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

Skip to comments.

The Republican Party’s uphill path to 270 electoral votes in 2016
Washington Post ^ | 1-18-14 | Dan Balz

Posted on 01/19/2014 9:22:33 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic

A recent conversation with a veteran of GOP presidential campaigns raised this question: Which, if any, of the recent battleground states are likely to become more Republican by 2016? The consensus: very few.

That reality highlights one problem Republicans face as they seek to regain the White House after six years under President Obama. Lots of factors affect elections: the quality of the candidates, the state of the economy, the effectiveness of the campaigns. But in a country whose demographics continue to change, Republicans will begin this campaign with one significant disadvantage.

Over the past three decades, the political leanings of many states have shifted dramatically. What once was a sizable Republican advantage in the electoral college has become a decided Democratic advantage.

One way to look at this is by comparing two overlapping 20-year periods. In the first, 1980 through 2000, Republicans won four of six presidential elections. In the second, 1992 through 2012, Democrats won four of six.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2014election; 2016election; 2016issues; balz; conservatism; cruz2016; demagogicparty; diversity; election2014; election2016; elections; hitlery; hrossperot; illegals; johnanderson; latinovote; memebuilding; paleolibs; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills; patbuchanan; ralphnader; randsconcerntrolls; republicans; thirdpartytrolls
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 next last
To: afraidfortherepublic

Dan Balz claims from his ivory tower high above all us peons.

81 posted on 01/20/2014 10:16:40 AM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Dan Balz

WashPost Buries GOP Slam of Obama Regarding al Qaeda Resurgence; Runs Two Christie Bridge Pieces on A1

Wash Post Headline Trumpets New Poll: ‘Major Damage to GOP,’ Ignores Strong Disdain for Obama

http://newsbusters.org/people/dan-balz#ixzz2qxpedH9Z


82 posted on 01/20/2014 10:18:00 AM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: mvymvy

Yes, under my plan most counties would have a fraction of an electoral vote and each county in each state would have an equal fraction of an electoral vote.

Take Texas for example, the state has 254 counties, but an increasing number of people, mostly liberal live in Harris, Dallas, Travis, El Paso and Bexar counties. These liberal city people may one day control the votes in the state in a manner that would disenfranchise rural voters in less populated counties.

In order to equalize the voice of voters in rural counties, smaller counties would have the same power as liberal big city counties.

In other words, the voters of Loving County, Texas would have the same voting power as Harris county Texas.


83 posted on 01/20/2014 10:25:08 AM PST by Oliviaforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: mvymvy

This is not a picture from some far away third world sham democracy, but rather from Ohio, right here in the USA.

Looks like blatant voter fraud by people who may not be citizens.

84 posted on 01/20/2014 10:35:05 AM PST by Oliviaforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

Electors are people, my friend.

To allow for a fractional proportional method, would need a constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College, and could be stopped by states with as little as 3% of the U.S. population.

Without an amendment, the office of presidential elector remains. A presidential elector is a person, and a person’s vote cannot be divided into fractions. Each state would have to use a whole-number proportional approach.


85 posted on 01/20/2014 10:36:28 AM PST by mvymvy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Without a base-acceptable candidate, their path isn’t just uphill, it’s vertical.


86 posted on 01/20/2014 10:36:49 AM PST by Colonel_Flagg (Some people meet their heroes. I raised mine. Go Army.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mvymvy

States can assign electors any way they wish.


87 posted on 01/20/2014 10:37:50 AM PST by Oliviaforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Let's keep in mind that for most of the eight years that the younger Bush was in office, he also had a Republican House and Senate. And yet his tenure in office was a complete disaster in terms of foreign/military policy abroad and crony capitalism here at home -- which is how we ended up with a jug-eared idiot in the White House today.

Well, 4 years actually but you're right. We had such an opportunity to roll back so much needless government but the Republicans in power squandered it. Bush so sullied the Republican brand that by 2008, Reagan himself couldn't have gotten elected.

88 posted on 01/20/2014 10:39:08 AM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Oliviaforever

With the Electoral College in place, states can’t split their electors, who are people.

