Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Replies: 27   Last Post: Mar 30, 2007 6:07 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Mike Oliver

Posts: 1,518
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Posted: Nov 20, 2000 6:53 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply



Keith Ramsay wrote:

> I don't think you can get very far in trying to describe who is
> "favored" by a system without considering some notion of what
> constitutes a fair, equitable such distribution of power, not that
> this is really the place to do it.


I meant "favored" relative to electing the president on a plurality
of the popular vote.

> |Most people who look at the issue superficially note that even the
> |least populous state gets three electors, and conclude (quite wrongly)
> |that the system gives disproportionate power to the small states
> |because their ratio of electoral votes to population is higher.
>
> Note that various attempts to eliminate the electoral college have
> been foiled in the U.S. senate, where those small states get even
> more disproportionate representations. I don't think these senators
> are just being dumb; I think they have a different issue in mind. They
> want a system that results in outcomes they prefer (basically).


Perhaps. I don't think it's a good long-term strategy, though.
The states that have the unit rule and vote predictably, can be
and are essentially ignored by the candidates. Therefore, if
Wyoming is in G.W.B's pocket from the moment he's nominated, he
has no incentive to address Wyomingan concerns, even ideologically.

> Giving Wyoming 5 times the electoral college vote as proportional to
> its size moves the point of balance point (as far as presidential
> politics goes) to the right. It's no coincidence that we tend to get
> presidents and Senates to the right of Houses of Representatives.


The argument wrt presidents would be more convincing if there'd been
a candidate *between* Tilden and Gore who won the popular vote and
didn't become president. As for the Senate, it's not winner-take-all
in a state, so my argument doesn't apply there.

> |In fact, it's easy to see that other things being equal (the "other
> |things" are e.g. the closeness of the race in your state and the
> |proportion of undecideds), your chance of deciding the election
> |is proportional to 1/sqrt(n) where n is the number of voters.
> |Since the number of electoral votes is (roughly) proportional to n,
> |it follows that your power is approximately proportional to sqrt(n).
> |That is, the system gives disproportionate power to voters in *large*
> |states.
>
> But the proportionality to 1/sqrt(n) (for this measure of power) is
> only when the race *is* balanced. (Ha, and you thought there wasn't
> going to be any math here.) Suppose all voters have .51 probability
> for voting in favor of a measure. The distribution of vote totals is
> roughly Gaussian with standard of deviation proportional to sqrt(n),
> but falling all the way to a tie is proportional to 0.01*sqrt(n)
> standard deviations from the mean. On a Gaussian, that decreases the
> density much more rapidly than the 1/sqrt(n) you get from the curve
> spreading out; it's going down with population like an exponential
> divided by sqrt(n).


Yeah, you've got me here. It doesn't invalidate the argument entirely,
but it does definitely restrict its applicability.






Date Subject Author
11/10/00
Read Math and the electoral college's virtue
chip_eastham@my-deja.com
11/10/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Dan Goodman
11/11/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Marc Fleury
11/12/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Jim Dars
11/14/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
denis-feldmann
11/14/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Dan Goodman
11/20/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Chip Eastham
11/20/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Herman Rubin
11/20/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Dan Goodman
11/22/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Herman Rubin
11/22/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Dan Goodman
11/12/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Jon and Mary Frances Miller
11/12/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Gerry Myerson
11/12/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Ronald Bruck
11/12/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Steve Lord
11/13/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Barry Schwarz
11/13/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Alan Morgan
11/11/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
David C. Ullrich
11/13/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Mike Oliver
11/16/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Robert Harrison
11/17/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Mike Oliver
11/20/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Keith Ramsay
11/20/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Mike Oliver
11/20/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
David C. Ullrich
11/17/00
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
useless_bum@my-deja.com
11/28/00
Read The Powerless Voter
Danny Purvis
11/28/00
Read Re: The Powerless Voter
LOUIS RAYMOND GIELE
3/30/07
Read Re: Math and the electoral college's virtue
Ross Finlayson

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.