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

Skip to comments.

Trump and GOP leaders push to change Nebraska electoral votes to winner-take-all
NBC News ^ | 4/3/24 | Ben Kamisar, Bridget Bowman and Allan Smith

Posted on 04/03/2024 2:09:18 PM PDT by DallasBiff

Former President Donald Trump and Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen are calling on the state’s Legislature to change the way Nebraska doles out its Electoral College votes, a move that would almost certainly benefit Trump in his 2024 presidential bid.

While most states dole out all their Electoral College votes to the statewide winner of the presidential vote, Nebraska and Maine give out one electoral vote to the candidate who wins each congressional district.

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


TOPICS: Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: electoralvote; nebraska
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last
Oh my NBC going crazy over one electoral vote, they said nothing about the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling about mail in ballots could be counted with a post date 3 days later than election day.
1 posted on 04/03/2024 2:09:18 PM PDT by DallasBiff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DallasBiff

We should be pushing for all states to do what Nebraska and Maine do. I’m pretty sure the only democrats we would have had in the past 43 years would have been both Clinton terms and Obama in 2008, Romney would have won in 2012.


2 posted on 04/03/2024 2:12:17 PM PDT by guitar Josh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: guitar Josh

Is there an electoral map by congressional district?


3 posted on 04/03/2024 2:19:54 PM PDT by DallasBiff (Apology not accepted.la is not the sharpest knife in the drawer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DallasBiff

All states should do winner-take-all. It’s clear that way.


4 posted on 04/03/2024 2:26:07 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Disagree- thats why the GOP are at a disadvantage. Electoral votes should be handed out in the same percentages as the general election in that state. The upside for a Republican candidate in craphole blue states like NY, Kalifornia, Illinois, etc is greater than the downside in Texas and/or Florida


5 posted on 04/03/2024 2:33:45 PM PDT by God luvs America (63.5 million pay no income tax and vote for DemoKrats...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: God luvs America

Look at the House of Representatives. The difference is not as much as you think.


6 posted on 04/03/2024 2:36:08 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: God luvs America

Trump won with 46% of the vote in 2016. Hillary had 48%. Not sure if it would work out in his advantage if the votes were split according to district.


7 posted on 04/03/2024 2:38:21 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DallasBiff

in a super crazy close election this one change could be the difference


8 posted on 04/03/2024 2:42:26 PM PDT by TexasFreeper2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DallasBiff

https://sites.google.com/view/presidentialbycongressionaldis/election-results


9 posted on 04/03/2024 3:05:13 PM PDT by guitar Josh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DallasBiff
"Is there an electoral map by congressional district?"

Going back to 1992....

Of the 428 districts in states which HAVE districts (7 do not, plus DC), the elections of 2000, 2004, 2012 and 2016 would have been won by the GOP if the electoral votes had been split by district and not winner-taker-all.

The GOP would still have lost in 1992, 1996, 2008 and 2020.

As one example, here is a listing of results by district for 2020. You can get any other year too (back to 1960):

2020 presidential election results by congressional district

10 posted on 04/03/2024 3:12:09 PM PDT by PermaRag (Joo Biden is not my President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DallasBiff

Sorry folks, but electoral votes by congressional district would have wiped out obama and biden. 2) its actually more constitutional in spirit than winner take all. It eliminates big city control over every state, effectively eliminates vote fraud for a generation. And when the republicans controlled the rust belt, TWICE, in the past 30 years it could have been done. But we dont have a republican party. We have a retardican party.


11 posted on 04/03/2024 3:15:45 PM PDT by pghbjugop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PermaRag

Oregon is winner take all. The state can be Dems 51%, Rep. 49%. Oregon is blue in metro areas and red as can be in most of state. The red voter NEVER GETS COUNTED. It would be much fairer (lib term) if my vote got counted.


12 posted on 04/03/2024 3:20:08 PM PDT by WHATNEXT?
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: guitar Josh
Romney would have won in 2012.

Maybe assigning electoral votes by congressional district isn't such a good idea, after all. The mere thought of that made me throw up in my mouth a bit. Yes, even knowing what the alternative was.

Regardless, that is the most logical way to assign electoral votes. There was no good outcome possible in 2012.

13 posted on 04/03/2024 3:46:52 PM PDT by CommerceComet ("You know why there's a Second Amendment? In case, the government forgets the first." Rush Limbaugh )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: guitar Josh
We should be pushing for all states to do what Nebraska and Maine do.

At this point in time, in Nebraska, we should be pushing for winner take all.

14 posted on 04/03/2024 3:55:27 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pghbjugop
Sorry folks, but electoral votes by congressional district would have wiped out obama and biden. 2) its actually more constitutional in spirit than winner take all. It eliminates big city control over every state, effectively eliminates vote fraud for a generation. And when the republicans controlled the rust belt, TWICE, in the past 30 years it could have been done. But we dont have a republican party. We have a retardican party.

Some of the posts on this thread are unbelievable.

To win the next election, in Nebraska, we should be pushing winner take all.

15 posted on 04/03/2024 3:57:32 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DallasBiff

I propose the following as a constitutional amendment.

Each congressional district shall award it’s electoral vote to the candidate that has a majority of 51% of the votes cast. If there is no qualifying candidate, a run-off election shall be held 45 days after the election with only the top two candidates by votes cast being accepted as candidates for the run-off election. If the run-off election does not result in one candidate obtaining 51%, The Legislature shall meet in unicameral session and decide which of the candidates shall be awarded the electorial vote.

One of the State electoral votes shall be awarded to the candidate that receives the most congressional districts, The second state electoral vote shall be awarded to the candidate that receives the most votes in the election.


16 posted on 04/03/2024 3:58:11 PM PDT by taxcontrol (The choice is clear - either live as a slave on your knees or die as a free citizen on your feet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pghbjugop
And when the republicans controlled the rust belt, TWICE, in the past 30 years it could have been done. But we dont have a republican party. We have a retardican party.

Unbelievable. If the Republicans controlled a state, it would be retarded for them not to retain winner take all.

17 posted on 04/03/2024 3:59:52 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: PermaRag

As one example, here is a listing of results by district for 2020. You can get any other year too (back to 1960):

2020 presidential election results by congressional district

This appears to be missing 7 congressional districts as the totals do not add up to 435. Even if these missing congressional district went for Trump, he would have lost 272 to 265.

But, the election would have played out a lot differently with different math in play.


18 posted on 04/03/2024 6:21:12 PM PDT by Steven Scharf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Steven Scharf

Looking at the cong. list, it is missing the seven states with only one congressperson.


19 posted on 04/03/2024 6:35:27 PM PDT by Steven Scharf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Steven Scharf

Add those, the total would be 275 to 263.


20 posted on 04/03/2024 6:40:34 PM PDT by Steven Scharf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 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