If Republican Controlled States Allocate Electoral Votes Differently

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

If the GOP tried this the start of an illegitimate administration would be a trainwreck from the start.

By 2016 we'll have had 16 consecutive years of trainwrecks. I doubt anyone will notice the difference.

[MurrayBannerman]

Gerrymandering goes national. Pathetic.

Stares at Maine and Nebraska

[Stockdale for Veep]

Gerrymandering goes national. Pathetic.

Stares at Maine and Nebraska

Those states shouldn't do it either, it should be uniform nationwide, or you know popular vote.

I would slightly respect them more if they just came out and said they were trying to cheat.

Looks at the redistricting after 08. Would have loved to be a fly on the wall when the GOP saw Obama won NE-2.

[Dereich]

No swing state would ever do this. State politicians are not going to get rid of the prestige and national attention for themselves and their states by torpedoing their importance. Self interest will always triumph over nebulous party interest; this will never even be considered by policy makers.

[CatoMinor]

A few things to keep in mind:

1. The GOP is not dumb enough to do this. Rigging the system to win without the popular vote on a regular basis is begging for mega voter backlash and would be legitimate grounds for revolution.
2. Just because the Internet brings this up every few years doesn't mean its going to happen.
3. Not worth discussing outside of the "What-if" board.

[Nichlemn]

Gerrymandering goes national. Pathetic.

Stares at Maine and Nebraska

Those states shouldn't do it either, it should be uniform nationwide, or you know popular vote.

I would slightly respect them more if they just came out and said they were trying to cheat.

Looks at the redistricting after 08. Would have loved to be a fly on the wall when the GOP saw Obama won NE-2.

How are they trying to cheat? It's not particularly advantageous for them. It'd be better for Nebraska Republicans if they had winner take all like everyone else.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Wow. Fresh off passing an avalanche of laws that helped them steal this election (North Carolina specifically), Republicans are already looking forward to stealing the 2016 election.

The GOP won fair and square. What is the lefts issue with voter id laws? Why not address the New Black Panthers engaging in voter intimidation in Philly.

Yeah, because anyone who chooses to live in Philly is definitely afraid of a black guy standing on a street corner.

Maybe JCL means Philadelphia Township, Indiana

[Landslide Lyndon]

Wow. Fresh off passing an avalanche of laws that helped them steal this election (North Carolina specifically), Republicans are already looking forward to stealing the 2016 election.

The GOP won fair and square. What is the lefts issue with voter id laws? Why not address the New Black Panthers engaging in voter intimidation in Philly.

Yeah, because anyone who chooses to live in Philly is definitely afraid of a black guy standing on a street corner.

Maybe JCL means Philadelphia Township, Indiana

Maybe he is afraid that the black guy in the corner is Samuel L. Jackson and will try to recruit him for the next Avengers movie.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

In any event, changing to electoral votes by CD would completely blow up in Republicans' faces.  They've already proven perfectly capable of disenfranchising voters in less risky ways such as voter ID laws, having activist judges gut legislation that protects voter's rights and make it easier for people to vote, having those same activist judges rubber-stamp their racial gerrymanders, blocking any legislation that would make it easier for groups that aren't solidly Republican to vote, etc.

The only place worth considering is Michigan.

Your concern for the integrity and legitimacy of the democratic process is an inspiration to us all

What a brilliant idea.

If you're a Krazenesque Republican hack whose political short-sightedness is matched only by his shameless lack of respect for the democratic process than I guess I can see why this idea might appeal to you.

[MurrayBannerman]

The only place worth considering is Michigan.

Your concern for the integrity and legitimacy of the Democratic process is an inspiration to us all

God forbid the elected officials representing the state of Michigan make a decision on its electoral process. I mean, who gave them the right!

Oh wait...

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

The only place worth considering is Michigan.

Your concern for the integrity and legitimacy of the Democratic process is an inspiration to us all

God forbid the elected officials representing the state of Michigan make a decision on its electoral process. I mean, who gave them the right!

Oh wait...

The thing is we both know you don't support this because you think it'd be good for the democratic process.  You only support it because it would help Republican Presidential candidates get electoral votes from a state that probably won't vote for them and whose CD map is horribly gerrymandered.  You only wanted to do this in Michigan because it checks certain political boxes for you.  If the MI GOP wants to touch a high-profile political third rail, I obviously can't stop them.  But you should at least have the dignity to admit you simply want to rig the election and that your previous post was a crock of s[Inks] designed to distract people from the question of whether Republicans *should* do this by attempting to make it about whether they *can* do this.

One other thing: Why are you so afraid of letting Michigan's voters decide who gets their state's electoral votes?

[MurrayBannerman]

The only place worth considering is Michigan.

Your concern for the integrity and legitimacy of the Democratic process is an inspiration to us all

God forbid the elected officials representing the state of Michigan make a decision on its electoral process. I mean, who gave them the right!

Oh wait...

The thing is we both know you don't support this because you think it'd be good for the democratic process.  You only support it because it would help Republican Presidential candidates get electoral votes from a state that probably won't vote for them and whose CD map is horribly gerrymandered.  You only wanted to do this in Michigan because it checks certain political boxes for you.  If the MI GOP wants to touch a high-profile political third rail, I obviously can't stop them.  But you should at least have the dignity to admit you simply want to rig the election and that your previous post was a crock of s[Inks] designed to distract people from the question of whether Republicans *should* do this by attempting to make it about whether they *can* do this.

One other thing: Why are you so afraid of letting Michigan's voters decide who gets their state's electoral votes?

Isn't a proportional representation, rather than a winner take all situation be more democratic?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

The only place worth considering is Michigan.

