|
Dusseldorf posted:So you're saying they would get proportionally little representation because there aren't very many people to represent from them? I'm not sure why this is being cast as a bad thing. I'm not casting it as a bad thing, I think the electoral college is archaic at best and we should get rid of it. I'm just stating facts that removing it would move the flyover states' influence back in line with their population. This is a good thing. The idea that the electoral college gives state interests power doesn't make any sense anyways because that's what the Senate was supposed to do. The electoral college literally only exists because anti-democratic aristocrats needed a political bone thrown to them at the time the constitution was written. Echo Chamber posted:The winner-take-all system doesn't give solid red Wyoming and Montana any relevance today, even though there are swing voters in all fifty states. A popular vote would give national candidates an incentive to at least chase a few undecided votes there. As I mentioned upthread the entire mountain west has about the same number of people as the states of illinois and wisconsin alone. There's no reason a presidential candidate would campaign in Wyoming because running up the score in a state with 40 times as many people is easier and more efficient. There simply aren't Democratic voters in these states in any significant numbers. So yes, it is an urban power grab, and this is a good thing, let's be clear. You don't have to construct some special narrative to disguise that fact, you can just be honest about it. icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Dec 25, 2013 |
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 05:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 21:37 |
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I'm not casting it as a bad thing, I think the electoral college is archaic at best and we should get rid of it. I'm just stating facts that removing it would move the flyover states' influence back in line with their population. This is a good thing. The idea that the electoral college gives state interests power doesn't make any sense anyways because that's what the Senate was supposed to do. The electoral college literally only exists because anti-democratic aristocrats needed a political bone thrown to them at the time the constitution was written. Well right now interest has nothing to do with population and everything to do with whether or not the state lines happens to be gerrymandered in a way that make it to poll close. That is the only thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 05:24
|
|
|
Tzen posted:Hahaha this is great, the results from non-Americans are interesting as hell. Edit: took it again and I'm closer to Spokane, which makes sense because that's where Alberta gets its American TV from.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 05:58
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:It's also likely unconstitutional as an unauthorized compact within the union between the states and as an infringement of the right to vote. It will not be enacted, and if it is, it will be struck down and its advocates will be called damned fools. I didn't know states were barred from forming compacts outside the Constitution. Could you explain the legal reasoning?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 06:28
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I didn't know states were barred from forming compacts outside the Constitution. Could you explain the legal reasoning? Yeah, aren't states allowed to assign their electors any way they please?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 06:30
|
|
|
Doesn't Nebraska or somewhere already assign its electors proportionally?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:01
|
|
|
Rincewind posted:Doesn't Nebraska or somewhere already assign its electors proportionally? Maine and Nebraska partially divide their votes on the district level. For example, in 2008 John McCain won 2 of Nebraska's electoral votes because he won the popular vote in Nebraska, and 2 more because he won 2 districts in Nebraska. Obama got 1 electoral vote because he won 1 district.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:08
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I didn't know states were barred from forming compacts outside the Constitution. Could you explain the legal reasoning? What if instead of actually forming an interstate pact, the states all just sort of "did" something at once, but as separate legislatures? Isn't that what that plan basically entails?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:08
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I didn't know states were barred from forming compacts outside the Constitution. Could you explain the legal reasoning? I don't know about compacts outside the Constitution, but Article II expressly grants state legislatures the authority to appoint electors however they want to. Rincewind posted:Doesn't Nebraska or somewhere already assign its electors proportionally? In Maine and Nebraska, the candidate who wins the state popular vote gets two electors, and the remaining electors are assigned to the winner of the popular vote within each congressional district. In the 2008 election, this resulted in Obama getting one Nebraskan electoral vote (from the 2nd district) while McCain received the other four; this is the only time the rule resulted in a split for either state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:11
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:What if instead of actually forming an interstate pact, the states all just sort of "did" something at once, but as separate legislatures? Isn't that what that plan basically entails? Thats a fine idea, as long as all the blue states do it first, as a sign of good faith. The red states will follow through before the next national election, pinky promise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:13
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:It's also likely unconstitutional as an unauthorized compact within the union between the states and as an infringement of the right to vote.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:20
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Thats a fine idea, as long as all the blue states do it first, as a sign of good faith. The red states will follow through before the next national election, pinky promise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 07:23
|
|
|
I think some people may be confused what the national popular vote compact is. It's not these states saying "we'll switch to dividing up the electoral votes based on the proportion of the state the candidate wins", it is, "we will give our electoral votes to the candidate that wins the national popular vote." So, if states equivalent to 270+ electoral votes sign on to this, then it doesn't matter if you get the other states, it's over. No matter how their own state goes, they will give their electoral votes to the candidate that wins nationally. And since they control the majority of the electoral votes, that's sufficient to implement the compact.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 08:22
|
|
|
Which still leaves non-signatory states as FPTP, right? And it's generally purple states (with the exceptions of NY and CA) that have signed? e:^^^ oh. Well, never mind, then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 08:23
|
|
|
Ogantai posted:The Constitution doesn't say anything about a "right to vote". If a state wanted to it could do away with voting entirely and choose its legislators by having candidates run a sack race, or a gameshow, or just by pulling names out of a hat (and IMHO that be a much better system). The 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments all explicitly mention a "right to vote", which cannot be abridged on the grounds established in those amendments. These amendments don't explicitly guarantee the right to vote, but they clearly presume that such a right exists. Second, numerous Supreme Court cases recognize the right to vote as a "fundamental right," rooted in history, tradition, the opinions and intent of the Framers of the Constitution, and implicit in our system of ordered liberty. Reynolds v Sims is one prominent example, as is (haha) Bush v Gore. The right to vote is as firmly established as any other right in our legal system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 08:41
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I didn't know states were barred from forming compacts outside the Constitution. Could you explain the legal reasoning? They're not barred, they just need authorization from the Federal government. The Great Lakes Compact is a good example of this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 12:22
|
|
|
Can't seem to get a copy of my map but according to the NY times my mild Yorkshire accent sounds like I'm from Yonkers,Newark or Jersey. At least it's the north east anyway which is close enough. Apparently our shared love of mischief night brings us together.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
Ferrosol posted:Can't seem to get a copy of my map but according to the NY times my mild Yorkshire accent sounds like I'm from Yonkers,Newark or Jersey. At least it's the north east anyway which is close enough. Apparently our shared love of mischief night brings us together. Well my Lancaster accent showed up as LA San Fran and for some reason Honolulu
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
 I'm a West of Scotland californian apparently.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
I'm Danish and not sure what to make of this: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
It could mean that non-english speakers are learning English through Hollywood movies?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
Disco Infiva posted:It could mean that non-english speakers are learning English through Hollywood movies? Swede here. I was taught to learn the British English terms in school. I dunno, might account for the heavy emphasis on the NY area some of us are getting. But you're probably right too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
Disco Infiva posted:It could mean that non-english speakers are learning English through Hollywood movies? Most of the Romanians I met while living there taught themselves English through TV, most of it American. There was a cute girl who had a perfect American accent, she'd never been there before and said she learned through Cartoon Network. I never saw her again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
Disco Infiva posted:It could mean that non-english speakers are learning English through Hollywood movies? yeah but in that case why did me and that Scottish guy get California when we more than likely know English normally
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
Rumda posted:yeah but in that case why did me and that Scottish guy get California when we more than likely know English normally Because people with some kind of relation to California are likely disproportionately represented in America media or English language media overall. Same with New York City. This quiz also measures word choice, not accent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
Darth Various posted:Swede here. I was taught to learn the British English terms in school. I dunno, might account for the heavy emphasis on the NY area some of us are getting. I'm Finnish, and the "hot" areas for me were New York, Massachusetts, much of the south and California, while Northern Texas was distinctly "cold". Might be a mix of similarity to British English (I've lived in Britain) and total lack of exposure to some distinct dialect things in hicksvilles far away from the coasts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
GreenCard78 posted:Because people with some kind of relation to California are likely disproportionately represented in America media or English language media overall. Same with New York City. Na its both
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:I'm Finnish, and the "hot" areas for me were New York, Massachusetts, much of the south and California, while Northern Texas was distinctly "cold". Might be a mix of similarity to British English (I've lived in Britain) and total lack of exposure to some distinct dialect things in hicksvilles far away from the coasts. Depending what part of Texas that's a pretty Czech region so there may be a reason for that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:I'm Finnish, and the "hot" areas for me were New York, Massachusetts, much of the south and California, while Northern Texas was distinctly "cold". Might be a mix of similarity to British English (I've lived in Britain) and total lack of exposure to some distinct dialect things in hicksvilles far away from the coasts. I'm French and the hot areas were around the Carolinas.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 21:38
|
|
|
Rumda posted:yeah but in that case why did me and that Scottish guy get California when we more than likely know English normally I'm Scots and I somehow managed to avoid California and get Hawaii, Boston and Oklahoma! I can remember the Boston thing was for the saying Mary, merry and marry differently; but I can't remember how I managed the other two... I was close with a few exchange students from the Southern states last year, so that may explain bits of it, but the others I really don't know about... The west coast may be a mixture of the Hollywood films thing and the drive-in booze shop question, because they don't exist much outside of bits of America; and New England will probably get exaggerated because of the above very localised question. The test isn't designed for foreigners, and when half the questions are "other" or an answer that gets you all blue; then you reduce the range of questions that influence what areas you get...
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 21:50
|
|
|
For British people whose dialect appears more similar to Americans in New England or on the East Coast, it may be due to the exchange of sounds that spread through sea trade. I think Americans in major ports like Baltimore, New York, Savanna, and Boston adopted traits like silent Rs from Posh English accents, which were perceived as prestigious. Don't remember where I read that though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
IceAgeComing posted:The west coast may be a mixture of the Hollywood films thing and the drive-in booze shop question, because they don't exist much outside of bits of America; and New England will probably get exaggerated because of the above very localised question.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
Squalid posted:For British people whose dialect appears more similar to Americans in New England or on the East Coast, it may be due to the exchange of sounds that spread through sea trade. I think Americans in major ports like Baltimore, New York, Savanna, and Boston adopted traits like silent Rs from Posh English accents, which were perceived as prestigious. Don't remember where I read that though. My phonetics teacher said something to that effect.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 22:15
|
|
|
Yeah I speak something that approximates British English to the extent that non-Brits often think I'm from the UK, and the hottest areas were around the far north of New England for me as well. Makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 22:20
|
|
|
I remember doing a much more involved version of this same test a few months ago (with hundreds of questions) but here's the result from the 25-question one for someone from the Scottish islands. The entire map went blue at multiple points throughout the test, and jumped around the south and even the rural west at times so 'most similar' here means like... two similarities.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 22:44
|
|
|
The full version is here but it's closed for the meantime. I suspect the short version isn't long enough to make solid conclusions from, unless it uses some sort of algorithm that figures out which question is most discriminating given the previous answers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 22:54
|
|
|
I'm Croatian and I got NY, Yonkers and Jersey. It's the media, I guess, although I did spend several summers on the East Coast as a kid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 00:11
|
|
|
Ponsonby Britt posted:The 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments all explicitly mention a "right to vote", which cannot be abridged on the grounds established in those amendments. These amendments don't explicitly guarantee the right to vote, but they clearly presume that such a right exists. Second, numerous Supreme Court cases recognize the right to vote as a "fundamental right," rooted in history, tradition, the opinions and intent of the Framers of the Constitution, and implicit in our system of ordered liberty. Reynolds v Sims is one prominent example, as is (haha) Bush v Gore. The right to vote is as firmly established as any other right in our legal system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
I really want to see a british version of the dialect map just so me and other americans can go "wow golly gee I sound like I'm from Bristol, Norwich, and Manchester!!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 21:37 |
|
|
Squalid posted:For British people whose dialect appears more similar to Americans in New England or on the East Coast, it may be due to the exchange of sounds that spread through sea trade. I think Americans in major ports like Baltimore, New York, Savanna, and Boston adopted traits like silent Rs from Posh English accents, which were perceived as prestigious. Don't remember where I read that though. Baltimore sure as gently caress does not elide its Rs. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 04:40
|
|