Harmony Central Forums
Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

GOP eyes new election laws

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse









X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GOP eyes new election laws

    They will try to cheat any way they can. Let's hope they are as unpopular with the popular vote as with the electoral votes.

     

    GOP eyes new election laws

     

    After back-to-back presidential losses, Republicans in key states want to change the rules to make it easier for them to win.

    From Wisconsin to Pennsylvania, GOP officials who control legislatures in states that supported President Barack Obama are considering changing state laws that give the winner of a state's popular vote all of its Electoral College votes, too. Instead, these officials want Electoral College votes to be divided proportionally, a move that could transform the way the country elects its president.

    Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus endorsed the idea this week, and other Republican leaders support it, too, suggesting that the effort may be gaining momentum. There are other signs that Republican state legislators, governors and veteran political strategists are seriously considering making the shift as the GOP looks to rebound from presidential candidate Mitt Romney's Electoral College shellacking and the demographic changes that threaten the party's long-term political prospects.

    "It's something that a lot of states that have been consistently blue that are fully controlled red ought to be looking at," Priebus told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, emphasizing that each state must decide for itself.

    Democrats are outraged at the potential change.

    Obama won the popular vote with 65.9 million votes, or 51.1 percent, to Romney's 60.9 million, or 47.2 percent, and won the Electoral College by a wide margin, 332-206 electoral votes. It's unclear whether he would have been re-elected under the new system, depending upon how many states adopted the change.

    While some Republican officials warn of a political backlash, GOP lawmakers in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are already lining up behind proposals that would allocate electoral votes by congressional district or something similar.

     

    Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder told The Associated Press on Tuesday that he "could go either way" on the change and doesn't plan to push it. But he said it's a reasonable issue to debate and that he prefers that leaders discuss it well before the next presidential election.

    "It could be done in a thoughtful (way) over the next couple years and people can have a thoughtful discussion," Snyder said.

    Republican leaders in the Michigan Statehouse have yet to decide whether to embrace the change there. But state Rep. Peter Lund, a Republican who introduced a bill to change the allocation system two years ago, said some Republicans might be more receptive to his bill this year following the election.

    "We never really pushed it before," he said, adding that the bill wasn't designed to help one party more than the other.

    Democrats aren't convinced. And they warned of political consequences for Republicans who back the shift


  • #2

    Just cut to the chase and make it so the popular vote takes all.

    <script type="text/javascript">// onbeforeunload = function() {}; // </script>
    Silk City Music Factory: A Connecticut Recording Studio

    Comment


    • Belva
      Belva commented
      Editing a comment

      Philter wrote:

      Just cut to the chase and make it so the popular vote takes all.

      <script type="text/javascript">// onbeforeunload = function() {}; // </script>

      This is the correct answer. When the electoral college system was first put in place, computers weren't available, but the country was growing. I may not be correct, but it looks to me like the EC was initiated to simplify vote counting in a growing country.


  • #3

    What do they think that will really achive, ultimately? Has to be one system for all states, not piecemeal as suits their figures, right? The only argument for democratic change to the electral college is to go entirely over to the popular vote. In this day and age I can see the point in that. As I recall, this would mean Obama would still have won twice, while Gore would have been in in 2000, and Bush - or whoever ran in his place - might well not have been able to win in 2004, so I can see that might not suit them. On the other hand, the popular vote was pretty **bleep** close this time, making it a much closer race than under the EC it appeared. What they are proposing is an unnecessary over-complication in the aim of adding to their seats. Transparent. 

    MOTGLHC

    "We're the 1% that don't fit in and don't care."

    Malcom McLaren 1977

    Comment


    • kav
      kav commented
      Editing a comment

      Funny how they aren't interested in campaign finance changes.


  • #4
    I support the change.

    Before you go there, sometime in the future when the Democrats are no longer in favor, this change will help them as well.

    Comment


    • jzh
      jzh commented
      Editing a comment

      normh wrote:
      I support the change.

      Before you go there, sometime in the future when the Democrats are no longer in favor, this change will help them as well.

      You said that about the Patriot Act. Everyone lost on that piece of **bleep**.


  • #5

    moonlightin wrote:

    They will try to cheat any way they can. Let's hope they are as unpopular with the popular vote as with the electoral votes.

     

    GOP eyes new election laws

     

    After back-to-back presidential losses, Republicans in key states want to change the rules to make it easier for them to win.

    From Wisconsin to Pennsylvania, GOP officials who control legislatures in states that supported President Barack Obama are considering changing state laws that give the winner of a state's popular vote all of its Electoral College votes, too. Instead, these officials want Electoral College votes to be divided proportionally, a move that could transform the way the country elects its president.

    Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus endorsed the idea this week, and other Republican leaders support it, too, suggesting that the effort may be gaining momentum. There are other signs that Republican state legislators, governors and veteran political strategists are seriously considering making the shift as the GOP looks to rebound from presidential candidate Mitt Romney's Electoral College shellacking and the demographic changes that threaten the party's long-term political prospects.

    "It's something that a lot of states that have been consistently blue that are fully controlled red ought to be looking at," Priebus told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, emphasizing that each state must decide for itself.

    Democrats are outraged at the potential change.

    Obama won the popular vote with 65.9 million votes, or 51.1 percent, to Romney's 60.9 million, or 47.2 percent, and won the Electoral College by a wide margin, 332-206 electoral votes. It's unclear whether he would have been re-elected under the new system, depending upon how many states adopted the change.

    While some Republican officials warn of a political backlash, GOP lawmakers in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are already lining up behind proposals that would allocate electoral votes by congressional district or something similar.

     

    Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder told The Associated Press on Tuesday that he "could go either way" on the change and doesn't plan to push it. But he said it's a reasonable issue to debate and that he prefers that leaders discuss it well before the next presidential election.

    "It could be done in a thoughtful (way) over the next couple years and people can have a thoughtful discussion," Snyder said.

    Republican leaders in the Michigan Statehouse have yet to decide whether to embrace the change there. But state Rep. Peter Lund, a Republican who introduced a bill to change the allocation system two years ago, said some Republicans might be more receptive to his bill this year following the election.

    "We never really pushed it before," he said, adding that the bill wasn't designed to help one party more than the other.

    Democrats aren't convinced. And they warned of political consequences for Republicans who back the shift

    Help me understand...we need to attack Syria because Syria attacked Syria?

    Comment


    • ryan7585
      ryan7585 commented
      Editing a comment
      did you intend to comment?


Working...
X