is impossible to prove what you
voted to someone else so that you cannot be forced, shamed or paid to vote
a certain way

 

Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote in
news:a43c0718-024b-4f09-9056-fec37bb6808e@googlegroups.com:

lørdag den 15. februar 2020 kl. 01.40.02 UTC+1 skrev
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org:
mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote in
news:5f8e91f2-fe2c-431e-8d34-003abcbc306f@googlegroups.com:

On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 11:29:18 PM UTC-5, Bill
Sloman wrote:

Pencil and paper is even simpler, and still works fine in
Australia and in England.

Florida would find a way to fuck that up, too.

BTW: Thanks for the word-of-the-day "scrutineer".
Not a word we hear too often in the states.


Bank online apps ask for two authentication steps.

We are in a big hurry to vote and count on the same day.

What we need to do is have a hard copy pencil and paper vote
and
the vote sheet gets optically copied and printed and the copy
given to the voter. He or she then goes home and gets online to
do a verify of the vote and the IP addy that is tied to it. The
same addy that gets registered prior to all this.


won't work, it is vitally important that it is impossible to prove
what you voted to someone else so that you cannot be forced,
shamed or paid to vote a certain way

That is why you vote at a poll first and the photo is of you, the
vote sheet, and your thumbprint.

The at home procedure simply verifies that you voted, not for whom.

The way it stops fraud is that fraudulent 'voters' would have to be
virtual at that point which is a fail, and any hard (real) voters
commiting fraud would get caught as well.

I think your problem with it is that the person's votes would be
known to another?

Perhaps then the manner should be ID verification upon entry to the
polling place and an electronic polling paradigm with no match
between the two for third party observers.

Similar problem as with gun control. Folks think *any* oversight
is too much, and a simple felony record check is all they need.

The RIGHT way to do it would get rejected by everyone as the right
way to do it is to monitor a person from birth on, as in "Gattaca"
styled. Fingerprints, teeth, face... all get tracked as you age.
As does behavior. It would lead to ethnic and racial biases, every
time, as man has a basic flaw.

That would work sans the bias, but nobody wants that either.

I had an idea 25 years ago to require that ALL cars have a police
accessible addressable shutdown call in their brain boxes (that's
what the car guys call them) that can be activated via radio beacon.
Nobody is gonna go for that either. But look at all the car chases
that would not ever happen.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, February 14, 2020 at 7:48:29 PM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:

On Friday, February 14, 2020 at 7:11:34 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 11:29:18 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

Pencil and paper is even simpler, and still works fine in Australia and in England.

Florida would find a way to fuck that up, too.

BTW: Thanks for the word-of-the-day "scrutineer".
Not a word we hear too often in the states.

I just want a system that won't be gamed. I truly believe that the electoral college perverts the Presidential election. One of the things I hate about Trump is that he even claimed election fraud in Pennsylvania where he won! All so he could claim he won the popular vote! He is willing to throw anyone and everyone under the bus to get what he wants.

At least we will be able to say it was a presidency like no other!

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Then the problem is with Trump. His main claim was that 3 mil illegal
votes were cast and that absent those, he would have won the election.
The exact same claim can be made by anyone with a system that doesn't
use the electoral college. And there are illegal votes. How many,
no one really knows, but I'm confident it's not 3 mil.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, February 14, 2020 at 8:28:52 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 7:02:45 AM UTC+11, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 9:28:22 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 9:07:07 PM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:
The country was formed as a union of states and people mistakenly think this is >about the states. It isn't. It's about the people of the country electing a >President, not states. As it stands people do not all have the same voting >power for the President. People in large states have too much of the power, but >more importantly people in swing states get all the attention during an >election.

When you vote for President, you're actually voting to select the electors from your State - not necessarily the President. (You're telling your State which candidate you want to the State to vote for.)

I assume you know that, so let's move on...

The Electoral College was a compromise from the beginning.
But, today's technology does indeed allow (or would allow) for the direct election of a President by the people - bypassing the States and the Congress.
(Ignoring for the moment, that the "tech" didn't work too well in Iowa!)

So, the salient questions revolve around whether a direct election would be, on balance, a desirable outcome, or not.

It would be until the Democrats lost again, then they want to change
it again to something else.

In the same way that the Republicans keep on fiddling with the electoral rolls in the hope of excluding even more people who might vote for the Democrats?

Except that didn't happen. Republicans just believe we should protect
elections from illegal voting and it's not an undue burden to show some
freaking ID at the polls.

The difference is that the Electoral College is a uniquely American invention, and dumping it would bring the American system back into line with what everybody else does.

