Skip to comments.It’s only “rigging the Electoral College vote” when Democrats can’t cheat, but GOP has a plan
Posted on 01/28/2013 7:23:44 AM PST by jmaroneps37
To guarantee the will of the people would decide who would govern us our Founding Fathers gave each state has the right to apportion its Electoral College votes (ECVs) as it wished.
Democrats dont really like this ... Throughout the last two hundred years, they have often relied on voter fraud to win presidential elections.
This is why they are gearing up to fight a new plan for awarding ECVs being considered in six states totally controlled Republicans. Barack Obama won all six.
The plan calls for an ECV to be awarded to a candidate for each Congressional District he/she wins thus ending the winner take all system which invites fraud in a few districts which is so rampant as to smother the honest votes throughout a state.
This win the district, win the ECVs system is entirely legal and is the mirror image (comparing honesty to corruption) of the Democrats plan to award ECVs of some states to the winner of the nationwide popular vote. Doing this would mean that California would not even have to bother counting its presidential votes.
It could just wait until the results of ballot box stuffing operations in the northeastern states were complete and say, Heres our 55 ECVs to the Democrat candidate.
How things would change
If this system was in place last November six states Obama won in spite of being completely controlled by Republicans could have awarded GOP candidate Mitt Romney enough additional ECVs to win by a narrow margin.
differences in Romneys favor ..Florida +15; Ohio + 12; Michigan + 9; Wisconsin + 5; Virginia + 9 and Pennsylvania +12 for a grand total of 63 new ECVs and a final tally of 273 ECVs.
The chances of this plan being passed
. are very real.
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
And of course the idea’s detractors claim, “well, that negates the will of the people, since Obama won the popular vote.”
Democrats’ power is consolidated in cities, where fraud is rampant and institutional. The plethora of inner-city voting turnout percentages of 110% bear that out. Most of Illinois, for instance is conservative, but the cancerous tumor that is Chicago hands that state to the dems every single election.
According to Beck, the GOP is dead and “you may as well embrace the Libertarians”.
If the dems and some pubbies get their way, (and they likely will) illegals, all of them, will become “legal”. That would likely turn Texas blue among others. GOP can’t get the Hispanic vote.
1. Are the Republicans doing anything illegal/unconstitutional or can states decide how to apportion their electoral votes?
2. Would you all not do the same thing if the shoe was on the other foot?
Then I go on to tell them they might try winning some state legislatures and Governorships instead off putting all their eggs into national races and this wouldn't even be an issue because they could stop it legislatively.
Has anybody run the numbers of how this would have turned out in the last election had the plan been implemented in all 57 states?
BTW, both Maine and Nebraska already use some version of this plan.
If I remember correctly, NJ split its EC vote in the 1860 election.
I'm sure one of the lib sites has run this analysis. I assume it would have worked in the GOP's favor, purely looking at the GOP edge in the House (and assuming there wasn't a significant amount of vote-splitting between the Presidential and House races).
That's also not a particularly relevant analysis. This plan is not being considered in all 50 states (can't speak for the 7 extra states of 0bamaland). It's only being considered in "swing" states or states that have recently tended to go D in Presidential elections, but where the GOP controls the state government. The GOP in Texas would never let this happen there, for example, nor would the Dems in California.
That, incidentally, is the biggest weakness of this plan. In politics, perception is reality. Enacting this plan only in states where it would benefit the GOP makes it easy for the Dems and the MSM (redundant, I know) to spin this as a transparently partisan move. It feeds right into the "rigging the electoral college" narrative the Dems and MSM are spinning. In states like WI, PA, VA, etc., where the electorate is relatively moderate and usually pretty evenly split, there will likely be some hesitation on the part of GOP governors to sign this type of legislation.
Didn’t some states threaten to do the same when Algore failed in his attempt to steal the 2000 Election?
[ According to Beck, the GOP is dead and you may as well embrace the Libertarians.
If the dems and some pubbies get their way, (and they likely will) illegals, all of them, will become legal. That would likely turn Texas blue among others. GOP cant get the Hispanic vote. ]
Maybe we should use the 2nd amendment to FORCE the Blue states to leave and create their own countries where they can just copy/pasta the soviet union’s constitition for themselves and the rest of red states can just re-affirm the Consititution as the founders intended.
They can keep the North East and California, Oregon and Washington state and we can have a seaport in Texas.
This has been discussed here before, and there have been very good arguments against changing the system, but living in California, I would love to have my vote for president count. I know this is not being discussed in California, but if it becomes successful in other states, it might be something conservatives can push and get voted on in an election. I also think, this might help turnout. There are a lot of people that don’t vote because they know it doesn’t matter.
The 273 - 262 result is from applying the rules to all 50 states plus DC.
Just because you can do something, it doesn’t mean it’s wise to do so.
This could be a serious over-reach on the part of the GOP.
“The GOP in Texas would never let this happen there”
The GOP in Texas had better start contemplating this, because sooner or later (and it may not be that long), Texas’ demographics are going to change. When that happens, Texas will become “Tejas” — first becoming a “purple” (battleground) state, and finally it will “tip over” into the blue.
All one has to do is check the major hospitals in Texas to gain a perspective on where the demographics are going. By far, the majority of babies in Texas are being born to Hispanic women, and the fertility rate of Euro/Anglo women is dropping. What does this portend for the future? Who are all those Hispanic babies going to vote for, when they get to voting age?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.