Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: zaker99

This is STUPID..

The entire purpose of the electoral college is to ensure large states do not overwhelm smaller states.. in the winner take all model, small states have overrepresentative power.. if you play this game, you basically are removing the states completely from the entire thing and just going with the popular vote which was not what the founders intended.

I live in PA, and I’m a Republican but I would not support such a short sighted crap action such as this.


20 posted on 11/09/2012 8:19:46 AM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: HamiltonJay

How is allocating by congressional district, for example, unfair? Each state would still have the same number of electoral votes. This is legal and constitutional, and is not the same as going with the popular vote.


21 posted on 11/09/2012 8:35:33 AM PST by zaker99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: HamiltonJay

Changing the allocation of votes is not the same as the popular vote. It would prevent the big cities from over running the rural parts of the country. The electoral votes are based on congressional districts anyway, therefore candidates would have to campaign to win a majority of the congressional districts, thus making every citizen’s vote worth more. I.E. Romeny won 13 of 18 congressional districts in PA, but all those votes were “overridden” by Philadelphia. The founding fathers attempt to not let large states run the show has not succeeded since the electoral votes are based on population, so at the end of the day, the big states dominate with the most electoral votes. This is the best, (nothing is perfect), but the BEST way to acheive the goals of not only the founders but all Americans today. It not a poplular vote where the candidates just sit in the big cities and run up the vote and its not the stupid system now that provides for the institutionalized fraud that happens every election. How nice would it be for the candidates to travel to virtually every state to compete for individual districts? So many more people would get to meet the candidates and more would be involved knowing that their vote would make a difference. I too am a PA resident so I enjoy the attention we get every 4 years, but my friends in KY and SC always have to watch from a distance, other than throwing some $ for ads they will never see, they don’t get to participate. What could be more American than an election where the candidates travel all over the country and have to appeal to Americans of all stripes to win instead of just certain areas of a few states?

And lastly, I can tell you as a former state committee person, that the legislation was on the table to change our allocation method, (which would have given R 13 more votes, thus replacing the need for VA)but our RINO state chairman twisted enough arms in the legislature to shoot it down because he didn’t want to “diminish” his influence in helping R win the election for PA. Like most political party people they actually beleive they make the difference in winning elections.


38 posted on 11/09/2012 10:18:19 AM PST by pghbjugop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson