MATHEMATICAL MANIPULATION OF THE ELECTORAL-COLLEGE VOTE

Discussion in 'Elections & Campaigns' started by LafayetteBis, Sep 25, 2021.

  1. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,743
    Likes Received:
    2,079
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Many Americans suffer from a lack of understanding of both how our "System of Democracy works", and more importantly how it has greatly failed to work. That understanding requires a highly technical mathematical comprehension - believe it or not.

    And at the heart of the failure is the Replicant party and an analysis made by one its desiciples now defunct who showed precisely how it was easy for the party to mathematically manipulate the Electoral College vote.

    See here: Electoral College Surprisingly Vulnerable

    Excerpt:

    We should all be concerned about how elections are held in our country because it is a fundamental aspect of a Workably Fair Democracy.

    We could take days, months and years discussing this matter regarding the Electoral College as indicated above. And it is a serious matter because the EC is at the heart of electing the Head of Government in our True Democracy. As serious as the ability of we-the-people to elect those who represent us in Congress. Manipulating the Popular Vote is simply not acceptable, and I would dearly like to see a Supreme Court argumentation that decided otherwise. (Given the mathematical evidence of said manipulation.)

    We Yanks think all is Right in LaLaLand on the Potomac - but why? Because to argue that it is not and that it has serious voting-defects is somehow "unAmerican". But the fact of the matter remains, the Electoral College can be employed to manipulate the popular-vote electing the PotUS.

    The site connected above gives a highly technical description of EC-vote manipulation. That description is technically correct but barely understandable to most Americans who don't have a Doctorate in Mathematics. Like you, perhaps, I am one of those.

    But, that does not make the argument wrong. Just a bit difficult to understand. Moreover, since it is apparently correct, it scares-the-hell-out-of-me ... !
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2021
  2. joesnagg

    joesnagg Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2020
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    6,789
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Mathematicians think too much...besides, the Democrats ASSURE us that the system can't be "manipulated".
     
  3. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    131,889
    Likes Received:
    30,301
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    "The Electoral College divides one big election into 51 smaller ones –"

    They got it wrong right there. It has never been one big election to divide into anything. There has NEVER been a federal election in this country. There is no "the popular vote". The President is selected by the States not elected by the People. If a State wants to hold an election to which candidate the citizens want their STATE to cast it's electoral votes it can, it doesn't have to.
     
    kazenatsu and Bullseye like this.
  4. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,830
    Likes Received:
    19,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The electoral college could technically be won with around 22% of the popular vote — that Republicans are actively seeking ways to bypass the peoples will on a state by state basis if we ‘vote wrong’ shows this entire electoral method needs to be scrapped.
     
    jack4freedom likes this.
  5. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    131,889
    Likes Received:
    30,301
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In which state could you when an electoral college electors vote with just 22%? How could Republicans or Democrats or any part bypass votes and win with just 22%?

    Republicans are trying to ensure the person casting the vote is the person PROPERLY registered to vote and to vote WHERE they are voting. What's wrong with that? Don't you think we should ensure that to maintain the integrity of our elections?
     
  6. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,830
    Likes Received:
    19,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I never said state, i specifically said popular vote

    https://www.npr.org/2016/11/02/5001...residency-with-27-percent-of-the-popular-vote
    https://www.robertoreif.com/blog/2018/1/7/become-a-us-president-with-only-22-of-the-popular-vote

    Ok, maybe you will answer as others typically run
    How does any of the following make sure they are properly registered

    Banning Sunday voting
    Banning mobile voting centers
    Limiting voting locations
    Banning mailing of absentee ballot applications
    Banning same day voter registration

    And why are none of the above being done in deep red states, only ones that are toss-ups?

    Want to make elections more secure? National voter ID with automatic voter registration and connected state system to monitor for individuals moving or dying. But then more people might vote and we both know that isn’t good for Republicans.
     
    Woolley likes this.
  7. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    131,889
    Likes Received:
    30,301
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In which state, there is no national popular voting, it is all within states. Tallying up all those separate and individual votes and declaring them as some national popular vote is folly. Voting patterns and campaigning would be entirely different if there was just ONE BIG national election.

    Where have I said they do?

    Go to your local county office with your ID and register to vote in the weeks and months you have to do so so the county can get you properly in the system and you will appear on the voter role at your proper voting location and you can vote.


    I don't know that none of them are, but that's up to the state and county.

    State ID is just fine and if you can't get off your arse and go and register to vote or take advantage of the outreach the voting clerks do such as at nursing homes you have no sympathy from me. If someone doesn't care enough to ensure they are registered properly, such as when they move, then fine with me if they don't vote because it shows they care much about voting.
     
  8. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,830
    Likes Received:
    19,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    When 22% of the population can overrule 78% percent of the population the system is flawed.

    That isn’t what you asserted, you said “Republicans are trying to ensure the person casting the vote is the person PROPERLY registered to vote and to vote WHERE they are voting. What's wrong with that? Don't you think we should ensure that to maintain the integrity of our elections?” now you are rotating your argument.

    Your side is the one pushing those laws. How do they ‘maintain the integrity of our elections’?

    Just take a wild guess, why would a party that hasn’t won the will of the voters except once for the presidency since 1988 gain from only targeting states they are fearful of losing?

    Which makes my point, it isn’t about making sure it is secure it is to create barriers for those American citizens you don’t want to vote.

    Voting is a right, there should be a few barriers as possible — but like I said, that would destroy your party.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2021
  9. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    131,889
    Likes Received:
    30,301
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We are not a democracy we never vote national on anything, we are a Republic of States and the system works perfectly as it is designed to do. As far as the President, the States select the President and your state ALLOWS you, they don't have to, to vote on the electors for YOUR state. And I doubt that in your state if on candidate gets 22% and the other gets 78% that the former would be declared the person YOUR STATE selects.

    Yea, but I didn't say the things in the list had anything to do with registration, the last one does but I said nothing about them. And yes don't you think voting in the district and precinct in which you live is important? You know so you vote for those running in your district and your precinct and your city and your county and your state?

    By protecting the registering process and the voting process from people voting fraudulently by making sure the person voting is properly registered and voting in their proper districts and that ballot security and voting security is maintained at the polling and the chain of custody of ballots is secured and only properly cast ballots are counted.

    You know the INTEGRITY of the system.

    I reject the premise of your question.

    How wide open do you want it? What barriers there is no proof any of these attempts to make our elections LESS secure would correct any barriers that don't exist. For the over two centuries we have existed why do these "barriers" suddenly exist.

    There were none of these "barriers" in the 1800's? the 1950's compared to now with all the mailin voting and extending voting days and the coddling of voters we seem to have to do now?

    upload_2021-10-16_19-55-21.png
    http://www.electproject.org/national-1789-present
     
  10. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,830
    Likes Received:
    19,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not the point, it is a poor system which is why it had majority disapproval before Republicans figured out it is the only way to win.

    That our states are gerrymandered to hell and the house is no longer proportional are additional issues.

    Your party is the one making these items law, you said “Republicans” want to ensure integrity so I asked how the laws that Republicans are making help with said integrity.
    So you don’t have a defense for any of them, why would Republicans be pushing such laws under the guise of election security?

    None of the laws do that though.
    Linking state DMV’s, monitoring death records, automatic registration, national voter ID would help with this but isn’t being pushed

    I am sure you do, cognitive dissonance is a tough one to get through.
    What part specifically do you reject as not factual?

    What? Are you serious?
    You believe the barriers just suddenly appeared?
    Women have been unable to vote, blacks, non-landowners, specific barriers were implemented in several states such that the federal government had to intervene in 1965. An act that was just recently deleted by your team and was against many of the same states rushing to implement voter restrictions that you don’t want to address.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2021
  11. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is just normal election strategy.

    Your idea of a "Workably Fair Democracy" is a little bit different than the one that is in place in the US Constitution.

    It has already been explained to you in countless other threads that there is somewhat of a trade-off between "fairness" versus helping to ensure the integrity of elections through decentralization of power to the states.
    If we go with "fairness", then you will be far more likely to end up with a Constitutional-crisis, civil war, disputed election. There is a very good reason that the Electoral College system winner-take-all in each state exists in the US Constitution.

    Right now the individual states each hold their own election for President, and because of the winner-take-all system, a state where one candidate received 60% of the vote has no incentive to commit fraud to make that candidate get 80% of the vote, since it will not change the final votes in the Electoral College. This prevents the federal government from having to get involved in Presidential elections. It's a feature of separation of powers, something that is so important.

    In other words, the current system is more "Workable" than the system you propose, although theoretically less "Fair".
    It is less "Democratic", but at the same time helps preserve and protect democracy.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2021
  12. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    28,830
    Likes Received:
    19,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why do other nations not have this worry of civil war when allowing their citizens to vote in a democracy?
    What makes the US so uncivil in your opinion?
     
  13. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,550
    Likes Received:
    34,471
    Trophy Points:
    113
    True democracies fail and why we have an EC. The uneducated are not aware of history.
     
