Current Events > Electoral votes shouldn't be based on population, but how useful each...

(+) Yeah! (+)

state is.

Hear me out. Right now the only thing the EC does is benefit states where people pump out a ton of kids.

What about a system where each state is ranked on how much support their give the country, as in, manufacturing, tech/medical research, exporting goods to help our GDP, ect...

This sould drive states to be competitive with each other and not stagnate themselves.

"You want more votes, do more for the country" Worthless states sapping our resources can sit in the back quietly until they're worthwhile.

---

hahahaha

---

Lol, Republicans would literally never win another election

If that was the case ohio would be 0 ohhhhh

---

That a poll tax. Aggregating by state doesn't make less so.

SauI_Goodman posted...

If that was the case ohio would be 0 ohhhhh

My home state of CT would probably be given negative votes lol

---

This would put so much power into NY and CA that even my liberal ass is against it.

---

Louisianas value is going way up then

---

Evening_Dragon posted...

This would put so much power into NY and CA that even my liberal ass is against it.

Maybe for the first cycle or so, that's just motivation for other state legislators to get off their asses to earn their state more votes.

---

So what states do you think have too many electoral votes and dont contribute?

---

Or, we could just move to a popular vote system

---

Jiggy101011 posted...

So what states do you think have too many electoral votes and dont contribute?

Off the top of my head, CT does not deserve the votes we have. Our state is failing and our legislators have let it happen for the past 40 years. Maybe the threat of them being responsible for our voice getting stripped would motivate them to actually do their jobs and move the state forward.

---

FlameTurtle posted...

Or, we could just move to a popular vote system

Popular vote just benefits people who fuck a lot and pump out crotch goblins.

---

Republicans would never practice their own "fuck you I have mine" philosophy.

How about we do this on a individual basis? That way billionaires can get super votes.

---

tell us how you really feel

---

pogo_rabid posted...

Popular vote just benefits people who fuck a lot and pump out crotch goblins.

Why do I feel like you're about to start ranting about "useless eaters"?

---

I dont think Americans unlucky enough to be born into an unimportant state in this situation deserve to have their vote stripped

but it also shouldnt be worth more. just use the god damn popular vote

---

FlameTurtle posted...

Why do I feel like you're about to start ranting about "useless eaters"?

I was just using colorful language, don't overanalyze it

---

https://www.reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/comments/jqounv/didnt_think_to_do_math/gbp1fus/

Good writeup on how blue states fund the red states, for context

damn blue states are the best

---

California gets all the votes

Rexdragon125 posted...

https://www.reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/comments/jqounv/didnt_think_to_do_math/gbp1fus/

Good writeup on how blue states fund the red states, for context

Yep, and after the right sees how fucked they are, maybe their constituents will vote people in who would push the state forward.

---

China elects our next President.

---

That sounds like a good way to have big corporations basically controlling the policies that should be regulating them.

Money turns into voting power which turns into money, and so on

---

pogo_rabid posted...

Yep, and after the right sees how fucked they are, maybe their constituents will vote people in who would push the state forward.

Seems like a good way to get incompetent "strongmen" who make lavish, impossible promises elected in those states.

pogo_rabid posted...

I was just using colorful language, don't overanalyze it

All I'm saying is that it's too early to advocate for Social Darwinism. At least wait until lunch.


---

Unlike with current political promises, there's actually motivation for them following through. If they can't fulfill the promises and their voting base has less of a voice as a direct result, no way they'd get a second term.

All my plan does is motivate politicans to actually do something rather than fart around only caring when it's election time again.

---

This system is basically designed to try to cripple any poorer states by stripping their political influence and thus also removing any reason for a politician to do anything for them because their votes won't matter until years later while the people in better off states can vote you out now for not prioritizing them.
---

Panthera posted...

This system is basically designed to try to cripple any poorer states by stripping their political influence and thus also removing any reason for a politician to do anything for them because their votes won't matter until years later while the people in better off states can vote you out now for not prioritizing them.

he didnt think this one thru

A bad take on several levels. Go back to the drawing board.
---

That sort of policy is extremely antithetical to my views tbqh, especially if usefulness is defined only in economic terms (e.g. by GDP), a measure which obviously has its limits. How do things like food, energy and medicine production factor in (outside of purely monetary value)? Climate impacts? Even with a complete measure of usefulness, it doesn't strike me as very democratic to determine the power of one's vote based on that. And many factors in usefulness are completely outwith a state's control, e.g. natural resources.

If you do go down the GDP route, that's not a whole lot different to giving the rich more votes, which is something out of the Victorian era. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural_voting

The rich already have disproportionate power, which they can (and do) use to tip things more in their favor. Ditching the EC seems a better idea to me.

This seems a bit... fascistic. Survival of the fittest and all that. Expect some real nasty consequences if the poor states feel like they're getting a raw deal. Trump would be tame in comparison.