-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Does your vote in 2020 really matter- most likely not
- Thread starter james dixon
- Start date
BSM1
What? Me worry?
What in the world are you even talking about??
Salvador
RF's Swedenborgian
I live in the state of Illinois where voting for our state's electoral college votes is highly biased towards Democrats, hence, my vote for Electors from Illinois who'd vote for Donald Trump would not be as decisive as somebody's vote for Electors who'd elect Donald J. Trump from a key swing state like Florida.
Besides for tax reasons, I'm considering moving to Florida in order to have a more decisive vote for getting Electors who'd elect nationalist populist Republican Presidential candidates elected as our P.O.T.U.S.
If a direct popular vote system were to replace the EC, then there should be a national voter identification card system in place that'd significantly ensure each vote is legit.
In 2014, researchers at Old Dominion University used data from a Cooperative Congressional Election Study, data in 2008 and 2010, as well as voter records in 2008, to conclude that more than 14 percent of non-citizens indicated that they were registered to vote. Their best guess at the portion of non-citizens who voted was about 6.4 percent, or 1.2 million illegal votes were then cast in a U.S. Presidential election.
https://fs.wp.odu.edu/jrichman/wp-content/uploads/sites/760/2015/11/AnsolabehererResponse_2-8-17.pdf
If non-citizen illegal votes were significantly reduced to near zero, this would likely help Republican Presidential candidates by a margin of over three-quarters of a million votes.
When factoring out illegal non-citizen votes, President Trump may have indeed nearly won the popular vote.
Besides for tax reasons, I'm considering moving to Florida in order to have a more decisive vote for getting Electors who'd elect nationalist populist Republican Presidential candidates elected as our P.O.T.U.S.
If a direct popular vote system were to replace the EC, then there should be a national voter identification card system in place that'd significantly ensure each vote is legit.
In 2014, researchers at Old Dominion University used data from a Cooperative Congressional Election Study, data in 2008 and 2010, as well as voter records in 2008, to conclude that more than 14 percent of non-citizens indicated that they were registered to vote. Their best guess at the portion of non-citizens who voted was about 6.4 percent, or 1.2 million illegal votes were then cast in a U.S. Presidential election.
https://fs.wp.odu.edu/jrichman/wp-content/uploads/sites/760/2015/11/AnsolabehererResponse_2-8-17.pdf
If non-citizen illegal votes were significantly reduced to near zero, this would likely help Republican Presidential candidates by a margin of over three-quarters of a million votes.
When factoring out illegal non-citizen votes, President Trump may have indeed nearly won the popular vote.
Shad
Veteran Member
Civics 101. States vote for POTUS not the national population.
I know that. It should be changed. That's been my point all along.
Shad
Veteran Member
The problem is it would trigger a civil war on some level. The popular vote can be very dangerous thus was avoided by the FFs for a reason. You are talking about overthrowing the Constitution. Canada does not even use NV.
Last edited:
So...I agree with everything you said here apart from the 'Thats plenty of reason to not vote.'
I can't see any reason not to. I can see some reasons it won't make a difference, but they're projection rather than certainty, so I'd still suggest voting is important practically, even if the likelihood is that it has no effect. (Won't hurt, basically)
But your last paragraph is the clincher for me. Participate in your democracy. Else you're ceding power to 'them' willingly. Having the right to vote comes with the responsibilty to vote, and to do so to the best of your ability.
Err...
*Steps carefully off high horse*
I guess I should have said, "That's plenty of reasons people could use to decide not to vote..."
Yeah, this.I guess I should have said, "That's plenty of reasons people could use to decide not to vote..."
A lot depends on how convenient voting is. One subtle method of vote suppression is to make voting more convenient in areas heavy on your party supporters.
If you already have a rough schedule, it's easy to justify just skipping it. Especially when you know that your state is already a foregone conclusion anyway, so your vote won't matter in the biggest decision to be made.
I do believe that a democratic vote for president would go a long way towards combating voter apathy and ignorance.
Tom
Erebus
Well-Known Member
I do think there is a valid reason not to vote and it isn't, "It won't make a difference."
If you have serious moral problems with every candidate on offer, I can see somebody deciding that they can't in good conscience vote for anybody. For that to be the case, each candidate would need to have one or more negative policies that (in the non-voter's opinion) seriously outweigh their positive policies.
It's the principle of "Choosing the lesser evil is still choosing evil." I know some people disagree with that line of thinking, it really comes down to your personal ethics.
Personally, I vote.
I'm an outsider but...
Changing the Constitution is okay. Indeed, I think it's possible to work within the Constitution but still select the President based on popular vote.
But...
Were I a small state (like Nevada recently) I'd be thinking twice about supporting a nationwide popular vote model.
I don't see what's in it for them?
I get this point.
Once, in memory, I went and handed in a blank voting slip. I had reasons (good or bad) not to vote for anyone. It was a decision, though (rather than the absence of a decision), and not one I took lightly.
But yep, I hear ya.
Hi mate,
Sorry, just wanted clarification on what you meant here.
By democratic, do you mean straight majority?
Poisonshady313
Well-Known Member
When their votes are held up against a total of actual voters who voted, they have a louder voice and stronger influence than the electors held up against the total number of electors.
Lets look at the largest state. California. 55 electors represent approximately 39 million people. 8,753,788 Californians voted Clinton in 2016. But because of the electoral college and winner takes all, it's as if 39 million Californians voted for Clinton in 2016. What kind of voice is Nevada expected to have in a system like this?
Nevada was split almost cleanly down the middle. 512,058 (Trump) vs 539,260 (Clinton). Forget the fact that winner takes all means that half the state is having their vote cast for the candidate they didn't vote for (which is pretty significant, but we'll set it aside for now). If it were reversed so that Trump won Nevada, how are those 1 million votes supposed to stand up to the 30,246,212 Californian votes that don't exist yet speak just as loudly for Clinton as the 8,753,788?
Clinton votes from the 5 most populous states (California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois) were 18.1% of the total popular vote in 2016. Those 5 states contain 11 out of 15 of the most populous cities.
By contrast, just three states: California, New York, and Illinois, hold 19.3% of the electoral vote.
A popular vote is actually in the interest of the smaller states. They just don't understand that because similar to liberals, all they can see is the 2016 and 2000 elections.
Yeah.
It's kind of annoying that the 2 dominant parties named themselves with words that don't particularly represent the modern reality of their behavior.
But I try to capitalize the D or R when referring to the parties and not when I'm referring to political concepts. Similarly, Green isn't the same as green.
Tom
ecco
Veteran Member
I absolutely do not understand "independent".
There are two major parties. There are two major views on what is good for the Nation. There are Republicans and there are Democrats.
Any of the Democratic candidates would be a better President than Trump or any of the dozen others who were in the 2016 primary.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No doubt. But in my state I have a bit of a luxury. The Democratic candidate will almost certainly win. That allows me to voice some disapproval if appropriate. But if is at all close I will vote Democratic. I may vote third party if I cannot stand the Democratic candidate, but only if the election is safe.
ecco
Veteran Member
Please provide some evidence that any candidate received a substantial number of illegal non-citizen votes.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
My recent research proves that it was not 2.9 million people voting illegally for Trump. It was one illegal immigrant voting 2.9 million times. That is what I call a go getter attitude!
