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

To: pete anderson

"What about the Republicans that were against the Colorado Plan?"



The Colorado plan was even worse than the proposed California plan. The California plan would apportion the electoral votes by congressional district, while the Colorado plan would have split EVs based on proportional representation. For example, if Colorado adopted the plan proposed in California, Bush would have won 7 of the state's 9 EVs, but had Kerry managed to carry the state Kerry would have won 6 or 7 of the state's 9 EVs; under the plan proposed in Colorado, the candidate who carried the state would have won only 5 EVs (to 4 for the loser) unless he carried the state by over 10%, and would not get more than 6 EVs unless he held the loser below 33%. The California plan being adopted in Colorado would result in the state still being contested, while the adoption of the Colorado plan would mean that no presidential candidate would ever pay attention to Colorado.


64 posted on 12/01/2004 7:37:17 PM PST by AuH2ORepublican (Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]


To: AuH2ORepublican

Never the less, it would be very interesting to see all the large states (lots of EVs) adopt a plan whereby their power is reduced in favor of small states. I can see how small states would not like the plan, large states can adopt it as a pure suicide play. I believe this is just an example of republicans being sarcastic.


66 posted on 12/01/2004 7:42:18 PM PST by KC_for_Freedom (Sailing the highways of America, and loving it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | 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