A winner takes all approach to our elections doesn't really seem to represent the will of the people. If a candidate wins a small majority of the votes they win all of a states electoral votes. For example, in 2004 George W. Bush received 66% of the votes in Nebraska and John Kerry received 33%. If we moved away from our current electoral system to what would be a true representation of our votes, Kerry would've received at least one of those electoral votes. And in California, Kerry received 54% of the votes, and George W. Bush received 45%, so by moving away from our electoral system we're now using Bush would've received 25 of the electoral votes and Kerry would've received the remaining 30 votes.
Here's what America really looks like
http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/elec...
Why are Republicans trying to do this in only California?
Any thoughts?
2007-12-19
06:59:24
·
14 answers
·
asked by
It's Your World, Change It
6
in
Other - Politics & Government