Why should we "be in line with" what everybody else does? Russia, NK,
Cuba have rigged elections or no elections at all. Why don't you libs
ever bitch about that? We don't tell you how to hump kanagaroos.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 12:02:45 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:18:40 AM UTC-5, Whoey Louie wrote:
And there are illegal votes. How many,
no one really knows, but I'm confident it's not 3 mil.

So, are you thinking it more than 3 Million, or less than 3 Million?

A lot less than 3 mil. The alarmists like to start with voting registration.
They find dead people still on it, people registered in two different
places, etc. But upon further analysis, the vast majority of those are
just on the rolls, the dead people are not voting, the people registered
in two places just moved and are only voting where they live now, etc.

There might be something to the notion that if one even has to ask, then there is definitely a problem!

One can ask about anything. But certainly illegal votes can matter in
a close election. We even had a presidential election that was determined
by a small number of votes in one state.

Personally, I think less than 400,000 - 600,000 nationwide.
No evidence for that -- just my belief.
Actually, I guess there is one datapoint: Someone had a study out mentioning that 65,000 illegal immigrants (maybe "undocumented immigrants"?) cast votes in 2016's federal election, and more in California. But I'm sure there's a lot more to it -- especially in the definitions.

I'd like to see the study, who did it, etc. It seems illegal immigrants
would not be so inclined to try to vote. It exposes them to detection and
by committing a crime, they are on the path to deportation. And for what
upside? On the other hand, with the Democrats open border policies, drivers
licenses, now proposing free healthcare, some may decide why not vote too.

A related issue is counting illegal immigrants in the 2020 Census.
Representation in the House is based on the Census count -- so, presumably, the illegals get a voice that way. Not arguing the merits, just pointing it out.

My personal view is that ONLY American citizens should determine our governance, and not outside influences, including illegal immigrants. Want a voice? Become American.

I agree.

Don't just bring your shithole country with you and suck off the milk teet of American generosity.

You mean you're not in favor of free healthcare for illegals? I guess
you're not a modern Democrat.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, February 14, 2020 at 8:16:36 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 7:01:25 AM UTC+11, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 6:15:31 PM UTC-5, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 10:27:21 AM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:

snip

The Democrats are just sore losers, so now they want to change the system.

Whoey Louie likes Trump,

Wrong again. I've stated here many times that I did not vote for Trump,
that he's a skunk.





and thinks taht the Electoral College, as opposed to the Russian intervention, is what got him his narrow victory, so he likes the Electoral College.

Ridiculous of course.

It's not a well-thought-out position.

The Electoral College is a uniquely American invention,

Right, so STFU. Do we tell you how to hump kangaroos?

 

[mpm]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:18:40 AM UTC-5, Whoey Louie wrote:

And there are illegal votes. How many,
no one really knows, but I'm confident it's not 3 mil.

So, are you thinking it more than 3 Million, or less than 3 Million?

There might be something to the notion that if one even has to ask, then there is definitely a problem!

Personally, I think less than 400,000 - 600,000 nationwide.
No evidence for that -- just my belief.
Actually, I guess there is one datapoint: Someone had a study out mentioning that 65,000 illegal immigrants (maybe "undocumented immigrants"?) cast votes in 2016's federal election, and more in California. But I'm sure there's a lot more to it -- especially in the definitions.

A related issue is counting illegal immigrants in the 2020 Census.
Representation in the House is based on the Census count -- so, presumably, the illegals get a voice that way. Not arguing the merits, just pointing it out.

My personal view is that ONLY American citizens should determine our governance, and not outside influences, including illegal immigrants. Want a voice? Become American. Don't just bring your shithole country with you and suck off the milk teet of American generosity.

 

[Michael Terrell]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 12:02:45 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:18:40 AM UTC-5, Whoey Louie wrote:
And there are illegal votes. How many,
no one really knows, but I'm confident it's not 3 mil.

So, are you thinking it more than 3 Million, or less than 3 Million?

There might be something to the notion that if one even has to ask, then there is definitely a problem!

Personally, I think less than 400,000 - 600,000 nationwide.
No evidence for that -- just my belief.
Actually, I guess there is one datapoint: Someone had a study out mentioning that 65,000 illegal immigrants (maybe "undocumented immigrants"?) cast votes in 2016's federal election, and more in California. But I'm sure there's a lot more to it -- especially in the definitions.

A related issue is counting illegal immigrants in the 2020 Census.
Representation in the House is based on the Census count -- so, presumably, the illegals get a voice that way. Not arguing the merits, just pointing it out.

My personal view is that ONLY American citizens should determine our governance, and not outside influences, including illegal immigrants. Want a voice? Become American. Don't just bring your shithole country with you and suck off the milk teet of American generosity.

