CNN: California could sway 2008

[OC]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/31/california-could-sway-2008-race/

[Tender Branson]

Aren´t there more Democratic voters turning out for the CA Primary next year, so that this proposal will be easily defeated ?

[Grad Students are the Worst]

I doubt this will pass.

[So the Heroes Fall]

“If this change is made, it will virtually guarantee that a Republican wins the White House in 2008,” Lehane said in an e-mail.

Yeah, Californians are going to vote for such a proposal.

Not going to pass.

[Everett]

The so-called Presidential Election Reform Act is being pushed by Thomas Hiltachk, a lawyer in a Sacramento firm that represents the California Republican Party and has worked with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

A Schwarzenegger spokeswoman said the governor is not involved with the proposed initiative, and party officials said they have no connection to it.

I cringe at the thought that anyone would be sufficiently ignorant to believe that the Republican Party leadership is somehow completely uninvolved with a blatant proposal to convenient modify the system in favour of Republicans. Cheap tactics, really. Not particularly subtle either. Nice try, but we aren't passing this rubbish.

[King]

I support this being done in all states with over 25 EVs (California, Florida, Texas, New York) just to make it interesting, but I don't support the reasoning for it given by this douche.

[SPC]

I support this being done in all states with over 25 EVs (California, Florida, Texas, New York) just to make it interesting, but I don't support the reasoning for it given by this douche.

Likewise, I support this measure (and intend on voting for it if it comes to the ballot), just as I support the North Carolina measure. However, I don't think they should be done for partisan reasons so much as localizing politics.

As for me, it will have only a small effect. I will go from living in a place that will almost certainly go Democratic to living in a lace that will almost certainly go Republican.

[Clay]

I'd support it.

And not just CA, but every other state as well.

[Ghyl Tarvoke]

I'd support it.

And not just CA, but every other state as well.

Ford would have won in 1976 had this been in place..

[Clay]

I'd support it.

And not just CA, but every other state as well.

Ford would have won in 1976 had this been in place..

See?  It's a good idea.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Bush would've won by a larger margin in 2000 with this. Do you want it in place in every state with current gerrymandering? Just take a look at Florida or Ohio.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

and Michigan, too..
This proposal would basically kill the democratic party because at that point, the dem would have to crack 54% to even come close to winning.

[Erc]

Bad proposal, and I doubt it will pass.

Did Perot win any congressional districts (CA or elsewhere) in '92?

[ottermax]

I would support a measure like this nationally if the districts weren't gerrymandered.

[MODU]

If this does make it to the ballot, it should have a qualifier so that it starts in 2012.  That way, all parties have a full term to begin their ground-work operations to prepare for the next election fairly.

[Jaggerjack]

Crud. I hope this doesn't pass.

[MasterJedi]

If this does make it to the ballot, it should have a qualifier so that it starts in 2012.  That way, all parties have a full term to begin their ground-work operations to prepare for the next election fairly.

That would be a good thing, as long as it would be done will all states nationwide.

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

Great proposal. 

I hope it passes.

It beats having California's huge stash of electoral votes being decided by a bunch of San Francisco crack head pot smoking dope addicts every time.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Eh, it doesn't have a chance.

[bullmoose88]

I'd support it.

And not just CA, but every other state as well.

^^^

[bullmoose88]

It beats having California's huge stash of electoral votes being decided by a bunch of San Francisco crack head pot smoking dope addicts every time.

I think the GOP loses California not because of San Fran but because Southern Cal isn't as Republican friendly as it used to be.

[Jaggerjack]

It beats having California's huge stash of electoral votes being decided by a bunch of San Francisco crack head pot smoking dope addicts every time.

I think the GOP loses California not because of San Fran but because Southern Cal isn't as Republican friendly as it used to be.

Indeed. The Bay Area and LA county have trended hard left in the 1990's. I mean, LA County's the only thing keeping SoCal from voting Republican.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Great proposal. 

I hope it passes.

It beats having California's huge stash of electoral votes being decided by a bunch of San Francisco crack head pot smoking dope addicts every time.

You remove San Francisco, and California still votes Democrat. Of course you'd rather mindlessly bash San Franciscans.

[Reluctant Republican]

Great proposal. 

I hope it passes.

It beats having California's huge stash of electoral votes being decided by a bunch of San Francisco crack head pot smoking dope addicts every time.

Just because San Francicso's a liberal place does not mean there all potheads, and that was a bit of an elitist remark, no different from all the Democrats who mock the religious right. San Francisco goes Democrat for many reasons, not the least is it’s large LGBT population who the Republican party has enjoyed pissing off over the years. What real reason do the socially progressive folks in the bay area have to support the GOP?

Still, I only support this passing if the North Carolina measure passes. Tit for Tat then. Either every state does this, or none of them do this.

[Grad Students are the Worst]

It beats having California's huge stash of electoral votes being decided by a bunch of San Francisco crack head pot smoking dope addicts every time.

Crack-head pot-smoking dope addicts.

Damn, that's quite a trifecta.  Are they homos too?  How about baby-killers?