Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 38
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    indianpolis - north side
    Posts
    9,461
    vCash
    1500

    GOP wants the change the Electoral College Rules [in states they lost]

    After back-to-back presidential losses, Republicans in key states want to change the rules to make it easier for them to win.

    From Wisconsin to Pennsylvania, GOP officials who control legislatures in states that supported President Barack Obama are considering changing state laws that give the winner of a state's popular vote all of its Electoral College votes, too. Instead, these officials want Electoral College votes to be divided proportionally, a move that could transform the way the country elects its president.

    Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus endorsed the idea this week, and other Republican leaders support it, too, suggesting that the effort may be gaining momentum. There are other signs that Republican state legislators, governors and veteran political strategists are seriously considering making the shift as the GOP looks to rebound from presidential candidate Mitt Romney's Electoral College shellacking and the demographic changes that threaten the party's long-term political prospects.

    "It's something that a lot of states that have been consistently blue that are fully controlled red ought to be looking at," Priebus told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, emphasizing that each state must decide for itself.

    Democrats are outraged at the potential change.

    Obama won the popular vote with 65.9 million votes, or 51.1 percent, to Romney's 60.9 million, or 47.2 percent, and won the Electoral College by a wide margin, 332-206 electoral votes. It's unclear whether he would have been re-elected under the new system, depending upon how many states adopted the change.

    While some Republican officials warn of a political backlash, GOP lawmakers in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are already lining up behind proposals that would allocate electoral votes by congressional district or something similar.

    Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder told The Associated Press on Tuesday that he "could go either way" on the change and doesn't plan to push it. But he said it's a reasonable issue to debate and that he prefers that leaders discuss it well before the next presidential election.

    "It could be done in a thoughtful (way) over the next couple years and people can have a thoughtful discussion," Snyder said.

    Republican leaders in the Michigan Statehouse have yet to decide whether to embrace the change there. But state Rep. Peter Lund, a Republican who introduced a bill to change the allocation system two years ago, said some Republicans might be more receptive to his bill this year following the election.

    "We never really pushed it before," he said, adding that the bill wasn't designed to help one party more than the other.

    Democrats aren't convinced. And they warned of political consequences for Republicans who back the shift - particularly those governors up for re-election in 2014, who include the governors of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, among others.

    "This is nothing more than election-rigging," said Michigan Democratic Chairman Mark Brewer.

    Each state has the authority to shape its own election law. And in at least seven states - Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida and North Carolina - Republicans control both chambers of the state legislature and the governor's office.

    Already, Maine and Nebraska have moved away from a winner-take-all system to one that allocates electoral votes based on congressional district.

    "This is a concept that's got a lot of possibility and a lot of potential," said Washington-based Republican strategist Phil Musser, acknowledging that the debate would "incite different levels of partisan acrimony." Musser also predicted that more pressing economic issues would likely take priority in most Republican-led statehouses.

    In Pennsylvania, Senate Republican leader Dominic Pileggi this week renewed his call for the Republican-controlled Legislature to revamp the way it awards electoral votes by using a method based on the popular vote that would have given Romney eight of the state's 20 votes.

    Democrats quickly criticized it as partisan scheme.

    "It is difficult to find the words to describe just how evil this plan is," said Pennsylvania state Sen. Daylin Leach, a Democrat. "It is an obscene scheme to cheat by rigging the elections."

    Gov. Tom Corbett, who supported a related proposal from Pileggi last year, had not seen the new plan and could not say whether he supports the new version, the Republican governor's spokesman Kevin Harley said.

    In Wisconsin, Republican Gov. Scott Walker has said that changing how electoral votes are allocated was an "interesting idea" but that it's not one of his priorities, nor has he decided whether he supports such a change.

    It's gotten a lukewarm reception in the Republican-controlled Legislature as well. No proposal has been introduced yet and no lawmaker has announced any plans to do so, but the state Assembly speaker, Robin Vos, first proposed the change back in 2007.

