Posted on 12/23/2004 8:40:52 AM PST by 1066AD
I am all for California to split their electoral college votes, but let Idaho stay winner take all. So how about it Di Fi?
Some argue that we need the college so the smaller states will be potected. But the curent system still favors the larger states. The only states that are visited by candidates are those with the most electoral votes or those that the candidates feel are in play. I live in Indiana, a state ignored during the entire campaign. Yet with 11 votes we have more electoral votes than most of the states in the union.
I voted for Bush and am glad he won, but I would have loved the opportunity to have heard him speak or to feel as if he cared what happened here. I don't like the "all or nothing" distribution system, which gives the winner all the electoral votes even with a 1 vote majority in the popular vote. This essentially takes away the popular vote from those people who vote for the losing candidate.
Look it at this way. If you examine the break of the popular vote by counties, AND, if the electoral votes had been divided according to percentages, then the mandate Bush has rightfully claimed would be overwhelming. Take Illinois. Cook County determines the entire outcome for the state of Illinois. Cook County is a strong bastian of Democrats, but almost every other county went to Bush.
This is right out of the liberal playbook, move the posts until the rules favor the dems.
Well maybe the republicans should take her on and tag on to the amendment that if the vote fails, the electoral college process cannot be changed. FOREVER
LOL. Good point.
I'd lay $$, Feinstein is merely the mouthpiece chosen for the DNC to move on their position. As she is not the candidate for 08, she's not pulling the strings, but is doing as she is told. Anyway, she's not welcome here.
It could take months, even years to accomplish.
I remember Hillary's response when questioned on abolishing the EC: One word... "Wyoming".
Go Cheney!
"(Liberals--Ialics mine) believe a fair system is one where everyone is equal."
I disagree. Only those who agree with them are equal, but there is a levelled equality in there, including an us vs. them socialistic arrangement: do what I tell you, as I know better than you.
The counterculturalists of the 60s were said to be even more power hungry than those who worked within the system. Sounds like today's Democratic Party to me.
Dropping the electors would very likely put every election into the hands of the trial lawyers. As it is, we have had problems in Florida, New Jersey, Ohio, Washington, New Mexico, and so forth, but nevertheless we now officially have a president, because the electors have voted and the election is over.
Do away with the electors and the Democrats would mount a chad war such as America has never seen. Clinton would still be acting president right now, while we counted and recounted the ballots from the 2000 election and Bush stood by waiting for the results.
Liberalism is a mental illness.
Perhaps you could provide some evidence to support that statement?
Sorry.
Your guy lost.
Deal with it.
What a ticket - hillary and Feinstein!
It is expected that the she part of the clinton clan will make a run in 08 - but a more interesting subject will be -- who with?
Our founding fathers came up with the electoral college for a reason.
The ONLY way the Dems will ever get rid of the EC is if they pack the Supreme Court with justices who will invoke some new-fangled principle of international law which they will say overrides our Constitution. Only the Dems would have the chutzpah to declare the Constitution itself unconstitutional, but in this era of "gay marriage" I won't be surprised at anything, no matter how ridiculous.
This is part of the Demonrat playbook. They will try to destroy the Democracy that they pretend the name of their party stands for.
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.