Electoral College, salvaging it...

[Keith&Co.]

I worry that the greater part of our population is subject to mood swings and rumors. I like the idea of a buffer between media-zonked voters and putting reality-TV stars at the helm.
I also like there being SOME reason that the candidates have to pay attention to more than four states with population centers.

But these days, the internet allows us to form community along a lot more lines than mere proximity. Religion, ethnicity, interests, fetishes, philosophies, education level, education location, military service, thinking Rush Limbaugh is NOT a fat fucking sausage of hate, favorite sportball teams...

What if the electoral college represented various of these communities, on a rotating basis, selected in advance....

And we didn't tell the candidates who was who?

An electoral university meets and decides this year's divisions, based on one or another recognized community.
Ballots include places where voters take a stand inside or outside these communities. Several questions asked each year, only one of them the active choice for that election.

One year, the electors might choose professions. Make the medical field a voting 'district,' alongside construction, education, artisanal beard-oil vendors, cooks, service, gypsies, etc.
Another year, maybe the votes are collected together by favorite TV show. Or maybe if the shows aren't chosen as the basis of an elector, at least the question on the ballot would give some candidates pause, wondering if they spent enough time trying to woo the Game of Thrones voters...

I think mystery electoral divisions would vastly improve Candidates actually having to pony up plans for what they really want to do and how they expect to achieve it. Because you never know who you're targeting, you have to make your widest possible appeal.
And when someone asks a question at a rally in Bayonne, NJ, you have no idea if they represent Bayonne, or Hair Dressers, or Weather Channel fans, or people who put pineapple on pizza. Even they don't know.

 

[prideandfall]

I also like there being SOME reason that the candidates have to pay attention to more than four states with population centers.

why?

if those four states with population centers contain a notable majority of the voting public, there's a strong argument to be made that the focus should be on them.
giving an inordinate percentage of representation to a minority of the population "to be fair" is a senseless argument.

if it turns out that a a large enough percentage of the voting public are spread out across the rural states, i would think that would be sufficient motivation to pay attention to them.
if they're a ridiculous minority, they should be treated as such.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I have liked my modification. Instead of partisan slates of electors, we substitute them for goats... electoral goats. And the candidate who won the most votes in a state gets a couple bags of oats. In theory, the goats (same number as electoral votes) will go for the oats. Though occasional disaffected goats could go for the other candidate. After doing this for the 50 states, you count who got the most goats and they are President. The candidate, not the goats.

Maybe the goats could run Congress?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

This seems needlessly complex considering we already have workable solutions.

 

[Patooka]

I worry that the greater part of our population is subject to mood swings and rumors. I like the idea of a buffer between media-zonked voters and putting reality-TV stars at the helm.
I also like there being SOME reason that the candidates have to pay attention to more than four states with population centers.

As an outsider looking in, maybe just do most countries do. The political party with the most seats in the Lower House (Congress, House of Representatives what have you) has their leader appointed as Head of State. That minimizes the effect of celebrity politicians. Then have a fixed number of Senators per State so Iowa has the same amount of Senators as Alaska or Rhode Island. That way smaller states are just as important as bigger states when it comes to passing legislation or budgetary considerations. And maybe has only senate seats up for grabs during mid-terms. With those two changes an Electoral College becomes redundant.

I just can't understand why having a system where the head of state can be blindsided by government potentially every two years is worth keeping. Seriously, how does that benefit anyone?