    "I am open to that idea," Vos said in December as lawmakers prepared for the start of their session. "But I would have to hear all the arguments."

    All 10 of the state's Electoral College votes went to Obama last fall under the current system. If they were awarded based on the new system, the votes would have been evenly split between Obama and Romney.

    Democratic Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett sent an email plea urging people to sign a petition against the change: "We can't sit silently by as they try to manipulate the democratic process for political advantage," Barrett wrote. "We can't let them attack the very democratic institutions and rights that others have sacrificed so much to gain - just because they don't believe they can win in a fair election fight."

    So far, Republicans have only advocated for the change in states that have supported Democrats in recent elections. The view is predictably different in states where the Republican nominee is a cinch to win.

    "The Electoral College has served the country quite well," said Louisiana GOP Chairman Roger Villere, who doubles as a national party vice chairman.

    He continued: "This is coming from states where it might be an advantage, but I'm worried about what it means down the road. This is a system that has worked. That doesn't mean we can't talk about changes, but we have to be very careful about any actions we might take."
    Link

    I can't decide if this is a clever move by the GOP or grasping at straws. It seems to be a short term fix that tarnishes the GOP's brand. Not sure that being the 'sore loser/cheater' party is the kind of thing that attracts new members. Funny thing is, I'm not outraged. Mystified maybe, impressed a little perhaps, unsurprised though. The GOP seems determined follow the pied piper of Rush Limbaugh what ever river it leads to.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    22,588
    vCash
    1500
    They are freaking out because once Texas goes blue, the G(impy)OP is ruined.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
    Posts
    15,023
    vCash
    1500
    I think the Electoral College should be changed! We hear time and time again that "every vote counts," but deep down, does it? If you are running for President, why would you waste any time campaigning in states that are only going to give you 3 or 4 electoral votes? It isn't like those votes are going to decide the election.

    Plus, a lot of states are pretty much decided before the election even takes place. Obama knew before the election began that he was getting at least 104 electoral votes because California, New York, and Illinois are traditionally Democratic states. Same with Romney- He knew he was getting most of the South and Midwest because they are all traditionally Republican.

    And the main reason I don't like the electoral college is because you could win like 12-15 states and you are at 270.
    PSD's Muhammad Wilkerson!!!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    32,377
    vCash
    1490
    There's a lot that needs to be changed in our voting process......this isn't one of those things.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    38,222
    vCash
    1500
    Amazing.
    Visit my Blog.



    "Glad the GOP finally came out with an Obamacare alternative. Can't wait to see their alternative to the Iraq War." - @LOLGOP

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Arvada, Colorado
    Posts
    18,054
    vCash
    653
    The GOP will rise again!!!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,948
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by nymetsrule View Post
    They are freaking out because once Texas goes blue, the G(impy)OP is ruined.
    LMAO, I'm in tears. Quit watching MSNBC, brah. It's not happening anytime soon.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by justinnum1
    Wade will be a lot better next season now that he got knee surgery. Hate on. - 7/31/2012

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    32,377
    vCash
    1490
    Quote Originally Posted by Longhornfan1234 View Post
    LMAO, I'm in tears. Quit watching MSNBC, brah. It's not happening anytime soon.
    38%+ of Texas is Latino and the Dems get 75% of their vote. "Soon" could a relative term here, but its on the way.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    3,284
    vCash
    1500
    So many factors will affect Texas. I can't see it going blue unless everything stays course for the next 10 years.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    774
    vCash
    1500
    If you're going to do this you need to do it for all 50 states.

