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

To: Gaffer
True, but this explains why the GOP still controls the House of Representatives yet has a built-in disadvantage in a presidential election. There are many GOP House districts in states that haven't voted for a Republican presidential candidate in decades.

Even New Jersey, which is pretty much a Marxist state when it comes to presidential elections and Senate elections, has a House delegation that is split 6-6 between the two major parties.

25 posted on 03/06/2015 4:42:40 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("It doesn't work for me. I gotta have more cowbell!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child

So, by your arguments I’m guessing you are one who thinks the popular vote should decide then?

To me, the whole tenet of the Electoral College and the way the 538 votes are apportioned is to protect regional interests throughout the 50 States, even those states that have small populations. This reasoning protects the totality of this Union - its morals, desires and environment, IMO. If the presidential vote were truly popular vote, the perhaps twenty (or less) cities and counties would decide the presidency every time. I certainly do not want that.

The number of votes in the college is fixed just like in the HoR. For the proportional mix to change one district has to gain in number of residents while others have to lose. IOW, a population shift to other areas. I like this. It’s why Northeastern states are losing seats and southern ones gaining.


27 posted on 03/06/2015 4:51:50 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | 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