Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dem's amendment would give 29 more electoral votes to popular-vote winner
The Hill ^ | 10/26/12 | Jonathan Easley

Posted on 10/26/2012 1:38:36 PM PDT by Nachum

The head of the House Democratic campaign arm this week proposed a constitutional amendment that would give the winner of the popular vote in the presidential race an additional 29 electoral votes. Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) did not offer an explanation in the joint resolution filed in the House for why he was proposing to change the way elections in the U.S. are decided. Under the Constitution, the candidate who wins at least 270 electoral votes wins the presidency, regardless of the popular vote. The prospect of a split between the popular vote and the Electoral College usually provokes cries

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: amendment; dem; electoral
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last
Well, this is a new one.
1 posted on 10/26/2012 1:38:40 PM PDT by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Well, this is a new one.
_____________________

And just before the election....


2 posted on 10/26/2012 1:39:58 PM PDT by leapfrog0202 ("the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery" Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

How about let’s not.

NO.


3 posted on 10/26/2012 1:40:44 PM PDT by Irenic (The pencil sharpener and Elmer's glue is put away-- we've lost the red wheel barrow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

How’d they come up with 29? If you don’t like the Electoral College just eliminate it and go with the popular vote (I wouldn’t do that myself). What kind of bizarre bs is this?


4 posted on 10/26/2012 1:42:04 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Why did this fool even bother?


5 posted on 10/26/2012 1:42:04 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker ((God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/


6 posted on 10/26/2012 1:42:36 PM PDT by Nachum (The List was hacked- www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Stupid proposal and not a well written article. The Constitution does not say.... the candidate who wins at least 270 electoral votes wins the presidency, regardless of the popular vote...


7 posted on 10/26/2012 1:44:11 PM PDT by 11th Commandment (http://www.thirty-thousand.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
one word..... NO
8 posted on 10/26/2012 1:45:27 PM PDT by kingattax (99 % of liberals give the rest a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

1) A constitutional amendment? That takes a lot. Wasn’t the last one the ERA?

2) If Romney wins the popular vote, you can expect them to withdraw this.


9 posted on 10/26/2012 1:45:53 PM PDT by Lx (Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Would not be for this election
It is really stupid
No justification for it
Only happened twice in our history
The guy is moron
Why 29, why not 523

If it were me, I would have states award the EV proportionally


10 posted on 10/26/2012 1:46:41 PM PDT by svcw (Why is one cell on another planet considered life, and in the womb it is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA
How’d they come up with 29?

Same number of electoral votes as Florida. Coincidence?

11 posted on 10/26/2012 1:47:03 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I love the smell of desperation in the morning!


12 posted on 10/26/2012 1:47:54 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Obama should change his campaign slogan to "Yes, we am!" Sounds as stupid as his administration is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

My counter-offer:

MAKE VOTE FRAUD A CAPITAL OFFENSE!!!;)


13 posted on 10/26/2012 1:48:34 PM PDT by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA
How’d they come up with 29?

Probably because their projections indicate a 296-242 Romney win and they want to hedge their bets.

14 posted on 10/26/2012 1:48:34 PM PDT by Michael.SF. (Obama Lied, Stevens died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

NO!!!


15 posted on 10/26/2012 1:48:38 PM PDT by blueyon (The U. S. Constitution - read it and weep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Nope.


16 posted on 10/26/2012 1:48:48 PM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Why 29? Why not 100? Would they come from the other seven states?


17 posted on 10/26/2012 1:51:30 PM PDT by SandyInSeattle (Eat Mor Chikin!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

No. They are looking for a way to cheat, or they have one planned already. Run, don’t walk, away from this temptation.


18 posted on 10/26/2012 1:51:37 PM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
What's the logic behind 29 votes? Would 30 just be silly?

This is just an invitation to "find" boxes of votes after election day from places well known for it like Chicago, Seattle and the Minnesota prison system.

19 posted on 10/26/2012 1:52:01 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (Big Bird is a brood parasite: laid in our nest 43 years ago and we are still feeding him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Are they going to amend the Constitution to do this?


