Michigan legislative action thread
Posted on 11/17/2014 6:46:56 AM PST by cotton1706
The socialists plans have been to control the cities, and through the cities, control electoral votes. De-coupling the cities/population areas will shatter the red state/blue state meme that the establishment has pieced together over the decades.
It would certainly be better than going to a Popular Vote election......that would be WAAAAAYYY too easy for the Dems to manipulate/cheat!
OUTSTANDING!! I had hopes that Pennsylvania was going to do the same several years ago (to defang the ‘RATS voter fraud in Philadelphia) but, apparently, some GOPe type inexplicably derailed it in the PA legislature. Now despite an even larger dominance of the Republicans in the legislature the fact that the incoming governor is a ‘RAT eliminates the possibility during the ‘RATS term in office.
This certainly would make Michigan relevant again.
I do not like the idea of each state having different rules for how we elect Federal politicians. If Michigan does this...why not all the states?
I am actually not excited how each state gets to determine their congressional districts either...each state doing it a different way.
Seems to me there is just too much room for corruption when each state can decide their own system of electing federal pols...like President...etc.
I hate to tell you this but the states already have different rules on how to elect “federal politicians”. In fact some states are already dividing their electoral votes.
I wish we elected senators the same way.
As long as it’s the liberal states that do it, im all for it :)
In my view, you have it completely backwards. The Federal government did not create the states, the states created the federal government. So it’s completely appropriate for the people, through their legislatures, to determine how their representatives to the federal legislature, should be chosen.
Its a great deterrent to fraud. Obama could get a billion votes in Detroit and it still wouldn’t matter.
Yes, I remember that the moderate GOP speaker or senate president or whatever derailing this idea in PA. It had Obama and the democrats panicking. It’s called the Keystone state for a reason! No democrat has won the presidency without it since Truman.
I, too, had been advocating this change, when we did in Kansas and though it didn’t make much difference when we held our Caucus prior to the 2012 general election, it really helped realize just how many Kansans were conservatives and desired less of government than those that desired, eh more, shall we say.
The same holds true for places like Texas and AZ. Let each state decide what is best.
Of course, that makes sense, since the Federal government is a creation of the States, and not the other way around.
/johnny
/johnny
Then take it up with the Founding Fathers. They actually believed in the sovereignty of the states. Thus, the Constitution allows for the states to select EC electors in the manner determined by each state. State sovereignty is meant to be a check on the Federal government. Why would you want to destroy what little is actually left of that idea?
Maine and Nebraska already divide their electoral votes.
Michigan doing this would definitely help a little bit, but the math is still on the difficult side. Instead of having to run the table on swing states, this would give the Republican nominee breathing room so that he could afford to lose 1 or 2 of the non-heavyweight swing states.
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.