Just imagine if, say, Mississippi had come up with an excuse to keep Barack Obama off the ballot.
-
-
16. This is a genre of response you get a lot from supposedly adult progressives: Conservative: [argue policy or point out that a progressive has misstated the facts] Progressive: Oh boo hoo you poor snowflake. https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1124633649222168576 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
17. States have a distinct role in the United States that counties do not. The country is broader & more diverse than any one state. And no state weights counties by population as does the Electoral Collegehttps://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/1124636582496153600 …
Show this thread -
18. Again, this ignores the fact that the Electoral College is weighted by population. Texas, for example, has so many electoral votes because it has 28 million peoplehttps://twitter.com/epicciuto/status/1124634500959436801 …
Show this thread -
19. I submit that my hypothetical, which assumes 2016 turnout in every state & gives the R the same average share in winning states as Lincoln in 1860 (& more in the losing states than Lincoln got) is considerably more realistic than thishttps://twitter.com/charles_gaba/status/1124648192082087936 …
Show this thread -
20. I don't see the need for that: not how it has historically been done & few states are as vast & diverse as the whole country. But not a terrible idea for, say, California if the districts were regularly re-weighted by pop like the EC.https://twitter.com/jonathanchait/status/1124654444715626497 …
Show this thread -
21. Again, bear in mind - as noted in my column - that in practical effect, the Electoral College in nearly every case goes to the winner of popular *majorities*; it comes into play mainly where neither candidate gets one.https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/what-the-electoral-college-saves-us-from/ …
Show this thread -
22. You: but if we eliminated winner-take-all states, what might the candidate field look like? Me: Let's consider a real-world example:pic.twitter.com/Eoc8YPFLAS
Show this thread -
23. As for Trump's tax returns: the norm of candidates releasing their taxes is a valuable one, & both Trump & Romney did themselves political damage by delaying/flouting it. But it's not a job requirement. Until 1916, no presidential candidate even paid income taxes.
Show this thread -
24. I'll circle back another day to the Electoral College's historical roots, which tend to be oversimplified by the progressive narrative. This, from a liberal historian, is a useful partial corrective https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/04/opinion/the-electoral-college-slavery-myth.html … https://twitter.com/goldietaylor/status/1124740681858203649 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
25. My chief historical argument is that we've had the Electoral College in its current form since 1804. What other country's system for popular sovereignty has lasted that long? The world's longest continuous constitutional system is nothing to discard lightly.
Show this thread -
26. Also the Solid South from 1880 to 1944 is an important part of the history. I dealt in this thread with the example of 1888, when the Electoral College prevented the lockstep Jim Crow South from re-electing Grover Cleveland.https://twitter.com/baseballcrank/status/1114267402513072128 …
Show this thread -
27. Of course, the real scandal of the Solid South's role in Congress and presidential elections in those years is that Congress never enforced Section 2 of the 14th Amendment against them. But that's another day's story.
Show this thread -
28. All of that said, while the Electoral College resolves popular vote pluralities, we do face a realistic possibility in 2020 of facing the Electoral College's real weakness: a tie decided by the House. Which would likely go to Trump, depending how the 2020 House races go.pic.twitter.com/Pjr3Rqbm7g
Show this thread -
29. Sure. Lots of things would change about how elections are conducted, who runs, etc., and lots more rules would require changing. Which is why it's silly to critique the current rules with national popular vote figures https://twitter.com/JoeyTeevens/status/1124753308147691521 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
30. I guess some folks are still doing the thing where they call a plurality a majority? The main practical effect of the Electoral College is to resolve elections where there is no majority, like 2016.https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1124844646537015296 …
Show this thread -
31. We should not count votes differently by race. I'm not sure why anyone in this century would argue we should. https://twitter.com/MattBruenig/status/1124850086398312448 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
32. One thing I discovered in reading the responses is quite how many people on Twitter are unaware that Texas and Florida each have more people than New York.
Show this thread -
33. "Meaningless subgroups"? Massachusetts and Virginia have both existed more than twice as long as Germany or Italy. https://twitter.com/MattBruenig/status/1124851132684226560 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
34. Actually - and again, this is covered in my piece - very few developed countries choose a head of state by national popular plurality. The German system, like ours, has a federalist structure. https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/what-the-electoral-college-saves-us-from/ … https://twitter.com/AlexMLeo/status/1124849420711936000 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
35. Too many responses to get to everyone, but once you start adding runoffs, redrawing state boundaries, rewriting ballot & voting eligibility rules, you grasp what a radical reworking of the whole system is being proposed.https://twitter.com/yeselson/status/1124856977992179712 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.