Had a feeling that question whoud get thatt type of plus one answer.! i'll have some more for you...big reason for this forum is 'learning.'

Do we really need the electoral system anymore. I see it's only use as keeping incumbents in power.

Appreciate that so it's the State doing the winner take all which in turn mean delegate or delegates from the winning party and in your hypothetical 49% a plurality end up controlling all 36 electoral college delegtate positions so that is where the votes of the 51% were flipped into 100% of the delegates.

I'm still going to call it Winner Steal All but now I can see how it works I can see why California started the move to change it to something more representative of the popular vote. which would make the hypothetical roughly 18 17 1 or there abouts.

To me it means 4,800,000 Democrats got their vote changed which to me is tampering. applying some ethics. I imagine roughly the same procedure was used within each party to apportion delegates for their primary and convention other than caucus states.

Very instructive and thanks for the assist.

So how do they get to winner take all if they don't take all the votes. For example 35% vote for A 30% for B and 25% for C and 10% for D. For a total of 100% of votes cast or one with a majority of 55% vs 45% or one with 50% vs 50%. That's popular has nothing to do with electoral . What is the true meaning of winner take all? Take all what? there is nothing to take. unless it's popular votes.

Electoral time Regardless of popular vote you vote for Candidate A, B, or C.; one says I'm the Demo electoral vote, the other says I'm the Reublican electoral vote and a third says i'm the independent and I'll vote for whomeever will do best for our state. Most of those people complete unknowns and no one knows how they get ont he ballot to begin with. assuming the party or partys select them .

Assume three electoral votes are the ALL. does it mean the plurality winner takes all three regardless and regardless the popular vote or the popular vote rules and only that one delegate who stood for that one party or thre are three delegates with three votes but all from the same party. or if a majority of popular votes occur for one candidate and there are fifteen electoral votes then are fifteen from one party sent regardless of the others? Must be some rhyme or reason to saying winner take all and to California moving to a percentage system.

i understand the original version and he 12th amendment version what I don't understand besides 'winner take all' is how the delegates are chosen and since the state law is meaningless at the federal level how they are controlled. Yes I am confused. I had simply assumed if 1000 voted and one got 501 or more they would get credit for 1000.

Your state does better than mind I only wanted to know how many voted libertarian and how many independent or any other party and was told those figures weren't kept.

Why do I suddenly feel like I've been rolled and hosed and fllim flammed by the former two party system all these decades?

More I thinki about it more I think to thell with Democrats and Republicans what we need is a good house cleaning.

I did get something on that from the State. Nothing is done at the local level the big change happens when the winner is announced statewide. any winner take all changes are done at that point. Then winner take all is applied. In effect it changes all ballots cast but affects the electoral delegates if anything. I checked more than one state they were doing the same

however the feds don't recognize winner take all and don't recognize any state control over the delegates and none have been charged or prosecuted for voting differently that I could find and it rarely mattered.

It's a muddy area looking at the 48 that do it that way but seems to have affected something in California where the Proposition or Question is to go back to delegates by percentage.

But like HE said the 12th was the start of it in an effort to account for the parties as other or something more than factions.

It's kind of like the choosing the VP which is often thought to be required to be the same party but only stipulates from another State with nothing about the Presidential choice being the sole and only decision maker but then that is a rule of the party's in their primaries, it is custormary but only the partys or factions have the power to decide how it is done.Looking at original wording, 12th and 25th.

The main issues are the control of who can get on the state ballot and why the parties don't pay for that cost to begin with, the winner take all issue and of course the money as free speech issue.

Incumbents are not going to change what keeps them in power no matter what the citizens think. That's what makes them Government Over Citizens in natue and therefore leftist not matter how slight. The exception is those who keep one foot firmly attached to the center which is the Constitution. Damn few of them left these days.

Good suggestion. The way they explained it in Duval County it was an automatic process at some point in the normal election proceedings.

To be fair on the Florida loss for Gore the votes were not stolen by Nader those were his fair and square . One almost might say they were inappropriately tampered with in advance. by, as you suggested by local officials.

Our voting booklet was spiral bound. which means when laid open flat one page did not match the other by a half line or more.

This confused many of our very much older people with vision problems. they would find one candidate and run their finger sort of across ot the other page where the choices were indicated and if not catching the difference go either up or down to the next set of X marks the spot squares. If you can envision that description.

This in some cases caused voting in the wrong block. due to the misalignment. the next time around that condition did n't occur. It IS entirely possible if not probable that caused a number of miscast ballots.

I heard nothing of it being considered in the count or the recount and as each count gave Bush a wider margin it MAY have been overlooked.

If it was not overlooked and accounted for that was at Supreme Couirt Level who determined Bush had the lead in both Popular and Electoral.

So we got tweedle dee instead of tweedle dum.

The plurality business only works at state level and if they stipulate. At federal level with the electoral college or SCOTUS or whomever involved The Presidential election requires a strict majority.

Otherwise your rendition is a as good as mine so I'll still say check with your local priceinct or county clerks to see how it word locally.

Why? That's the meaning of winner take all. Tabulate see who has the most they get the entire amount. Doesn't apply at federal level in the General Election and int Primary it's up to the Party's and each one is supposedly different though the usual cave to the left is occuring.

Establishment Republicans AKA Rinos and NeoCons had two wars going on internally. One was waged by the Rules Committee who were determined to follow the rules. They had received a significant number of complaints about Winner Take All as stealing votes by actually counting them in favor of one - other than - the voter had selected.

Remember the party and only the party controls it's own selection procedures In advance the Rules Committee stated they would honor all challenges for WTA and others as it did affect who were the proper delegates.

While Trump got more it was with the help of Winner Take All Without those extras it looked like Cruz was the actual winner based on the votes taken from Mario, Cruz and some establishment dude who were 2, 3, @4. ALL of their votes were more than Trumps. They also could not afford to alienate Trump voters the biggest plurality block and ignored their own rule at the RNC level.

Then comes the onslaught from the left followed by RNC is going to cave and drop Trum using - guess what? Winner take all.

The question now is ....at what point in the selection process does the control switch from State/Party to Federal.

At this point in time If they do that they destroy the Republican Party a chance the establishment is willing to take. If they leave Trump in place they will probably also be history.

So the next step was announcing the GOP Establishment is going to urge it's version of party faithful to vote for Libertarians. as the lesser of two left wing evils. Sort of what I had suggested until the Lib Candidates tipped their cards and showed their true side.

If they, the establishment are not allowed to change candidates under federal rules they would rather toss bones to the Libs than lose their entire party. instead they'll a good chunk of it but not to the libs. They shot their wad all powder no minie balls.

What you might see then is Trump having been nominated and accepted and intact as a legal candidate form and announce the Constitutional Republic Party or some other name. and still offer a coalition style deal. Whyipick that name. Biggest draw includeing from the 46% unregistered of the eligble voters pool.

Bingo a clear majority and perhaps a clear electoral majority while the other two founder.

That is one of many scenarios.

But at that point Trump ante's up as does KochBrothers and Waltons and money as free speech goes into fourth rubber with nasty chirps in fifth.

What about Hillary? The Sec Progs are dumping her on the one end for the Greens nd the Blue Dog types on the other end.

Everyone hates Hillary.

Ain't life grand!d It's not a race between candidates nor even two distinct political philosophies. It's a race between the general public and the Government Party

ha haha

Unfortunately, the Feds realized if they give states money, and states become dependent on said money, the Feds can get the state to do anything they want just by threatening to remove the state welfare they are used to.

No The Mickey 'Mouse Ballot would be rejected in it's entirety. The Mitt Romney write in would be given to whom ever had the most votes That came straight from the Duval County Elections Clerk in Jacksonville Florida as to how they handle the ballots when I asked the number of voters who had voted third party or write in. I was told they didn't keep that information as they were all given to winner take all except the Mickey Mouse - you both picked the same example - She also said it was state wide

The winner take all law so far uncontested doesn't require anything more than A who got the most votes and b. Total votes cast. Consequently I asked about the measures or propositions both referral and intiative if there was nothing in the presdential area listed or written in. She indicated those would be counted and not changed as it 'was local business.

Since then i always tell people check your own precinct and county.

The Twelfth Amendment changed it to explicitly make the Vice President of the same party as the President I find the VP must be from another State but nothing else.