Posted on 03/31/2015 8:20:37 AM PDT by Din Maker
O.K., this is not a new idea being put forth. I just want to expand on it because I think it could very well make a difference in the Electoral College vote count in 2016.
Before too much more time passes, all of the GOP controlled State Legislatures, in States where the DemocRATS get all of the EVs because of inner city voters and voter fraud, need to do the following, which is Constitutionally OK to do:
Pass legislation dividing up the State's EVs up by Congressional Districts in States that have given all their EVs to the Dems for the last four elections like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, New York, Michigan, and Illinois. Just those five states would neuter the EV control by the urban liberal bastions of Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Madison, NYC, Detroit, and Chicago and put a Republican (hopefully a Conservative Republican) in the White House.
If FReepers in these States could get just one State Rep. and one State Senator to introduce the bill, that's all it would take. This is not intended for FReepers to act in States like Texas or OK. States that are dyed-in-the-wool Red, need to stay just as they are. But, any State that goes Dem in Presidential Elections but has a GOP controlled State Legislature, is fair game.
Hey, it's thought. This is bare-knuckle, grass-roots activism.
No pubbies.
Yes conservatives.
Period
it can not just be someone with an R by their name..
It MUST be a conservative who understands, supports and defends the constitution.
Cruz or lose...
There was a movement to do this after the 2010 elections and it had Obama panicking. But it was then thwarted (with the help of RINO’S).
I’d like to see this happen but I’m not holding my breath.
A lot has changed in the past 4 years. More States are now controlled by the GOP and, thanks to the Obamacare catastrophe, that people started realizing this year when they filed their Income Tax Return, things are different now.
I think that is a GREAT idea!
I railed on my state congress critters for the past 4 years {in PA where we had a pubbie house, senate and gov to get this legislation done}.
We had the votes in the house but the senate is full of eastern rinos and the ex-gov was a pussy.
The new communist gov is a pain in the ass but corbett was weak and he didn't do much to help the conservative cause.
Well, I appreciate your efforts.
In 2012, if the Republicans had shifted all the purple states to the district method where they controlled both houses of the state legislature and had a Republican Governor, Mitt Romney would have been elected President. (Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Virginia.)
Things are a bit different this year. We no longer have the Governor in Pennsylvania or Virginia. Nevertheless, the idea is a good one for at Michigan. I’m not sure it’s a good idea for any of the others if we can’t also make the shift in Pennsylvania and Virginia.
Eventually, we should try to get a Constitutional Amendment to require all the Electors to be chosen by the district method. The reason isn’t the tactical advantage in any particular election (because the main parties will adjust themselves to the new reality). Here are the two main reasons:
(1) The Congress and the President have become too badly separated from each other. We want checks and balances. But, with extreme polarization, there’s no give-and-take, and checks and balances stops working.
(2) We want to minimize the role of fraud in tipping the balance in big states like Ohio and Pennsylvania.
As part of this Constitutional Amendment, the President and Vice President should be elected, as a slate, by a joint session of Congress with each Senator and Representative having one vote (i.e., parallel to the Electoral College) from among the five slates receiving the most electoral votes, and the votes in the Electoral College should be made automatic (no flesh and blood “Electors”).
Terrible idea ... unless one is pushing for armed revolution and the and of the U.S. as we know it. We are not a Conservative Nation nor are we a Liberal one. This would create open hostility and chaos. Remember, we are not a majority and neither are the Libtards.
Personally, I think the Electoral College should be abolished for any number of reasons.
If you abolish the electoral college, you abolish federalism. The 10 biggest cities would rule every branch of govt in perpetuity. Look long and hard at the populations of the 10 biggest cities and how they vote, and what their elected leaders are like. (Cities such as Chicago, New York, Los Angeles.)
Extremely bad idea. If we abolish the EC and go with a down the line popular vote then Presidents will be chosen by NYC, LA,Chicago and San Fran.
Do you really want a President Diblasio?
Conservatives sometimes think it is our moral character that makes America less socialist than Europe. America’s eroding conservatism is instead based on the Electoral College and the US Senate. Without them, there would be one-party rule unless a parliamentary system was adopted.
It is indeed an interesting issue and if I understand I tend to agree with your point. I agree 100% that it is the EV is hurting Conservatism but perhaps for different reasons than I think you mean.
The EC Balkanizes our politics. To Balkanize it more by allocating EV’s by Districts is like taking a surgeons knife to America. There is no need, then, to spread the message of Conservatism. America will never learn. Conservatives would only then need to appeal to a VERY small group of voters. And there is no question that the backlash, in the future, would be HUGE. Let’s face it. We are a dwindling, aging minority. We are not dwindling so much as the Lib Press would have you believe, but we are dwindling nontheless.
The answer isn’t more prayers or bibles in schools, etc. The answer is getting the word out to a Nation. It isn’t working. We are just lucky Dims haven’t been voting.
We need look no further than excessive Gerrymandering to prove the point I make. The House is balkanized. Each side only preaches to it’s choir. What will be the end result of that? It will be that who will “win” in the end is the side with the largest base. And, as I said, ours is dying off with nothing to replace it.
If the Conservative message is worthwhile and appealing (Reagan and others proved that it is), then get the message out. Trying to change the rules, Constitutional or not, isn’t a message, it is an exercise in desperation and will be seen as such. And it sure won’t be the LibTards who will ultimately suffer.
I think your thought has merit, but as you see from this thread conservatives tend to dismiss such idea’s there is always this, that and the other thing, whereas liberals no matter how foolish an idea that might promote their agenda even slightly they just do it, whether Constitutional or not.
I do not know your thought is in line with the Constitution, you say it is so I defer to your knowledge, in so far that it is, I see no reason not to at least attempt to void as much as possible the prevalent fraud but again we must insure any and all efforts meet constitutional muster, we do not want to become as the enemies of our Republic and chip away at our foundation.
A couple of States already apply this measure. I think one of them is Maine. Someone correct me if I’m wrong.
Nebraska just changed to this recently and we ended up giving Bozo some EC votes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.