20 posted on 10/26/2012 1:53:17 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

This better never pass


21 posted on 10/26/2012 1:54:19 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Here’s and idea from a guy in a state with less than 10 electoral votes to offer: NO!


22 posted on 10/26/2012 1:54:19 PM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Lets just get rid of the 17th Amendment so my state can have two senators that actually represent the state rather than two senators who represent Karl Marx.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
23 posted on 10/26/2012 1:55:54 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Lx

I think the last one prevented Congress from giving themselves an immediate pay raise


24 posted on 10/26/2012 1:56:01 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle

He’s from NY state and I’m guessing his proposal would mean that the winner of the national popular vote would get NY’s 29 electoral votes no matter which candidate actually wins the election in that state.


25 posted on 10/26/2012 1:56:16 PM PDT by 1raider1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Lx

Do you remember when Clinton was polling high in the popular vote in his first run, and all the media pundits were coming out advocating using the popular vote instead of the EV count. Turns out he lost the popular vote and you never heard another word about using the popular vote after that ...until NOW! What scumbags!


26 posted on 10/26/2012 1:57:15 PM PDT by FrdmLvr (culture, language, borders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Desperation


27 posted on 10/26/2012 1:58:11 PM PDT by HollyB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA
How’d they come up with 29?

It would have been enough to turn Bush - Gore into a "mandate" for Gore. It is also the number of electoral votes of Florida.

28 posted on 10/26/2012 1:58:11 PM PDT by Ingtar (Everyone complains about the weather, but only Liberals try to legislate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

This would push campaigns to court large states rather than just swing states and the candidates would have to offer pork.


29 posted on 10/26/2012 1:59:59 PM PDT by Homer1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

...it will probably pass.

With McCain and the usual gang of idiots giving us a lecture on how it will make elections more fair.

So what do you want me to say?


30 posted on 10/26/2012 2:00:41 PM PDT by Tzimisce (THIS SUCKS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FrdmLvr
Turns out he lost the popular vote and you never heard another word about using the popular vote after that ...until NOW! What scumbags!

Oh they haven't stopped pushing it at all. In fact our former representation on the GOP national committee and former state chair, Saul Anuzis is still pushing it. Fred Thompson is also pimping the idea.
31 posted on 10/26/2012 2:03:58 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I give them credit for figuring out up front it would have to be a Constitutional amendment. They’re not usually that bright.


32 posted on 10/26/2012 2:06:18 PM PDT by discostu (Not a part of anyone's well oiled machine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
If the electoral college is going to be reformed, I would get rid of the electors and instead award one electoral vote per congressional district carried plus two for each state carried. A state would be considered to be carried by a candidate if the candidate won a majority of the state's congressional districts or, in case of tie in districts, the state's popular vote.

That would keep from giving too much weight to the larger states and would firewall vote fraud at the district level (once you steal enough votes to steal a district, stealing more wouldn't help).

33 posted on 10/26/2012 2:07:49 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FrdmLvr

They jumped on that bandwagon again after 2000 when AG won the popular but lost the election.


34 posted on 10/26/2012 2:09:35 PM PDT by discostu (Not a part of anyone's well oiled machine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

That won’t pass.


35 posted on 10/26/2012 2:11:20 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

LOL! One of those times I wish JimRob would include a “like” button!


36 posted on 10/26/2012 2:17:16 PM PDT by jagusafr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

How about a law requiring a picture ID to vote instead?


37 posted on 10/26/2012 2:22:33 PM PDT by Proud2BeRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

This will be quickly withdrawn when Romney wins the popular vote...


38 posted on 10/26/2012 2:27:53 PM PDT by Mannaggia l'America
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Actually there is a good argument for popular vote vs electoral college. Under the EC system, eleven battleground states get the most attention because they are swing states. The rest are ignored because one party dominates it. In states where one party dominates by 10 or more, very little effort or campaigning occurs. Rather the dominant states are used as fund raising sources to fight in the 11 swing states. One way is to decide delegates by Congressional districts like Maine and Nebraska. Win that district, you win the delegates.