Your concern for the integrity and legitimacy of the Democratic process is an inspiration to us all

God forbid the elected officials representing the state of Michigan make a decision on its electoral process. I mean, who gave them the right!

Oh wait...

The thing is we both know you don't support this because you think it'd be good for the democratic process.  You only support it because it would help Republican Presidential candidates get electoral votes from a state that probably won't vote for them and whose CD map is horribly gerrymandered.  You only wanted to do this in Michigan because it checks certain political boxes for you.  If the MI GOP wants to touch a high-profile political third rail, I obviously can't stop them.  But you should at least have the dignity to admit you simply want to rig the election and that your previous post was a crock of s[Inks] designed to distract people from the question of whether Republicans *should* do this by attempting to make it about whether they *can* do this.

One other thing: Why are you so afraid of letting Michigan's voters decide who gets their state's electoral votes?

Isn't a proportional representation, rather than a winner take all situation be more democratic?

Depends who draws the district lines and how.  We're not talking about some imaginary universe where district lines are generally drawn to produce fair and/or representative maps.  Surely we can at least agree on that much, no?

[MurrayBannerman]

The only place worth considering is Michigan.

Your concern for the integrity and legitimacy of the Democratic process is an inspiration to us all

God forbid the elected officials representing the state of Michigan make a decision on its electoral process. I mean, who gave them the right!

Oh wait...

The thing is we both know you don't support this because you think it'd be good for the democratic process.  You only support it because it would help Republican Presidential candidates get electoral votes from a state that probably won't vote for them and whose CD map is horribly gerrymandered.  You only wanted to do this in Michigan because it checks certain political boxes for you.  If the MI GOP wants to touch a high-profile political third rail, I obviously can't stop them.  But you should at least have the dignity to admit you simply want to rig the election and that your previous post was a crock of s[Inks] designed to distract people from the question of whether Republicans *should* do this by attempting to make it about whether they *can* do this.

One other thing: Why are you so afraid of letting Michigan's voters decide who gets their state's electoral votes?

Isn't a proportional representation, rather than a winner take all situation be more democratic?

Depends who draws the district lines and how.  We're not talking about some imaginary universe where district lines are generally drawn to produce fair and/or representative maps.  Surely we can at least agree on that much, no?

I agree on that, but I was more thinking of percentages, like the new thread on it explains.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

The only place worth considering is Michigan.

Your concern for the integrity and legitimacy of the Democratic process is an inspiration to us all

God forbid the elected officials representing the state of Michigan make a decision on its electoral process. I mean, who gave them the right!

Oh wait...

The thing is we both know you don't support this because you think it'd be good for the democratic process.  You only support it because it would help Republican Presidential candidates get electoral votes from a state that probably won't vote for them and whose CD map is horribly gerrymandered.  You only wanted to do this in Michigan because it checks certain political boxes for you.  If the MI GOP wants to touch a high-profile political third rail, I obviously can't stop them.  But you should at least have the dignity to admit you simply want to rig the election and that your previous post was a crock of s[Inks] designed to distract people from the question of whether Republicans *should* do this by attempting to make it about whether they *can* do this.

One other thing: Why are you so afraid of letting Michigan's voters decide who gets their state's electoral votes?

Isn't a proportional representation, rather than a winner take all situation be more democratic?

Depends who draws the district lines and how.  We're not talking about some imaginary universe where district lines are generally drawn to produce fair and/or representative maps.  Surely we can at least agree on that much, no?

I agree on that, but I was more thinking of percentages, like the new thread on it explains.

And yet none of the red state legislatures are taking up bills like this.  I can't possibly imagine why that might be   I guess it shouldn't be surprising that the Republicans are trying to pull something like this, they've already made it clear they're fine with disenfranchising voters and trampling on the Constitution to kill any semblance of campaign finance reform, I suppose screwing around with electoral vote allocation in Democratic leaning states is the logical next step.

[CountryClassSF]

We have to do this. But not everywhere.  Just the big states. PA should do it in their lame-duck if they have one.

There is nothing to stop them from doing this except being too weak-kneed. Step up and pass the bills. They've been talking about it since 2011.

[KCDem]

We have to do this. But not everywhere.  Just the big states. PA should do it in their lame-duck if they have one.

There is nothing to stop them from doing this except being too weak-kneed. Step up and pass the bills. They've been talking about it since 2011.

Democracy-haters unite!

[Skill and Chance]

We have to do this. But not everywhere.  Just the big states. PA should do it in their lame-duck if they have one.

There is nothing to stop them from doing this except being too weak-kneed. Step up and pass the bills. They've been talking about it since 2011.

Is that the country you want to live in?  Where the basic ability of people to vote for president is politicized too?

Not to mention you would truly reap the whirlwind after the next Democratic wave when they retaliate in lean R states.  Or the map simply changes and the GOP candidate wins MI/PA/WI outright but still loses 10-15 EV from them.  

[DS0816]

We have to do this. But not everywhere.  Just the big states. PA should do it in their lame-duck if they have one.

There is nothing to stop them from doing this except being too weak-kneed. Step up and pass the bills. They've been talking about it since 2011.

Oh, please, stop!

Every states' congressional districts does not have the same number of people living in them, the same number of people participating in voting, because that cannot be guaranteed. What the hell do you think we have a Popular Vote for?!

Either you are one ignorant fool … or you have a criminal mind to begin with. (You can explain this if you want. I don't actually care.)

[DS0816]

Here's CountryClassSF in another thread:

Lib judge overrules God.

Dammit.

I feel very scared for our country. 

I feel scared for you.

'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these." Mark 12:31

Why don't you hug a gay sometime?

I am gay. I don't believe in redefining marriage. The bible is clear. I do not want this. Real Arizona does not want this.

This sickened garbage helps to explain "CountryClassSF."