2024 Elections Thread

[Sun_Worshiper]

It was the 3/5 clause gave the slave states more representation than "one free man, one vote" but less representation than "free men's vote counts as much as free men + slaves". Once that is in place the electoral college adds nothing to the power of slave states.

The electoral college was intended to keep the presidential election away from the people and involve the States. The justified fear was mob rule and loss of State infuence. Pity about the 17th Amendment. We have a republic, if we can keep it.

But the contemporary point remains: The variation of interests across States is larger than the variation of interests within States. Hence,the electoral College requires a broader coalition of interest than a popular, even if the popular vote is larger.

Put differently, I don't have to be ruled by California if I don't live there.

Say what? Of course it gave extra power to slave states. They got to extra vote share in the EC based on having a population of slaves that were not allowed to vote.

It is also true, as you say, that the EC reflected concerns about direct democracy, but the point about slavery is crucial to understanding how we got the EC.

[Sun_Worshiper]

^^^ This is not to say whether we should or should not still have the EC, but it is important to understanding where it came from - something a lot of folks would rather ignore or mischaracterize.

Should modern America have an EC? Probably not. The Senate gives rural states sufficient opportunity to check the majority. The idea that voters in some states should have more say in the presidential election than voters in others is ridiculous. But it isn't going anywhere, so the debate is a purely hypothetical exercise.

[dismalist]

Of course it [the Electoral College] gave extra power to slave states.

Q: [Psychiatrist friend to economist in an elevator] How's your wife?

A: [Economist] Compared to what?

[Sun_Worshiper]

Of course it [the Electoral College] gave extra power to slave states.

Q: [Psychiatrist friend to economist in an elevator] How's your wife?

A: [Economist] Compared to what?

Must be one of those heterodox economists that never took a math course.

But seriously, I can see that you know that the 3/5 compromise existed, that it was crucial to getting slave states to agree at the Constitutional Convention, and that it gave slave states more electors than they would have had otherwise, even though slaves had no voting rights and received no political representation. So I don't know why you are pretending that this was not a crucial piece of the EC's formation.

[dismalist]

I'm not pretending. I could get snarky about anyone not knowing the distinction between the average and the margin, but I won't. Please don't get personal.

The point is that given the 3/5 clause, the Electoral College adds nothing to the influence of the slave states.

[Sun_Worshiper]

This is simple addition. More electors in slave states based on their slave population. Slave states had more house members and, in turn, more electors as a result of this arrangement then they would have had otherwise.

[nebo113]

Lichtman predicting a Harris win.  Am still crossing my fingers.

[Ruralguy]

Harris's lead is thin. If you are a fan of Harris, it certainly looks good, both as compared to Biden, and what Harris had herself several weeks ago. But looking objectively, there is no lead in PA and a very thin one (less than 1 percent and within the margin of error) in Georgia. I don't think there is a path to 270 without either of those.

Also not much "thicker" of a lead in a number of battlegrounds. The momentum is there, but I would say she isn't there yet. That is to say, I wouldn't feel comfortable predicted a win for her (or for Trump) at this stage.

I get Lichtman's "keys" to the election, and how having a clear majority of those (incumbency, lack of internal challenge, etc.) can successfully predict the general election outcome most of the time, but I don't see it in the ground data at the moment. Lichtman might very well be right. But I don't see it...yet.

[RatGuy]

Anecdotally, here in my deeply red area I'm seeing a lot more Harris signs and stickers than I did Biden or Clinton. Also, the pro-Trump messaging I'm hearing is "we know he's a bad human but at least he ain't a commie," which to me is a lot less rhetorically effective than some of the strategies from previous cycles.

[dismalist]

Here is a very thorough analysis of where the polling stands:

Brookings on Polling

There are several points to be made, but one is that the polls are biased against Trump, but no one knows by how much.

[Ruralguy]

I think the primary conclusion relevant to this election is that they don't think it's possible to really "call" the election based on polling, looking at two different aggregates for the national polling and each battleground (and comparing to previous two elections and the general offsets seen between the polls and the actual results).

I think there are interesting micro-level results, such as that Pennsylvania seems to have the smallest polling miss of the battlegrounds. Also, the national misses can be particularly large.

[clean]

Im not going to say that I am neutral.  I have distinct preferences.

At least one side of the debate is just lying.

Inflation is the highest ever.... (anyone remember the late 70s?)
Immigrants are eating pets!
Prisons and mental institutions are being emptied to send people to the US
Democrats support killing babies after they are born/ Democrats support abortion up to the 9th month/... 
and many more.

And he proudly took a bullet to the head to save us all.

I can only hope that his anger turns off those that may be in the middle and undecided, ( or maybe just leaning the MAGA way).

[Parasaurolophus]

Harris did well overall, which was no real surprise. What is surprising is that she still has no good answer about her policy flips. Surely someone can feed her a good line already. Geeze.

The remark about having to sit next to strangers on a plane was... Well, it didn't quite convey what she intended. Talking about fracking and climate change in the same breath is also not a great idea. Her brief remarks on Gaza were extremely disappointing, but not unexpected given what she's been saying. I'm particularly unimpressed with her basically saying outright that the indiscriminate killing of civilians is acceptable, save that the number looks a leetle too high right now. If she wins and follows through on doing nothing, history will not look kindly on Democrats.


As for Trump... Of course it was a torrent of lies, but I actually think he acquitted himself well, in his own way. He conveyed the impression that he has it together, which is the kind of reassurance Republicans want and need. Yes, he's happy spouting whatever 4chan cooks up, but I think that for an awful lot of his actual and potential voters, they either already believe some version of it or it just doesn't matter because some other pet issue (tax cuts, probably, and self-enrichment for the rich ones) looms larger. For those people, it doesn't matter whether he thinks lizard people kill newborns in delivery rooms, so long as he looks able and willing to service their core issue. And he looked to me like he'd be up to that task.

There's a kind of Democrat fantasy out there that he's demented and can't cope. And while it certainly seems true that he's not as nimble as he was eight years ago (and that he's a moron, and that he likes to indulge his audience of conspiracists), he just doesn't present as the dementia candidate. Unlike his erstwhile opponent. Who, happily, has been replaced by an infinitely better candidate, despite her faults.

[spork]

As a childless cat lady, I endorse Taylor Swift endorsing a candidate. The Oprahfication of American politics must continue!

I did not watch the "debate." I was directing a cat hostage rescue operation.

[nebo113]

As for Trump... Of course it was a torrent of lies, but I actually think he acquitted himself well, in his own way. He conveyed the impression that he has it together, which is the kind of reassurance Republicans want and need.

Is this a joke?