Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
Posted on 02/12/2009 2:36:49 PM PST by callthemlikeyouseethem
DES MOINES (AP) - Iowa lawmakers are considering changing the way the state's presidential votes are counted as part of an effort to break from the Electoral College system.
The proposal is moving through the state Senate and so far has generated little opposition.
It calls for Iowa to join with other states and pledge its electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, no matter who wins in Iowa.
(Excerpt) Read more at kcrg.com ...
An incredibly stupid idea that will result in the supreme court battling with Iowa every third presidential election.
“And we’re so by God stubborn
we could stand touchin’ noses
for a week at a time
and never see eye-to-eye...”
Meredith Willson (”The Music Man”)
This is why our Founders didn’t trust Democracy.
I don’t know. They keep electing Senator Dungheap Harkin.
It won’t be just Iowa. There are at least 14 states where this is in the works. 4 have already enacted it into law and are ready when other states do the same.
I don’t think they really thought this through. Such a move would disadvantage a small state. A state like California is pretty much ignored in the campaign because it is presumed to vote Democratic. If it votes were up for grabs in the “popular race” candidates might come and campaign. California would have gone to Bush in the Kerry campaign under this popular vote scenario. Campaigning in California would be important to secure that voter rich territory that would otherwise be taken for granted. Net loss to states like Iowa.
I agree with you. At some point violence against the government is going to enter the picture; it’s a lesson of history.
I’m stuck in this Democrat-controlled state. Every day, it’s something new. This is just the latest.
You know the old joke: Why are Iowa farmers only buried two feet deep? So they can still get their hand out.
The state can apportion their electors any damn way they choose. They can go by state vote, county vote, national vote, they can let the vote in Guam decide, they can let the Governor throw darts blindfolded.
Maybe this movement is tied to the Census grab,
They should all drop the primaries and vote for who ever the DNC and RNC appoint as a candidate.
Why not? It will all become Mob rule anyway, after the rest of the stupid blue states follow suit.
There will never be a legitimate and fair election ever again. It will all be about who has the most money and the most national commercials. Not to mention who gets on Oprah and the View.
This country is doomed and too far gone to even hold a shred of decency any more.
It's because Iowa has so much in common with New Yorkers.
/s
I’d like to see every state allocate its electoral votes in the way Maine and Nebraska do.
If you win a congressional district in Nebraska, you get the 1 electoral vote. The two electoral votes representing that of the Senate, can go to the winner of the entire state.
Take a look at my state, Minnesota.
A GOP presidential candidate, even in a bad year, is usually able to win 2 congressional districts at the minimum.
That means that Minnesota’s ten electoral votes last year probably would have gone 7 for Obama - 3 for McCain.
Instead of getting shut out in California, the GOP candidate could win at least 15 electoral votes, maybe more.
Handouts - to the unions & to the farmers plus.
I don’t think people understand exactly the game that democrats are playing here. They’re creating permanent electoral blocks.
Look at the the resolution that passed a couple months back here in Michigan. It would allow us (fool us) to vote as normal but force our electors to vote with surrounding states. There are 14 states where this has passed at least one house. The democrats really have thought this through and are well aware of the permanent majority they can create.
(it’s a pdf file)
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2007-2008/billintroduced/House/pdf/2008-hIB-6610.pdf
Your state could go overwhelmingly for one candidate but your states EC votes would be awarded to the OTHER candidate who got more votes nationwide? I would bet that this is a violation of the 14th Amendment.
Besides, we vote for the ELECTORS, not the president.
How could you say that even though the electors for Candidate A won the most votes, we are awarding them to Candidate B based on the votes of OTHER STATES? Won’t fly. Not unless Obama can load the Supreme Court with Marxists like him.
They must be sick and tired of all those candidates going to their caucuses. Can’t say’s I blame them.
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.