A person’s vote cannot be divided into fractions.


89 posted on 01/20/2014 10:53:27 AM PST by mvymvy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: mvymvy

That’s not what I’m saying.

For example, take a state like Texas that has 254 counties.

Of those 254 counties, 240 of the rural counties vote Republican and the 14 liberal Urban counties vote Democrat.

The Rural counties would thus control all of the state’s Electoral College votes and as long as Texas had more rural than urban counties, Texas would remain a Republican state.


90 posted on 01/20/2014 11:03:29 AM PST by Oliviaforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: mvymvy

beg to differ. I’ve seen the vote by county maps and in Kali, all the larger cities go to Democrats. You can see it all across the county.

Every major population center is blue. Cities control the election of the president, not the burbs or the county


91 posted on 01/20/2014 3:09:46 PM PST by 12th_Monkey (One man one vote is a big fail, when the "one" man is an idiot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
Dan Balz of the WaPo .... institutional talking head on the Left-of-Center circuit ... veteran smartass America-despising intellectual snob.

I really want to get my poisoned chalice from Dan.

92 posted on 01/20/2014 4:08:40 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ray76
The US will be harmed immeasurably yet the Republicans forge ahead with the Amnesty agenda.

Because their bosses on K Street and at the Chamber are paying them to, and demanding results.

93 posted on 01/20/2014 4:10:18 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
I suspect they will not reform themselves and will crash to the ground again.

That's okay .... they'll have been paid, and they'll still have a monopoly on opposing the Democrats/Communists. For a while, until the Communists start arresting them.

94 posted on 01/20/2014 4:11:21 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 12th_Monkey

16% of Americans live in rural areas.

The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 15% of the population of the United States.

Suburbs and exurbs often vote Republican.


95 posted on 01/20/2014 4:19:38 PM PST by mvymvy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus
Dan Balz of the WaPo .... institutional talking head on the Left-of-Center circuit ... veteran smartass America-despising intellectual snob.
I really want to get my poisoned chalice from Dan.

You misunderstand; I am saying that there is effectively no difference between the Republican and Democrat parties — just look at how the Republicans act on their stated party planks:

So, why should anyone vote for a Republican?
96 posted on 01/20/2014 4:23:41 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
Probably the biggest obstacle we face is that the majority of the voting public still bases their vote on feelings rather than reason. Remember the exit polling from 2012. A majority thought that Romney had better ideas and experience, but what made the difference to them was they “felt like Obama cared about them”. As someone trained in reason and logic, I don't know how we beat that. Based on “feelings”, at this point my guess is that Christie would lose in a landslide to Hillary, even though Hillary is as cold as ice when you come down to it. Women are going to vote for her based on gender alone, and when the press gets through with their “bully” image of Christie, he'll be lucky to get elected dogcatcher in Secaucus.
97 posted on 01/20/2014 4:24:54 PM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
Sorry, I wasn't calling you out .... just commenting on seeing Dan Balz's name on the commentary.

Guy's a typical liberal bottom-feeder and hail-fellow-well-met on the talking-head circuit.

As to the substance of your post in reply, you're quite right, they have no principles, really, just window-dressing banners for the rubes.

They're a back-room party that is more a lobby than a political caucus. They're professional shills for the Chamber of Commerce and sellouts of their own party and base, as you prove.

98 posted on 01/20/2014 4:44:06 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: mvymvy

Map show a lot of blue and the cities red, what do we have? Back to back democratic president.


99 posted on 01/20/2014 4:57:12 PM PST by 12th_Monkey (One man one vote is a big fail, when the "one" man is an idiot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: 12th_Monkey

Most Americans believe, that where you live should not determine how much your vote matters.

Most Americans believe that the presidential candidate with the most votes should win, as in virtually every other election in the country.

Having election results determined by the presidential candidate getting the most individual votes is not some scary, untested idea loaded with unintended consequences.


100 posted on 01/20/2014 6:29:24 PM PST by mvymvy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 next last

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.

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