Story
Essentially, a district with 5,000 people would have the save vote as a district with 50,000.
Sad. Come on republicans; you win some, you lose some. No need to take the ball with you when you go home.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Story
Essentially, a district with 5,000 people would have the save vote as a district with 50,000.
Sad. Come on republicans; you win some, you lose some. No need to take the ball with you when you go home.
They are worried that this is the only way for them to stay competitive at the national level. It's beginning to look like the electoral college - as is - is systemically unfavorable to the GOP. All things being equal I don't see how the republican party can survive nationally in a minority-majority country without a handicap.
They are worried that this is the only way for them to stay competitive at the national level. It's beginning to look like the electoral college - as is - is systemically unfavorable to the GOP. All things being equal I don't see how the republican party can survive nationally in a minority-majority country without a handicap.
-Sun_Tzu-
That's not how democracy is done.
Get rid of the electorial college all together. Pass a bill requiring electoral delegates to vote according to the results of the nation wide popular vote.. By pass the entire system.
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]
They are worried that this is the only way for them to stay competitive at the national level. It's beginning to look like the electoral college - as is - is systemically unfavorable to the GOP. All things being equal I don't see how the republican party can survive nationally in a minority-majority country without a handicap.
br0kenrabbit
That's not how democracy is done.
Democracy?
[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]
They are worried that this is the only way for them to stay competitive at the national level. It's beginning to look like the electoral college - as is - is systemically unfavorable to the GOP. All things being equal I don't see how the republican party can survive nationally in a minority-majority country without a handicap.
-Sun_Tzu-
That's not how democracy is done.
Democracy?
*sigh*
We need a king.
How about me?
:D
...
:(
Basically gerrymandering taken to the extreme. What is funny, however, is election and voter fraud seems to have always been a part of American life. A Democratic boat took voters up the Mississippi so they could vote in 3 separate locations, basically ensuring Polk's win over Clay in 1844, for example:P
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]
They are worried that this is the only way for them to stay competitive at the national level. It's beginning to look like the electoral college - as is - is systemically unfavorable to the GOP. All things being equal I don't see how the republican party can survive nationally in a minority-majority country without a handicap.
br0kenrabbit
That's not how democracy is done.
This. If you can't get elected by the people you should change your message or quit. You don't change the voting rules so all of a sudden you have the advantage.If Republicans can't get elected they could always join the Democratic party and run on practically the same policies. Just calm down on gay marriage and abortion a bit.MrPralineThat is true. They don't even have to be pro gay marriage, they just have to say it.
Now, this is just words at this point and they may change their minds, but in at least those two states it looks like they've done the math that the backlash against this wouldn't be worth it and/or it would never withstand judicial challenge. nocoolnamejim
Whether it passes in any state or not, it just makes clear that the intent of those who support such a measure is not democracy.
[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]Now, this is just words at this point and they may change their minds, but in at least those two states it looks like they've done the math that the backlash against this wouldn't be worth it and/or it would never withstand judicial challenge. br0kenrabbit
Whether it passes in any state or not, it just makes clear that the intent of those who support such a measure is not democracy.
Obviously not. Just like the voter suppression attempts from last election, the intent of something like this is naked partisanship to try and win by, bluntly, cheating.If Republicans can't get elected they could always join the Democratic party and run on practically the same policies. Just calm down on gay marriage and abortion a bit.MrPralineAnd taxes and Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and the CFPB, and the NLRB and affirmative action, and unions, and defense spending and gun control and prayer in schools and....you get the idea. Admittedly I agree on the underlying point that I wish Democrats would stake out positions FURTHER to the left than they presently do and that both parties are a little too corporate controlled, but if the two parties more or less agreed on everything we wouldn't have constant gridlock in the House and Senate.
Obviously not. Just like the voter suppression attempts from last election, the intent of something like this is naked partisanship to try and win by, bluntly, cheating.nocoolnamejim
Pretty much shenanigans all around. I can't wait for the GOP to cease existing. If a real financially conservative party stepped up and kept their hands out of our bedrooms and off our women they might do just fine. But this bull$hit isn't going to fly.
If Republicans can't get elected they could always join the Democratic party and run on practically the same policies. Just calm down on gay marriage and abortion a bit.MrPraline
This is the conundrum Republicans face, in order to be more electable they are going to need to move further to the left, no question about it.
What was considered Liberal 10 years ago is now moderate and closer in line with what the majority of Americans want at this point.
