b*z
发帖数: 48 | 1 people always say that every single vote counts in presidential election.
this is may be a good motivation to get voters come out and vote. in reality,
i think it is not necessarily true. the recounting in florida is a case in
point.
florida state law says if the difference of votes received between two leading
candidates is within .5% of the total votes, an automatic recount is required.
i think the line of .5% needs more consideration and probably another line
should be drewn.
all quantitative | m*****i
发帖数: 1205 | 2
[恕删]
我感觉这个方法可能会有实行上的问题. 如果票数差别小于某标准, 即上文所提到的
"satistically equal", 便平分electoral votes的话, 实际上这已经属于
按照得票比例分摊选举人票的范畴. 既然如此, 当两人(假设主要竞争者只有两人)
得票数不"satistically equal"时, 赢者全拿, 便显得不合理了, 这便会导致对现在
产生选举人票方法的大幅更动. 但若想在这上面做改动, 便并非一州可以做出的.
除非所有各州皆改变其选举人票产生方法, 否则很难会有哪一州单独做此动作 - 其它
各州都是赢者囊括所有选举人票, 单独做出改变, 按比例分割选举人票的州在
大选举团中的影响将会降低.
所以我的想法是, 如果票数差别过小, 那么现在重新点票固然是解决
方法之一, 也可以考虑直接由州议会决定选举人票, 总的原则就是不需触动现行的
选举人票赢者全拿的规则 - 决定不了胜者时, 由最接近直选的方式, 议会决定好了.
【在 b*z 的大作中提到】
: people always say that every single vote counts in presidential election.
: this is may be a good motivation to get voters come out and vote. in reality,
: i think it is not necessarily true. the recounting in florida is a case in
: point.
: florida state law says if the difference of votes received between two leading
: candidates is within .5% of the total votes, an automatic recount is required.
: i think the line of .5% needs more consideration and probably another line
: should be drewn.
: all quantitative
|
|
