3 ms·

I think arguably the electoral process makes fraud harder. If the goal was to tip the scales, in a popular vote you could basically do this anywhere across the

by anonu 6y ago

I think arguably the electoral process makes fraud harder. If the goal was to tip the scales, in a popular vote you could basically do this anywhere across the country. But in an EV system, you would need to pick and choose 1 or probably more places (vulnerabilities) to attack to tilt things in your favor

unityByFreedom 6y ago
Great point. I don't know why some states all of the sudden want to trust the others' voting systems. One state could choose to go electronic with no paper trail, for example, and we all know that's a bad idea. Voter fraud does not happen on any sort of wide scale. Election fraud could.
- metiscus 6y ago
  There are a few reasons I've heard. The one I hear most frequently is that the electoral college is outdated and should be replaced on that basis alone. The second one is that it is undemocratic and allows disproportionate representation to small state voters. The third one that I believe underlies the two previous is that when the popular vote has been contradicted by the electoral college, it typically has elected someone from the "wrong party" depending on who you ask. Looking at the states in the popular vote compact there is some truth to that.
- js2 6y ago
  One of many bills introduced to address those concerns: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/1540/text https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/154...
  - unityByFreedom 6y ago
    Thank you for informing me about that. Still, the main problem with our elections IMO is the ease with which misinformation spreads online via social media. Dumping the EC does nothing to address that and it feels like a scapegoat. Like how we were diverted from caring about net neutrality and Comcast etc. to caring about FAANG monopolies.
js2 6y ago
I think arguably the electoral process makes fraud easier. If the goal was to tip the scales, in an electoral vote, the election is very close in the tipping point state, which is usually predictable ahead of the election. In 2016, you'd only have had to add 45K votes in PA. Conversely, if the vote were national, you'd have had to add 3M votes.
- okaram 6y ago
  Maybe ... actually in 2016 you'd have needed PA,MI,WI (and actually know with certainty those would have been the tipping point states, for which MI,WI at least weren't supposed to be that close, if I remember correctly)
  - js2 6y ago
    There’s only a single tipping point state. It’s the one that puts you over 270 EV. In 2016, it was PA. I agree knowing which swing state is going to be the tipping point state can be harder to predict, but even if you have to spread your bet, it’s still fewer votes to sway than the popular vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping-point_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping-point_state Aside: the EC came close to being abolished in 1970. https://www.history.com/news/electoral-college-nearly-abolished-thurmond https://www.history.com/news/electoral-college-nearly-abolis...

by anonu 6y ago

unityByFreedom 6y ago

Great point. I don't know why some states all of the sudden want to trust the others' voting systems. One state could choose to go electronic with no paper trail, for example, and we all know that's a bad idea. Voter fraud does not happen on any sort of wide scale. Election fraud could.

metiscus 6y ago
There are a few reasons I've heard. The one I hear most frequently is that the electoral college is outdated and should be replaced on that basis alone. The second one is that it is undemocratic and allows disproportionate representation to small state voters. The third one that I believe underlies the two previous is that when the popular vote has been contradicted by the electoral college, it typically has elected someone from the "wrong party" depending on who you ask. Looking at the states in the popular vote compact there is some truth to that.
js2 6y ago
One of many bills introduced to address those concerns: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/1540/text https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/154...
- unityByFreedom 6y ago
  Thank you for informing me about that. Still, the main problem with our elections IMO is the ease with which misinformation spreads online via social media. Dumping the EC does nothing to address that and it feels like a scapegoat. Like how we were diverted from caring about net neutrality and Comcast etc. to caring about FAANG monopolies.

js2 6y ago

I think arguably the electoral process makes fraud easier. If the goal was to tip the scales, in an electoral vote, the election is very close in the tipping point state, which is usually predictable ahead of the election. In 2016, you'd only have had to add 45K votes in PA. Conversely, if the vote were national, you'd have had to add 3M votes.

okaram 6y ago
Maybe ... actually in 2016 you'd have needed PA,MI,WI (and actually know with certainty those would have been the tipping point states, for which MI,WI at least weren't supposed to be that close, if I remember correctly)
- js2 6y ago
  There’s only a single tipping point state. It’s the one that puts you over 270 EV. In 2016, it was PA. I agree knowing which swing state is going to be the tipping point state can be harder to predict, but even if you have to spread your bet, it’s still fewer votes to sway than the popular vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping-point_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping-point_state Aside: the EC came close to being abolished in 1970. https://www.history.com/news/electoral-college-nearly-abolished-thurmond https://www.history.com/news/electoral-college-nearly-abolis...