I requested an absentee ballot for the 1972 Presidential Election season. I was in the Army at the time. I never received it. The next time I was in my home town I went to the board of Elections where they had records showing that I had voted. Whoever stole my vote also requested that my registration be changed to the other party.

 

[Rick C]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:18:40 AM UTC-5, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Friday, February 14, 2020 at 7:48:29 PM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:
On Friday, February 14, 2020 at 7:11:34 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 11:29:18 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

Pencil and paper is even simpler, and still works fine in Australia and in England.

Florida would find a way to fuck that up, too.

BTW: Thanks for the word-of-the-day "scrutineer".
Not a word we hear too often in the states.

I just want a system that won't be gamed. I truly believe that the electoral college perverts the Presidential election. One of the things I hate about Trump is that he even claimed election fraud in Pennsylvania where he won! All so he could claim he won the popular vote! He is willing to throw anyone and everyone under the bus to get what he wants.

At least we will be able to say it was a presidency like no other!

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Then the problem is with Trump. His main claim was that 3 mil illegal
votes were cast and that absent those, he would have won the election.
The exact same claim can be made by anyone with a system that doesn't
use the electoral college. And there are illegal votes. How many,
no one really knows, but I'm confident it's not 3 mil.

That was Pennsylvania alone.

--

Rick C.

+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:99c7b625-1c7c-4257-b35f-caee98aacae8@googlegroups.com:

Wrong again. I've stated here many times that I did not vote for
Trump, that he's a skunk.

You sure as fuck act like him.

The only exception is that your 41 IQ is one point higher than his.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 4:29:33 AM UTC+11, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 12:02:45 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:
On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:18:40 AM UTC-5, Whoey Louie wrote:

<snip>

You mean you're not in favor of free healthcare for illegals? I guess
you're not a modern Democrat.

No. He's just stupid. The main point of the health care system is preventing plagues. It doesn't have to do it often, but when it does it's vitally important (as in Hubei Province in China at the moment).

Free health care for everybody is expensive but having a big chunk of the population killed off by a fast spreading infectious disease is a whole lot more expensive, and right-wing politicians - and you two - are too dumb to realise this.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 2:14:50 AM UTC+11, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Friday, February 14, 2020 at 8:28:52 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 7:02:45 AM UTC+11, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 9:28:22 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 9:07:07 PM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:
The country was formed as a union of states and people mistakenly think this is >about the states. It isn't. It's about the people of the country electing a >President, not states. As it stands people do not all have the same voting >power for the President. People in large states have too much of the power, but >more importantly people in swing states get all the attention during an >election.

When you vote for President, you're actually voting to select the electors from your State - not necessarily the President. (You're telling your State which candidate you want to the State to vote for.)

I assume you know that, so let's move on...

The Electoral College was a compromise from the beginning.
But, today's technology does indeed allow (or would allow) for the direct election of a President by the people - bypassing the States and the Congress.
(Ignoring for the moment, that the "tech" didn't work too well in Iowa!)

So, the salient questions revolve around whether a direct election would be, on balance, a desirable outcome, or not.

It would be until the Democrats lost again, then they want to change
it again to something else.

In the same way that the Republicans keep on fiddling with the electoral rolls in the hope of excluding even more people who might vote for the Democrats?

Except that didn't happen. Republicans just believe we should protect
elections from illegal voting and it's not an undue burden to show some
freaking ID at the polls.

Republicans say they believe that they need to make special efforts to protect elections for illegal voting, end up putting an undue burden on people more likely to vote for the Democrats. Whoey Louie is too dumb to notice.

The difference is that the Electoral College is a uniquely American invention, and dumping it would bring the American system back into line with what everybody else does.

Why should we "be in line with" what everybody else does?

The USA is run by rich people for rich people to a much greater extent than any other advanced industrial country. This means that country doesn't work as well for the population as whole (which shows up in the life expectancy statistics and in whole lot of other places). You do meed to do better.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spirit_Level_(book)

> Russia, NK, Cuba have rigged elections or no elections at all. Why don't you libs ever bitch about that?

We talk about them as countries run by criminal conspiracies. The elections aren't exactly rigged, but you can't be a candidate if you aren't a member of the Communist (in Cuba and North Korea) or approved of by the adminstration (in Russia - which isn't communist any more).

> We don't tell you how to hump kanagaroos.

Everybody holds elections of some sort or other. Nobody seems to want to hump kangaroos.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 4:31:40 AM UTC+11, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Friday, February 14, 2020 at 8:16:36 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 7:01:25 AM UTC+11, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 6:15:31 PM UTC-5, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 10:27:21 AM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:

snip

The Democrats are just sore losers, so now they want to change the system.