39 posted on 10/26/2012 2:29:49 PM PDT by Fee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Yeah, good luck getting 38 states to agree!


40 posted on 10/26/2012 2:30:08 PM PDT by RPTMS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Stuff like this is what makes me sure that the internal polling for the democrats shows them losing big time.

This is not the kind of stuff that is suggested by a team that thinks they will win.


41 posted on 10/26/2012 2:44:51 PM PDT by Preachin' (I stand with many voters who will never vote for a pro abortion candidate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I like it.

Seriously.

The problem with going by popular vote, you get “turn out the base elections” and occasionally a Hitler wins.

With the electoral college, NY and TX are left out and only swing voters in swing states matter in a close election. THIS IS A VERY GOOD THING. The center must hold and civil wars are bad.

The bad thing about the electoral college is that outside of 10 swing states, the rest of the country is ignored.

This hybrid plan means you need to pay attention to the swing voters in swing states AND AT THE SAME TIME TURN OUT YOUR RESPECTIVE BASE IN NY, CA, TX, AL, ETC.


42 posted on 10/26/2012 2:46:12 PM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fee
Actually there is a good argument for popular vote vs electoral college.

Popular vote for president would be a problem. In a close race we'd have legal action galore demanding recount after recount in every state. It would take forever to declare a winner.

43 posted on 10/26/2012 2:47:47 PM PDT by ken in texas (I was taught to respect my elders but it keeps getting harder to find any.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: DManA
How’d they come up with 29?

It looks to me like the Democrats believe they will come up 28 votes short after election day. Great news.

44 posted on 10/26/2012 2:50:52 PM PDT by Hoodat ("As for God, His way is perfect" - Psalm 18:30)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

I like this plan.

Today, candidates are spending more time in NH and Iowa than NY and TX. This is wrong.

With a strictly popular vote plan, NH and IA would be totally ignored, and equally wrong.

This plan makes candidates focus on the swing states and also do some campaigning in the big states too.


45 posted on 10/26/2012 2:53:50 PM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Fee

I don’t like the popular vote because you can get a Hitler winning.

also a big storm like the one headed to NYC could change the results of the election (or a huge snowstorm in MN, ID, and WY), (or a New england snow storm).

With the electoral college, both parties are forced to the middle.


46 posted on 10/26/2012 2:56:31 PM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Where does it say the the CONSTITUTION that the winner of the popular votes gets 29 more EC votes?? It must be somewhere in the AMERICAN MARXIST CONSTITUTION but not in the one made by our FOUNDING FATHERS...
47 posted on 10/26/2012 3:07:59 PM PDT by ExCTCitizen (Yes, Obama, I had help with my business. MY CUSTOMERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

OK, we’ll swap you the 29 EVs for (1) a full re-registration of every voter in the nation, in person, with full ID, every four years. (2) Removal of all deceased persons from the voter rolls within five days of their death announcement. (3) ID required of every voter, no exceptions. (4)No vote counts released to the media until after the polls close on the West Coast. (5) No physical votes (Paper ballots, punchcards, etc.) to be handled out of public view; members of both parties must be involved in any transporting of ballots from precints to town hall or wherever ballots are taken for counting and (6) all counting to be done in public.

Oh, I almost forgot: (7) Ballots “found” after the election will be void. I know, maybe the RATs will try to hide some from Pub districts to invalidate them, that’s why workers from both parties have to transport them.


48 posted on 10/26/2012 3:11:04 PM PDT by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed &water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

29 instead of 30 - lol
It’s like my granddaughter told me last year, “you know why we celebrate the 4th of July?” (She’s six, so said why do we) As only a six year old can say it, “because grandma saying happy July 5th would sound silly”
When I read ‘29’, that is exactly what I thought about a bunch of six year olds.


49 posted on 10/26/2012 3:15:07 PM PDT by svcw (Why is one cell on another planet considered life, and in the womb it is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

Look what happened when we stated electing senators by popular vote.

Here in Michigan, Detroit, Ann Arbor, and Flint get to elect our senators, and the rest of us get to STFU and take it.


50 posted on 10/26/2012 3:22:09 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson