Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 6th Nov 2012 11:37 UTC
In the News "This election won't hinge on technology issues. Just look at prevailing discussions this year at the national level: major candidates have sparred over Iran's nuclear ambitions, the role of government, inane comments on the female body, and to nobody's surprise, the economy. Despite that fact, many decisions will be taken up by the next US president and those in Congress that will affect the world of tech, and by consequence, the real lives of citizens and human beings around the world - from alternative energy, to the use of killer drones, the regulation of wireless spectrum, and policies that aim to control content on the internet. Your chance to vote is just around the corner. Here's what's at stake in tech this election, and how the major candidates could influence our future." Happy voting, American readers. Whatever you pick, please take at least a few minutes to consider that the implications of your choice do not end at the US border.
Permalink for comment 541176
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Comment by shmerl
by kenji on Tue 6th Nov 2012 20:29 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by shmerl"
Member since:

The side effect of this, is that candidates disregard non swing states as not deserving attention. It's not an acceptable situation. Removing this layered system will make it an even democratic process. There is simply no benefit in keeping this awkward and indirect process in use.

My point was that in strong left or right leaning States the candidates would be either preaching to the choir or making a futile attempt to gain a majority that they will never achieve. What's the point of doing that when it will not affect the outcome, even if the vote was entirely based and popular votes and the Electoral College was dissolved?

A win is a win and a majority is a majority, electoral college or not.

Another side effect, if you can call it that, is that the swing States get more small town attention. If candidates went to all States, they would stay mostly in large cities and ignore the less populated areas (and even States that are 'too small' to matter entirely). That puts the power in the hands of the 'balanced' or centrist population and ignores the strongly partisan areas, which I think helps the political landscape.

I also appreciate that the candidates and running mates have made several visits to my small city, which would be ignored otherwise.

Reply Parent Score: 2