I'm sure that after she got the PR spin out of it she wanted in 2000, she realized that, as long as California is a Democratic stronghold, the Electoral College is the Democrats' best friend. It worked against them in 2000, but in 2004 the 3.5 Million Vote margin that GWB has rolled up proves how the EC is the Democrats' only hope.
Well, we might as well abolish the Senate as well - after all, it is by far the most undemocratic instition in our system. Do y'all think Hillary will support that?
Great post .... just another potent reminder of this witch and her thinking.
Hey, great idea Hillery ! Right now, ok.
Note to Hillary - we would have won either way.
What a bunch of tards, he won the popular vote and EV. What she is really saying is "let inbread braindead religious idiots in flyover states eat cake". I hate elitist democrats.
We should divide a few of the larger states in half, before we get rid of the electoral college.
Hillary wants to end the EC because she knows she can rack up tons of fraud in New York, Chicago, LA, if there votes actually affected the election.
Dems would never lose the Presidency if it changed to popular vote due to the conrol they have in these major cities and the fraud they can pull.
Good Lord, she's already spinning for '08?
This woman has no shame. She makes Marion Barry look like John Jay.
Memo to Hillary: No, we're not.
Not only is it the Democrats only hope, but without the EC there would be no basis (this time) for the Kerry campaign to challenge the reelection of the President. The Democrats will attack the EC when it suits them and try to use it when it suits them. All they know is to pursue the political expedient that is available at the moment. Sought of like Kerry himself, trying to manipulate both his service in Vietnam, and his opposition to that war, not only to self-promote but to advance his political ambitions.
I have to admit, this is one I agree with. Let's not forget that we have one rouge West Virginian Elector that claims no matter what he will not vote for Bush come December. What's to say he is the only one? I cringe everytime I think of CA giving 55 votes to the President when we get nearly 44% of the popular vote. Had these been the rules in 2000 I believe we would still have won the national popular vote (we just didn't need to try, we played according to the constitution). I don't agree that more votes play to the democrats. I'm for abolishing the Electorial College and for national standards and voter registrations. It shouldn't matter where you live, just vote and let your voice be heard. Republicans will still win.
Senator Clinton is being consistent here.
She had the same position in 2000 as she does now.
Back then, of course, it looked opportunistic, because it was a way to get the Democrat in.
This time, it almost looks principled: no flip-flop here on her part. Her proposal would handily give the election to Bush. (But, of course, that is exactly the result she wants...)
Pure Democracy is mob rule and the founding fathers knew it. I guess if you are part of the mob that doesn't matter, though.
Yea, what ever happened to the clarion call of the popular vote? The Rats aren't calling for it now are they? Still examining... still examining. I thought with the 3.5 million vote advantage they would be the first to concede. (Insert laughing sarcasm here.)
Ole crusty made her say that....it wasnt her....
Well, she also has called for the abolition of supportive undergarments, but most states agree that in spite of Ms. Clinton's demonstrated preference, this is a personal decision best left up to the individual.