Subject:
|
Re: Electoral College
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 9 Nov 2000 20:23:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
147 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kyle McDonald writes:
<snip?
> > Well to my understanding much of this is handled at a state level. I know
> > Maine and one other state split votes based on congressional districts.
>
> Yes. Maine is this way, I am still unsure how the two votes that are
> representative of the senate seats are decided though.
>
> Do they go to whomever wins the state's popular vote?
> or Do they go to whomever wins the most districts?
The 2 Senate Votes in Maine do go to the popular vote winner.
<snip?
> I don't think doing away with the electoral college is the
> right solution. Instead I think we will see more and more
> states change to systems like Maine's and (In think) Nebraska
> where it is not winner take all. Having the Districts be
> winner take all(1) vote in each district, and the other
> 2(senate) votes going to that states popular winner seems to
> me to be an interesting comprimise worth trying out before
> we go and throw the whole thing out the window.
I would have to agree with you but for the reason that if they did away with
the system it would make the smaller states much more insignificant and the
canidates would end up focussing on just the larger cities and States. Thats
isn't right either IMHO. I do think a vote broken down by district would be
good however and probably more representative of the peoples will.
Eric Kingsley
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Electoral College
|
| (...) Much of this is diccussed in a history of the electoral college at: (URL) is a link there to a .pdf file that is long, but (IMHO) worth reading - Very educational) (...) Yes. Maine is this way, I am still unsure how the two votes that are (...) (24 years ago, 9-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