    Quote Originally Posted by nymetsrule
    They are freaking out because once Texas goes blue, the G(impy)OP is ruined.
    This is why I found it so unbelievable when Texas wanted to leave the Union a couple months ago, and more unbelievable that Limbaugh and other extremists were SUPPORTING THAT! I thought to myself, really Limbaugh? You want to concede 2016 already? Lunacy.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    65,623
    vCash
    1500
    Instead of reforming their policies to appeal to the majorities of the citizens of those states they want to gerrymander even more based off of their previous gerrymandering…genius!
    Member of the Owlluminati!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    37,502
    vCash
    1750
    FSM Bless America.


  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    22,588
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Longhornfan1234 View Post
    LMAO, I'm in tears. Quit watching MSNBC, brah. It's not happening anytime soon.
    http://www.texastribune.org/2012/05/...inority-races/
    More than half of the 2011 Texas population, 55.2 percent, was of a race other than non-Hispanic white, according to demographic data released Thursday by the U.S. Census Bureau. That makes Texas one of five "minority-majority" states in the country. The release of new population estimates reveals that trend will continue to spread nationally, as 50.1 percent of babies younger than one in 2011 were a minority race.
    http://www.texastribune.org/2011/02/...-figures-show/
    The state's explosive growth during the past decade was fueled by a boom in its minority population, which accounted for 89 percent of the total increase in population, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Hispanics alone accounted for 65 percent of the state's growth over the last 10 years.
    The Dems get the majority of minority votes and women votes. I understand it might scare you, but read the facts before you get your jimmies rustled:

    http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48000.html
    Persons of Hispanic or Latino Origin, percent, 2011 (b) 38.1%
    Black persons, percent, 2011 (a) 12.2%
    Female persons, percent definition and source info Female persons, percent, 2011 50.4%
    Businesses owned by Hispanics:

    Hispanic-owned firms, percent, 2007 20.7%
    compared to the nation 8.3%


    http://www.businessinsider.com/texas...d-cruz-2012-11
    In Ryan Lizza's story in this week's The New Yorker, Texas' newly-elected Republican Senator Ted Cruz worries about the changing electoral landscape — and how it could get even less favorable for the GOP in coming years.

    Cruz provides what must be a truly terrifying thought for the Republican Party:

    “In not too many years, Texas could switch from being all Republican to all Democrat,” he said. “If that happens, no Republican will ever again win the White House. New York and California are for the foreseeable future unalterably Democrat. If Texas turns bright blue, the Electoral College math is simple. We won’t be talking about Ohio, we won’t be talking about Florida or Virginia, because it won’t matter. If Texas is bright blue, you can’t get to two-seventy electoral votes. The Republican Party would cease to exist. We would become like the Whig Party. Our kids and grandkids would study how this used to be a national political party. ‘They had Conventions, they nominated Presidential candidates. They don’t exist anymore.’”
    I can pull article after article and fact after fact. You'll be OK though, they don't bite. I promise.
    Last edited by nymetsrule; 01-19-2013 at 12:27 AM.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    43,277
    vCash
    7100
    I honestly thought states should divide their electoral votes by congressional districts. It would be a little more representative of the populace, I think. Of course, I think states should be able to assign their electoral votes the way they choose, and no system should be forced on all 50 states.
    On Cam Newton:

    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    So it's official.

    This jerk off is going to be the first QB taken in the first round (or maybe the first 5) in the modern era to throw less than 300 passes at DI level. and he might go #1 overall.


    hahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Nfl scouting is a joke.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    37,502
    vCash
    1750
    Quote Originally Posted by homestarunner93 View Post
    I honestly thought states should divide their electoral votes by congressional districts. It would be a little more representative of the populace, I think. Of course, I think states should be able to assign their electoral votes the way they choose, and no system should be forced on all 50 states.
    While I'm ok with that in principle, states like Illinois would **** that up dramatically. It's not inconceivable that (just because this is the state's politics) the candidate with the popular vote would receive far fewer electoral votes than another candidate.

    The electoral college is a joke, but reassigning electoral votes doesn't really solve its problem.

    To me, with how connected the US is because of the internet/media, there's no reason to not have a pure popular vote decide the national elections.


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •