Posted on 10/24/2007 5:10:00 PM PDT by Baladas
Beware, California voters, of emasculation -- according to Howard Dean.
The chairman of the Democratic National Committee came out swinging today against Monday's news of a new campaign to qualify the initiative changing how California's electoral votes are awarded. And just like the first time the initiative surfaced, he blamed it squarely on Republicans in general, and GOP presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani in particular.
The initiative, said Dean, is "an opportunity for the Republicans to neuter California, to take away California's role as the most powerful state in the country when it comes to selecting the president."
Dean and state Democratic party chairman Art Torres held a noontime conference call with reporters to bash the initiative that would allow 53 of the Golden State's 55 electoral votes to be awarded based on the winning candidate in each congressional district.
That would undoubtedly give the GOP presidential nominee a boost. And Dean made it absolutely clear in his comments: the eventual Democratic nominee can't win the White House without all of California's 55 electoral votes.
He said the net effect of a Republican winning, say, 20 of the state's electoral votes, is a 40-vote swing. "It's the equivalent of losing Ohio and another state," said Dean.
The dig at Giuliani came in reference to the fact that several of the people reportedly working on the initiative have former ties to the NYC mayor.
Democrats also demanded to know who's putting up the money for signature gathers to circulate the petitions, a bank account that backers estimated would reach $3 billion in order to get the initiative on the June ballot. They appear to have as little as three weeks to do that.
As of this afternoon, no campaign finance documents have appeared showing a committee or money for this operation. But political consultant Chris Wysocki, who signed on to the electoral initiative this week, said on Monday that the campaign intends to fully comply with state election laws regarding the identities of donors.
I asked Dean whether Democrats were opposed more to the initiative itself... or the fact that it was being proposed only in California. He seemed to say that it's the latter, adding: "If the Republicans were sincere about [electoral reform] they'd be starting this in Texas and Florida, where they control the legislature and the governor's office."
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
“Neuter.” That’s an interesting choice of words. I suspect that it exposes one of Howard’s most deep-seated fantasies. Not only that, but it seems somewhat late to use that word in California.
That initiative would destroy the Democrats electorally for the near future. Where can we send money?
I seem to recall that it’s the Democrats who wanted to apportion state’s electoral votes according to the national popular vote, not according to whoever won said individual state. Now they don’t hug? It’s hard to keep up with these opportunists.
LOL that is rich. Considering Kalifornia's preoccupation with gays, gay rights, the outright promotion and celebration of the lifestyle; one would think that emasculation is part of the plan; their own damn plan!
Dean is giving the GOP way too much credit.
Dean was FOR apportionment before he was AGAINST it.
Of course, that's why George Bush is trying to burn the place down. Any straight thinking Democrat knows that.
I’m all for this approach in all 50 states. Nebraska and Maine do it this way now. One Electoral vote for whoever wins in each congressional district, and two Electoral votes for whoever wins the state.
Closest you’ll ever come to a direct popular vote for President without a Constitutional Amendment.
CA is already neutered, as long as they are viewed as politically liberal, the Democrats have a monopoly on the electoral votes of CA.
What this is really about is saving money on Ad Buys, right now they really don’t have to spend in CA because the Dhimis have a monopoly already.
GWB ran in Ca in 2000, and he spent some money there and the Dhimis were SCREAMING about paying those stiff ad rates
Dean knows that voting isn’t necessary in the People’s Republic. Chavez, Boxer or Pelosi for Governor,for life?
You can’t neuter a government that is already impotent, terminally ill and is exporting the sickness to the rest of the nation. All I hear from Calif expatriates is we didn’t do it that way in California. Frankly, if they were doing it right, they wouldn’t have left.
If “neuter” means sterile, then between the GLBT, the DINKs, and the feminists, they are doing a pretty good job on their own at keeping the birth rate, especially of women likely to vote for Hillary, way below replacement.
Somebody slipped several orders of magnitude there, unless they're planning to pay $100 to every person in the state to vote for this thing.
That might not help the Republicans if done in all states. It would definately help if done only in California.
I still think that if this fails there should be an initiative to split California into 2 states. The northern half would be Democrat, the southern Republican, a definite advantage to the GOP. Plus, the GOP would get 2 more electoral votes from the 51st state’s additional senators.
If this passes will howweird deans head explode? Que the Slim Whitman.
How can you neuter libs that have no balls.
I'm all for this approach only in states controlled by the democRats.
Cut off their Viagra prescriptions....that’s how they measure enjoyment in life ...
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.