  14. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    24,505
    Likes Received:
    7,676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's too complicated to fully delve into in this thread and will get us drifting off topic, but consider this: The US is the democracy that protects all the other democracies.

    In addition to that, an argument can also be put forward that stability is also proportional to diversity, and the US is sort of like halfway between most all those other First World democracies and Latin America, in terms of diversity. Larger democracies also tend to be less functional and less workable.

    There are actually three different ways I could go about answering your question, but like I said, I won't, because it would really take a separate thread to get into that discussion, and I really don't like to make threads go off topic.
     
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2021
  15. Seth Bullock

    Seth Bullock Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    Messages:
    11,695
    Likes Received:
    9,327
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I may have mentioned this to you before. If so, it's been a while.

    Your obsession with harping against the EC belies a fundamental misunderstanding about how our government is supposed to work. You revealed that misunderstanding with these few words ...

    "And it is a serious matter because the EC is at the heart of electing the Head of Government"

    The President is not the "head of government".

    The President is the executive in charge of the Executive Branch of our government. His job is to execute the will of Congress. Other than that, the Constitution gives almost no power to the President that cannot be overridden by Congress. Put another way, the Executive Branch is supposed to be the servant of Congress, carrying out the jobs that Congress gives it to do.

    Our Founders wisely limited the power of the presidency. They set up a system whereby we are governed by the rule of law, and it was to be the responsibility of the Congress to enact such laws. The executive branch was supposed to be the branch that implements those laws. Effectively therefore, we are governed by Congress, our representatives that we directly voted for, not the President.

    What the EC system does is make the President acceptable to and accountable to a cross section of states from coast to coast.

    What I sense from folks like you is that you are placing far too much importance on who the President is or which party he is with. You seem to believe we should be governed by the Executive Branch rather than by our representatives in Congress.

    I do not want us to be governed by a sole power in the Executive Branch. That is too similar to a dictatorship for my American blood. That is similar to the Russian system wherein the legislative branch is a rump adjunct to the government, basically powerless, a government that is run by a dictator.

    No thanks.
     
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2021
    MJ Davies likes this.
  16. MJ Davies

    MJ Davies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2020
    Messages:
    14,375
    Likes Received:
    13,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This whole time I was under the (apparently false) impression that ALL US students had to pass the Constitution test in the 9th grade to matriculate to high school.

    And, in fairness, we have to consider that our last POTUS did a lot of overstepping and back-biting so many people have been lead to believe he was "targeted" in some big conspiracy because he's the perfect human specimen super-genius that deserves to sit on the throne until his last breath in spite of our Constitution. Alas, hundreds are sitting in prison right now for not knowing that he lied to them on January 6, 2021.

    Maybe we should implement another Constitution test to graduate high school.
     
  17. MJ Davies

    MJ Davies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2020
    Messages:
    14,375
    Likes Received:
    13,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How on Earth can somebody think "too much"? I think what we are seeing is the opposite problem.
     
    Statistikhengst likes this.
  18. Seth Bullock

    Seth Bullock Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    Messages:
    11,695
    Likes Received:
    9,327
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes.
     
    MJ Davies likes this.
  19. Statistikhengst

    Statistikhengst Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2015
    Messages:
    11,244
    Likes Received:
    12,500
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    ditto that.
     
  20. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    131,889
    Likes Received:
    30,301
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No that IS the point it is a great system that works perfectly as designed. And gerrymandering has nothing to do with the Electoral College.

    What does that have to do with the EC?

    Voter ID, for in person and mail in and absentee. Banning ballot harvesting and unsecured ballot boxes.

    If you want to register then go register, if you are not concerned enough to go and properly register and to make sure your registration is kept up to date then don't vote. And no we don't need a national ID the states do just fine managing voter ID.

    When you asked

    We need mass mail in voting, ballot harvesting, 3 months of voting 24/7 because women are unable to vote, blacks can't vote, non-landowners can't vote?

    And the act which was supposed to expire decades ago and there was no proof it still needed to be in place. BTW the act which made my voting more "difficult", I thought you were are against making voting "difficult".
     
  21. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    131,889
    Likes Received:
    30,301
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    How many times does it have to be explained to you that not only is the United States NOT a democracy it is guarantied in the Constitution we would never be one. There would be no United States or a Constitution were that not in there.

    You have this "democracy" within your STATE of SOME matters. But even for the presidential electors there is no constitutional requirement you vote them in your state, you are only allowed to do so by the consent of your state legislature.
     

Share This Page