Posted on 10/24/2007 5:10:00 PM PDT by Baladas
Neuter California? What a splendid idea.
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... 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.Well done, Rudy supporters.
Poor Doc Howie, still looking almost four years later for a reason to exist politically....(chuckle)
Well, neutering California is better than what I was thinking, when Gray Davis was governor. I wanted to give it back to Mexico, and was calling it the “Occupied Southwest Bank.”
Hey, the century is still young.
Applied nationally it might make very little difference, except that in case of recounts it would limit be used to limit them to specific districts. Going district by district plus two to the winner of the tateside majority, Bush would have won in 2000. That’s because the Democratic vote is more concentrated. Look at the Louisiana gubernatorial result with the literal destruction of black vote in NO.
Who wants a direct popular vote for President?
Gee. Thats a great idea. Let NYC, LA, and NE corridor elect our presidents.
NOT.
What do you think I face here in Michigan? Detroit gets to decide how all of Michigan’s Electoral votes are cast.
Hey Berosus!!! It's way worse NOW, after a fraudulent Republican Governor really has neutered it and suffocated it's fiscal future in bondage and B.S.!!!
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.