It's stupid, but it's been determined that you can't adequately legislate against stupid. The states are free to do with their Electoral College votes what they wish.
The Founders just assumed that no state would ever have a population as ignorant and apathetic as we've managed to achieve in the Northeast.
This is after a long, concerted effort, let's give credit where credit is due. Starting with the educational system, continuing through the drumbeat of the media assault - it's taken a lot of effort to get the population this ignorant and apathetic!
More importantly, IMO, this isn't about really ignorance or apathy as much as it is a naked power grab by our "populists" who understand that with a federated voting system it's impossible to buy off enough people in enough areas.
IMO, this isn't about really ignorance or apathy as much as it is a naked power grab by our "populists" who understand that with a federated voting system it's impossible to buy off enough people in enough areas.
Oh, absolutely. But it required the ignorance and apathy first.
Remember education "pioneer" John Dewey:
"You can’t make Socialists out of individualists. Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming where everyone is interdependent."
In some ways, the Founders were rather hopeful as to the better side of Man (the Veep being the Runner-up to the Presidency comes immediately to mind as a rather... Bad Idea that seemed workable.)
They certainly had seen sorts like Dewey before - they just never thought that, well, of course that sort of silliness will never take hold!
In some ways, the Founders were rather hopeful as to the better side of Man...
As Tony Woodlief once noted, (I paraphrase): "Anyone who has stood between a toddler and the last cookie should be disabused of the notion of the inherent goodness of humanity."
I forget if it was pre-or-post election-2000, but it would have been around that time.. Way back when, several Math-minded friends of mine got into a very heated debate over the EC - and an article featuring Natapoff's work (or it even might have been his!), and he kicked the "Popular vote" "geniuses" asses. (Really, they're geniuses. I'm serious, not sarcastic. Again, another example of that the smartest people aren't always the best at planning or building systems. Also notably, the anti-EC crowd also were afflicted with near-terminal BDS.)
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
I was getting to doubt my memory, since I couldn't find hide nor hair of it again.
Note:
All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost;
references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>
JS-Kit/Echo comments for article at http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2008/01/i-dont-want-large-cities-electing-our.html (16 comments)
Tentative mapping of comments to original article, corrections solicited.
It'd never work. To be effective every state would have to do it, and smaller states would never go for it.
Personally, I'd like a minor revision to the EC that would get it back (far closer) to the original intent.
(Remember, CA became a state with a fraction of the population of the rest of the Union - thus it's size to meet the minimum population.)
Do what 1 state does now - award the "senate" EC votes to the state popular vote winner, and the other votes per the winner in the House district.
To those who would throw it to popular votes I'll ask, as I have often: Can you imagine the mess in 2000 - with recounts all over the country?
Not just the "population centers" - but when you tell me that my vote can be cancelled by the Chicago machine?
Them's fighting words.
HEY!!! I live in Brooklyn and I... Ooh, a picture of a puppy dog...
Seriously tho, we're not all a**holes in the big cities.
"Seriously tho, we're not all a**holes in the big cities."
Close enough that the difference is just a rounding error. ;-)
Dave:
Can't you just feel your independence being sapped from your body? You're surrounded by pod-people! ;)
That sorta flips up that protective red plastic cover which was over the Reset Button, y'know.
Just sayin', is all.
(Moved - Ed.)
Jim
Sloop New Dawn
Galveston, TX
Not really. It's completely legal.
It's stupid, but it's been determined that you can't adequately legislate against stupid. The states are free to do with their Electoral College votes what they wish.
The Founders just assumed that no state would ever have a population as ignorant and apathetic as we've managed to achieve in the Northeast.
Oh, c'mon Kevin.
population as ignorant and apathetic
This is after a long, concerted effort, let's give credit where credit is due. Starting with the educational system, continuing through the drumbeat of the media assault - it's taken a lot of effort to get the population this ignorant and apathetic!
More importantly, IMO, this isn't about really ignorance or apathy as much as it is a naked power grab by our "populists" who understand that with a federated voting system it's impossible to buy off enough people in enough areas.
IMO, this isn't about really ignorance or apathy as much as it is a naked power grab by our "populists" who understand that with a federated voting system it's impossible to buy off enough people in enough areas.
Oh, absolutely. But it required the ignorance and apathy first.
Remember education "pioneer" John Dewey:
"You can’t make Socialists out of individualists. Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming where everyone is interdependent."
Or, more precisely, dependent on the government.
Not really. It's completely legal.
Just because it is legal doesn't mean we must abide it.
Kevin:
Yep.
Trust me. I never forget Dewey.
In some ways, the Founders were rather hopeful as to the better side of Man (the Veep being the Runner-up to the Presidency comes immediately to mind as a rather... Bad Idea that seemed workable.)
They certainly had seen sorts like Dewey before - they just never thought that, well, of course that sort of silliness will never take hold!
In some ways, the Founders were rather hopeful as to the better side of Man...
As Tony Woodlief once noted, (I paraphrase): "Anyone who has stood between a toddler and the last cookie should be disabused of the notion of the inherent goodness of humanity."
Pod people you say? Plllbbbtttt, I'll just never sleep again. :)
IMPORTANT UPDATE.
One of my Readers found this article:
http://discovermagazine.com/2004/sep/math-against-tyranny/?searchterm=math%20against
which explains the value of our system.
That's an outstanding piece. Thanks.
THANK YOU GEEK.
I've been trying to re-find that for YEARS.
I forget if it was pre-or-post election-2000, but it would have been around that time.. Way back when, several Math-minded friends of mine got into a very heated debate over the EC - and an article featuring Natapoff's work (or it even might have been his!), and he kicked the "Popular vote" "geniuses" asses. (Really, they're geniuses. I'm serious, not sarcastic. Again, another example of that the smartest people aren't always the best at planning or building systems. Also notably, the anti-EC crowd also were afflicted with near-terminal BDS.)
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
I was getting to doubt my memory, since I couldn't find hide nor hair of it again.
Note: All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost; references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>