Skip to comments.Al Gore calls for an end to the Electoral College
Posted on 08/31/2012 10:54:28 AM PDT by Victory111
click here to read article
If it were a choice between eliminating the Electoral College or the historically criminal Democratic Party, I’d choose eliminating the historically criminal Democratic Party on the grounds of unconstitutional misconduct, high crimes and misdemeanors, and treason.
Al Gore’s desire to eliminate the Electoral College is just another attempt to deny the state governments and individual citizens the right to exercise their sovereignty and thereby their ability to have any effective voice in local, state, or Federal government. He is simply wanting to eliminate another potent obstacle to his imposition of despotic tyranny.
Absolutely! I have argued for the Congressional District [CD] method for years, with the winner of the state getting the 2 electoral vote [EV] bonus.
It reflects the way we elect Congress, gives every CD an equal voice in the vote, and cuts down on recounts [only CDs with close results].
MD [where I live] has passed the National Popular Vote [NPV] law, which won’t go into effect unless enough states with a cumulative total of 270 EVs also sign on - VERY FOOLISH!
MD would overturn the results of its election if the winner of the state lost the NPV. It is quite likely unconstitutional since it allows voters from other states to determine the award of its EVs.
That is why I am hoping Romney wins the election - because [had MD’s NPV law been in effect] MD’s 10 EVs would be switched from Obama [a certainty] to Romney.
Then, these sore loser DEMs from 2000 in MD would realize what an assinine law this is, that their votes were “robbed” from them, and will demand the NPV law’s repeal ...
algore = Bloated, crazy POS
Of course the many voters who live outside the top 20 major population centers would be cheated otherwise and campaign expenses would be even higher if candidates had to compete in major tv markets like NY, LA, Chicago, Dallas, etc. that are not presently in play because of the states they are in.
The Electoral College was a brilliant design for its time which is still producing benefits today. I’d rather see candidates campaign in Iowa, Ohio, Missouri and Colorado than simply jetting from coast to coast which is what would happen if you remove the Electoral College.
Yes, the man with 0.51% majority of the certified (but not complete tallied) popular vote speaks!
We’d STILL be recounting the 2000 election if it had to be done NATIONWIDE, county by county, precinct by precinct.
The absentee ballots were not all counted in Gore “popular win”. In some states, there were not enough outstanding ballots to make a difference. In Floriduh, the Florida Supremes ruled in favor of the 3,000 military ballots but Katherine Harris kept to her ORIGINAL tally and did not add them.
Al Gore is a fool, an accused rapist, and a crazed sex poodle who plays on our fears. Get lost Al (like you did when you went for a hike once).
This is personal for him. He'll never cease to be angry about the 2000 election.
“Maybe it would be a better idea to do it by square miles.”
Actually, it would be best in the long term (for both the Republican party in particular and Euro-Americans in general) for states to switch from a “winner take all” system of assigning electors to the “assignment by congressional district” that the states of Maine and Nebraska currently use.
This would go a long way toward protecting conservative influence in the next several decades. Let me give you a soon-to-be example: Texas.
Right now, Texas is staunchly Republican, but that is going to change as the demographics of the state change (and they are changing rapidly NOW). The lion’s share of babies born in Texas are now Hispanic, both legal and illegal (possibly more of the latter). These “new Texans” aren’t voting now, but in 18-20 years, they will, and to believe that they’re politics will be the same as the gringos they’ll eventually replace on the voting rolls is a fantasy bordering on delusion.
What this means is that the 55 winner-take-all electoral votes of Texas will eventually “tip” from the right to the left. Once that happens, the presidency will become out-of-reach for Republicans, as there already are enough high-electoral-vote “blue states” to give them a significant “starting advantage” in presidential contests. Without Texas, it will be all over for the G.O.P.
I’m older, and may not live to see Texas tip, but it WILL happen. There’s nothing complicated about it, it’s the relatively simple math of demographics, and it’s inevitable.
The only solution to stop it will be to “change the system”. If Texas moves to a “congressional district” scheme of assigning electors, this will go a long way to dilute the growing numbers of Hispanics within the state. No, Texas won’t keep all 55 electoral votes in the “red column”. But it WILL keep enough of them so that the Pubbies will still have a chance at the presidency.
It’s obvious why the ‘rats want to throw out the electoral college.
What isn’t so obvious is that if we don’t re-structure the selection of electors as they are currently assigned in the red states, the growing demographic numbers of non-Euros may tip enough critical states leftward enough to make it mathematically impossible for the Republicans to win the presidency again.
So, my slogan re the Electoral College is, “mend it — don’t end it”.
If we are unwilling to fix it at the state levels, if we refuse to understand or acknowledge what’s coming, we are eventually going to end up with a situation that, by then, will be impossible to fix, and will forever guarantee the ‘rats the presidency.
That change could be made at the state level without a Constitutional amendment, and would put in play many rural counties in states like New York, Illinois and California.
ME and NE do this. Perfectly constitutional since the award of the electoral votes is determined by the people within state boundaries.
Unlike the National Popular Vote law [which some states have enacted] that awards the electoral votes based on the votes of people OUTSIDE of state boundaries.
Th NPV laws [which are not yet in effect] are quite likely unconstitutional.
Boy is that true. It's why Maryland is such as disaster.
Well, since the earth hasn’t died from global warming yet—what else does he have to talk about? His motel masseuse stories?
Well, Al Gore is still the nut-job that he always has been.
The electoral college was established to protect those minority states which have significantly lower population than the others. The number of representatives in the large populated states is larger, and based on population. So the populace is represented in the House.
The number of Senators gives the smaller states some more clout, because each state has the same number of Senators, not based on population.
The 17th amendment stripped the smaller states of some of their rights in that prior to that, State legislatures determined the number of Senators. Now Senators are elected by popular vote.
To get 3/4 of the States to vote to give up more of their rights under the Constitution is a stretch at best, and just plain wrong.
The Presidency just seems to have too much power already, in that the current “occupant” pays no attention to laws passed by Congress and signed by his predecessors, or to the Consitution upon which they are based. To allow that office to be filled by the pure choice of majority voters - who are becoming more and more recipients of government bribery via welfare and entitlements - is very foolhardy.
Here’s a Constitutional amendment for you... Set term limits for Congress Critters. Senators to have no more than 2 consecutive 6-year terms, members of the House, no more than 4 consecutive 2-year terms.
P.S. If we had the popular vote in 2000, the court challenges and counter challenges would have extended into the subsequent 4-year election period, because every questionable vote in every precinct of every state would have been challenged, and the leadership of our great country would have been undecided for a much longer period of time than it was, leaving us without government leadership for an unacceptable period of time. Even with the electoral college, there was insufficient transition time.
We should actually be thankful for the electoral college in 2000, because although we were attacked by al qaeda September, the fact that we had a decisive leader in Bush allowed us to put them on the run. One has only to imagine what actions might have originated by our enemies due to the lack of Presidential leadership for an extended period.
OMG is he still crying over that??? Idiot!
Getting it changed however will be a very difficult, if not impossible task.
With regard to the "inevitability" of Texas flipping to a blue state due to demographic shift, we do not need to stand around and just let it happen. We need not concede that the Hispanic voters will always vote Democrat. I believe that many Hispanics who think they are Democrats can be converted to Republican. To wit, Gov. Martinez of New Mexico.
BTW, this applies to all demographic groups. Just because they vote one way today does not mean it needs to always be that way.
Hey Al, You lost the electoral and the popular vote. Go back under your rock now.
Well, this perception really bothers me; it's as if only the battleground states decide the election. And that's just not true. The only reason there is a focus on the battleground states is that the other states have majorities for one or the other candidate. The inference is that those states with single party majorities don't matter... but they do. Take them out of the picture, and don't let their votes count, and see what you have!
With today's instant access via the internet or television, I don't really care whether the candidates visit my state or not - and I'm sure that's true of a lot of voters.
This idea that only the battleground states determine the winner is pure hokum.
P.S. Many years ago, Tampa put in a bid for the summer olympics. After seeing the traffic caused by this year's RNC, it's clear to me that there's no way the transportation system could have been improved to successfully handle the traffic volumes that would have resulted. The number of downtown streets - and highways - that were closed due to security concerns was unprecedented in the City's history.
I remember years ago, in the 90's when President Clinton visited the city. The routes to/from the airport were closed, people lined the street just to see him ride by in his limo - and you couldn't even tell if he was in the car. As for me... I'm better off if they stay away; the security issues in today's evil world make it too difficult to accommodate them for any more than the most critically needed visits.
Can’t blame Gore on this one. With so many courts backing no photo id’s to vote,the RATS are free to import their votes from all over. The RATS, for years, have been involved in fraudulent voting.
“He called for presidential elections to be determined by the popular vote.”
I call for Al Snore to be deported back to North Korea, so there.
Another Useless Idiot.
The Electoral College is calling for an end to Al Gore.
“We need not concede that the Hispanic voters will always vote Democrat. I believe that many Hispanics who think they are Democrats can be converted to Republican. To wit, Gov. Martinez of New Mexico.”
They voted for Martinez because of her name. New Mexico is the second “Euro minority” state (after California). The legislature is democratic, and will probably remain so. Again, Martinez won because she got Republican votes from Euros who were voting for her because of her policies, and from Hispanics (mostly democrats), who voted for her because of her name and because of her ethnic heritage. Just as Obama won 96% or so of the black vote. If Ms. Martinez’ name had been Jones, she might well have lost
When do you believe that blacks will stop voting “by race/ethnicity”?
Obama will get at least 90% of the black vote again this time, perhaps even more.
To believe that the time will soon come when Hispanics will begin voting AS A MAJORITY (emphasis intentional) for conservatism — well, that’s wishful thinking.
Hispanics are now approaching majority status in California. How are THEY voting?
What the Republican party needs to do is win larger majorities of “the Euro vote”. 55% is not enough to keep winning the presidency in the face of changing demographics.
So long as we embrace the notion that “if we only educate folks properly, people will vote conservative no matter what ethnicity or religion they are”, we will witness our influence dissolve into the multicolored and multicultural sludge of the “Rainbow Nation”. This is egalitarian nonsense.
Sorry if I sound cynical about this, but I harbor no illusions about the future.