[QUOTE="MrPraline"]If Republicans can't get elected they could always join the Democratic party and run on practically the same policies. Just calm down on gay marriage and abortion a bit.nocoolnamejimAnd taxes and Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and the CFPB, and the NLRB and affirmative action, and unions, and defense spending and gun control and prayer in schools and....you get the idea. Admittedly I agree on the underlying point that I wish Democrats would stake out positions FURTHER to the left than they presently do and that both parties are a little too corporate controlled, but if the two parties more or less agreed on everything we wouldn't have constant gridlock in the House and Senate. Hah, you and your nuance. ;}
[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="MrPraline"]If Republicans can't get elected they could always join the Democratic party and run on practically the same policies. Just calm down on gay marriage and abortion a bit.MrPralineAnd taxes and Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and the CFPB, and the NLRB and affirmative action, and unions, and defense spending and gun control and prayer in schools and....you get the idea. Admittedly I agree on the underlying point that I wish Democrats would stake out positions FURTHER to the left than they presently do and that both parties are a little too corporate controlled, but if the two parties more or less agreed on everything we wouldn't have constant gridlock in the House and Senate. Hah, you and your nuance. ;} I've watched you say about a thousand times "both Democrats and Republicans are exactly alike" for months and each time I wondered why nobody had ever taken ten seconds to disagree. I mean, I would have thought SOMEONE on either side of the constant debates here would have been offended by being associated with the other side...but nobody ever said anything. After a while I actually started thinking of it as a little game. I wanted to see how long it would be before someone took ten seconds to throw out a half-assed list like the one above but nobody ever did. Tell me truly...do you have this entire forum Jedi Mind Controlled? :P
[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]
This is a tacit admission that the GOP doesn't see itself winning in 2016. Really sad.
JML897
I think Chris Christie can win with the current system. It might not even be that close if the Dems nominate a John Kerry/Mitt Romney "robotic politician" type.
With the way he has been speaking this year, I don't think Christ Christie passes the GOP purity test, not any more. He might win a decent number of Democratic votes, if the Dem's are dissatisfied with their candidate, but I don't think Christie gets that far.
[QUOTE="JML897"]
[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]
This is a tacit admission that the GOP doesn't see itself winning in 2016. Really sad.
jimkabrhel
I think Chris Christie can win with the current system. It might not even be that close if the Dems nominate a John Kerry/Mitt Romney "robotic politician" type.
With the way he has been speaking this year, I don't think Christ Christie passes the GOP purity test, not any more. He might win a decent number of Democratic votes, if the Dem's are dissatisfied with their candidate, but I don't think Christie gets that far.
Yeah I think the Republican primary is Christie's main obstacle too.[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]
This is a tacit admission that the GOP doesn't see itself winning in 2016. Really sad.
JML897
I think Chris Christie can win with the current system. It might not even be that close if the Dems nominate a John Kerry/Mitt Romney "robotic politician" type.
Hoping Hillary Clinton runs, its her last shot (age) for an 8 year run.
I did vote for Kerry over dubya, but I like Hillary as the frontrunner.
If Republicans can't get elected they could always join the Democratic party and run on practically the same policies. Just calm down on gay marriage and abortion a bit.MrPralineThou doth not simply tell the people of God to calm down on the marriage of sodomites and infanticide.
Thou doth not simply tell the people of God to calm down on the marriage of sodomites and infanticide. Sorry :{ On Romneycare then?[QUOTE="MrPraline"]If Republicans can't get elected they could always join the Democratic party and run on practically the same policies. Just calm down on gay marriage and abortion a bit.-Sun_Tzu-
it's 2013, not 1805.. i think we can handle managing a straight popular vote at this point... and can we move election day to the weekend please? there's really no need for it being on a tuesday anymore.comp_atkinsOr simply have "election day" be a two week period that has early voting access to everyone with an abundance of polling places so people don't have to wait in line for hours.
[QUOTE="comp_atkins"]it's 2013, not 1805.. i think we can handle managing a straight popular vote at this point... and can we move election day to the weekend please? there's really no need for it being on a tuesday anymore.nocoolnamejimOr simply have "election day" be a two week period that has early voting access to everyone with an abundance of polling places so people don't have to wait in line for hours. we don't want logical solutions here..
Isn't it easier to just stop being the party that hates brown/black people, single women and homosexuals? It doesn't even have to be for real, at least not from the get go. Just fake it for a few years and it will come naturally with time.
The electoral college system is outdated and stupid. And I'm all in favor of having a mixed voting system between the popular vote and the electoral college vote.
Isn't it easier to just stop being the party that hates brown/black people, single women and homosexuals? It doesn't even have to be for real, at least not from the get go. Just fake it for a few years and it will come naturally with time.
LordQuorthon
The republican party doesn't hate any of those groups....how many republicans do you actually know? Or were you just generalizing?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment