Comments on: Calif. Measure Would Split Electoral Votes

Dems Call Ballot Initiative, Which Could Give GOP Candidate Up To 20 More Votes, A Dirty Trick

[denn034]

The liberals have a stranglehold on California so, one wonders how it could be a Republican dirty trick. This seems like an attempt to even the playing field to me, nothing more or less.

[jbaker314]

ubrew12,

You arguments have numerous problems.

Most news media is far left, with FOX being the one notable exception. ABC, CBS, CNN, and NBC can hardly be considered middle-of-the-road, much less conservative.

Second, MOST rural voters do not receive farm subsidies.

Third, if the intelligence services are monitoring the communications of a terrorist and that terrorist calls someone in the United States, should the intelligence service have to hang up? Not likely.

Fourth, I understand the reasoning for the proposed change in California. However, like many other conservatives (that does not mean Republican), I do not support the proposed change. My reasons for not supporting the proposed change have already been communicated in this forum.

[ubrew12]

ImpeachNOW said: "The Californication measure is a step in the right direction"

Surely you understand Republicans have no intention of ''stepping'' further than California on this matter.

[ubrew12]

This is how it works:
1. you fund massive media consolidation so that (mostly rural) voters, ignorant of history and the world, can have their patriotism exploited by ''tough on terror'' Republicans. Every rural vote is worth 3 urban votes in a presidential election, and 80 urban votes in the U.S. senate. Keep rural voters happy by heaping on the farm subsidies and with constant references to the ''heartland values of America'', etc.
2. Promote a ''unitarian executive'' so that all you need to do is win Presidential elections to control the government. This demi-God starts wars, spies on Americans, etc with impunity from the other branches of government.
3. Rig the electoral college (in blue states only) so getting Dems to lead the executive (ie become Prez) is next to impossible.

And THAT''s how America becomes Russia...

[jbaker314]

jncc1701,

The Supreme Court got involved because the Democratic Party was playing games and the Florida Courts were playing games.

They wanted a recount in selected Democratic areas, but when they figured out that the recount still would not give Gore the win, they decided to seek recounts in more "selected" areas.

It was a blatant attempt to maipulate the system.

It would have been wholly different if they had requested a statewide recount in the beginning.

[jbaker314]

fibonacci_,

I don''t agree that "almost all" Americans are bad at geography.

I do think that many are, largely because the education system is more interested in being "politically correct" than in teaching the basics.

I also think that the news media goes to great efforts to find the dumbest of the dumb, particularly when it has anything to do with the South. When do you ever see the news media present a Southerner in a positive light?

I have travelled to most areas of the continental US and have found that intelligence and ignorance are universally present in all areas, with no area have any particular claim of superiority over any other.

[jncc1701]

Posted by omega39 at 02:16 PM : Dec 02, , as Bush vs. Gore was winding its way through the courts, the Republican Florida legislature was lining up its delegates to give to Bush no matter how the final vote came out.

---------------------
True but this is what the Founders intended, the elected legislature would have placed Bush in the White House but have to answer for it in the next election (many in two years.) As it turns out, because the Supreme Court got involved - we the people had no recourse.
There is a subtle run on the Constitution by the GOP all in the name of winning - our Republic will not survive long if this stands. Elections will eventually become similar to Venezuela and Russia.

[omega39-2009]

So, if every state''''s legislature were to direct its electors to vote 100% for whoever wins the state''''s popular vote, the electoral college would become redundant, and a true democracy implemented without a constitutional amendment. The Campaign for a National Popular Vote is trying to do this.
ubrew12

In 2000, as Bush vs. Gore was winding its way through the courts, the Republican Florida legislature was lining up its delegates to give to Bush no matter how the final vote came out.

[fibonacci_]

jbaker314, I think Americans are almost all pretty pathetic at geography and cultural awareness. So I dont disagree with you wholly.

"I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uh, some people out there in our nation don''t have maps, and, uh, I believe that our.."
- Mrs. Teen South Carolina

[ubrew12]

You can''t really ditch the electoral college without a constitutional amendment (60% approval), and too many (Republican) congressmen would vote against it.

Lately, constitutional scholars have found another way out of the electoral college without an amendment. The Constitution actually only requires that each state''s electors be appointed ''in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct''. So, if every state''s legislature were to direct its electors to vote 100% for whoever wins the state''s popular vote, the electoral college would become redundant, and a true democracy implemented without a constitutional amendment. The Campaign for a National Popular Vote is trying to do this.

Note that when the CA state senate voted to use this system last year, Governor Swartzenegger vetoed it. Clearly, a popular vote is the LAST thing republicans want.