Whoey Louie likes Trump,

Wrong again. I've stated here many times that I did not vote for Trump,
that he's a skunk.

and thinks that the Electoral College, as opposed to the Russian intervention, is what got him his narrow victory, so he likes the Electoral College.

Ridiculous of course.

Saying that proposition is ridiculous doesn't invalidate the point - it just means that you don't know enough about what happened to explain why a rational person would think that it isn't valid picture of what went down.

It's not a well-thought-out position.

The Electoral College is a uniquely American invention,

Right, so STFU. Do we tell you how to hump kangaroos?

Nobody wants to hump kangaroos, so your expertise in the area is wasted.

Pretty much everybody wants to elect politicians who will serve the interests of the electorate as whole, but Americans are stuck with a system that elects representatives who look after the interests of the top 1% of the income distribution and do as little as they can get away with for everybody else.

The Electoral College isn't the only part of the US electoral system that's defective, but it's the most obviously silly feature.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Dean Hoffman]

On 2/13/20 11:27 AM, Rick C wrote:

The Old Dominion has passed House Bill 177 which if passed by the Virginia Senate and signed by the Governor will add VA to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact bringing the total electoral votes in the compact to 209 of the 270 needed for the compact to be enabled. This is encouraging to those who wish for the President to be elected by the people with one person, one vote.

One of the silly arguments for the electoral college is that it provides for more equal focus by the candidates at the state level. But that is patently not true. Candidates focus on areas where their campaigning can have an impact, the swing states. And in those states they focus on the larger ones. Here is a map showing campaign activity in 2012.

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

Pretty easy to see how the electoral college distorts the attention of the candidates.

Only a few more states to go.

So what do you think of Nebraska's and maybe Maine's system of
allocating electoral college votes? The winner of each congressional
district gets the vote representing that individual district. The
winner of the total state's vote gets
the two votes representing the two senators.
Nebraska has five total votes. It possible for its vote to split 4
to 1 or 3 to 2.
I think vote counting issues would be limited to the state
or to an individual district.

 

[mpm]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 7:57:07 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

I think if you put an actual kangaroo on the ballot, it might even get elected.

But even if it didn't get elected, would it come in last place?!
I doubt it.

 

Dean Hoffman <dh0496@windstream.net> wrote in
news:r2a963$1b5d$1@gioia.aioe.org:

On 2/13/20 11:27 AM, Rick C wrote:
The Old Dominion has passed House Bill 177 which if passed by the
Virginia Senate and signed by the Governor will add VA to the
National Popular Vote Interstate Compact bringing the total
electoral votes in the compact to 209 of the 270 needed for the
compact to be enabled. This is encouraging to those who wish for
the President to be elected by the people with one person, one
vote.

One of the silly arguments for the electoral college is that it
provides for more equal focus by the candidates at the state
level. But that is patently not true. Candidates focus on areas
where their campaigning can have an impact, the swing states.
And in those states they focus on the larger ones. Here is a map
showing campaign activity in 2012.

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

Pretty easy to see how the electoral college distorts the
attention of the candidates.

Only a few more states to go.

So what do you think of Nebraska's and maybe Maine's
system of
allocating electoral college votes?

Just get RID OF the entire thing. Problem solved.

No more running around wasting (our) money trying to figure out
what to do where to 'get' influence.

SNIP

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 2:25:47 PM UTC+11, mpm wrote:

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 7:57:07 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

I think if you put an actual kangaroo on the ballot, it might even get elected.

There are constraints on who can get on the ballot, and no kangaroo is going to qualify.

But even if it didn't get elected, would it come in last place?!
I doubt it.

The UK has a Monster Raving Loony Party

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Monster_Raving_Loony_Party

Some of them have got elected.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Michael Terrell]

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:25:47 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 7:57:07 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

I think if you put an actual kangaroo on the ballot, it might even get elected.

But even if it didn't get elected, would it come in last place?!
I doubt it.

It would get more votes than Sloman.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 5:07:13 PM UTC+11, Michael Terrell wrote:

On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 10:25:47 PM UTC-5, mpm wrote:
On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 7:57:07 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

I think if you put an actual kangaroo on the ballot, it might even get elected.

But even if it didn't get elected, would it come in last place?!
I doubt it.

It would get more votes than Sloman.

In the kind of fantasy world world where either of us would be on a ballot. Michael Terrell might even be right. He seems to be happy to live in the kind of cloud cuckoo land where this kind of question is worth thinking about.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney