Hacker News Reader

Comment by cgb223 | Hacker News Reader

Why cant states just give out percents of electoral votes based on who voted?

Example: Lets say CA has 10 Electoral Votes (for easy math) 60% vote Dem, 40% vote Republican. California then Gives 6 Electoral Votes to the Democrat and 4 to the Republican instead of all 10 to the Democrat.

Feels like that would more fairly represent the voters of each state no?

View on HN

Yes, I also think this is the simplest way to make it more fair. States can do this unilaterally without pact. That's why I feel the pact is not about fairness.

The pact is necessary because whoever changes the system first loses out on influence. You never hear of presidential candidates appealing to Maine or Nebraska. It only works if everyone does it together.

I feel like I've seen some maps for past elections done hypothetically like this. I can't recall the conclusions though. I think the Senate situation still gives disproportionate power to small states in that model, even if it is slightly less dramatic than the winner take all in each state we have now.

Why can't one party campaign like the rules were written down beforehand, instead of hanging out running up the score in California?

Getting rid of the electoral college won't necessarily make Hilary win this time around. It will be a different vote entirely. Republicans will actually contest California and some others. They'll try to run up the score in Texas. They'll shift a couple issues left.

The only sure thing from this change would be ignoring the spread out population.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com