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

I personally am all for this. It won't garentee GOP wins but it will give us a fighting chance and most important, it would virtually negate the effect of vote fraud overriding the rest of us.
1 posted on 02/25/2013 6:24:54 PM PST by cripplecreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Springman; cyclotic; netmilsmom; RatsDawg; PGalt; FreedomHammer; queenkathy; madison10; ...
For serious consideration.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Weekly/biweekly Michigan legislative action thread
2 posted on 02/25/2013 6:27:19 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cripplecreek

I agree. it would also do away with the welfare mama’s in the big cities basically taking the whole state.


3 posted on 02/25/2013 6:29:35 PM PST by annelizly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cripplecreek
“Basically my view is this wouldn’t be the appropriate time...

What would you wait for? Some time where you were not within 4 years of a presidential election?

5 posted on 02/25/2013 6:34:39 PM PST by C210N (When people fear government there is tyranny; when government fears people there is liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cripplecreek

I’m for it as well, because of the limitation on fraud, as well as it being generally more representative of the voting patterns of the state. One consequence that may not have been considered, is that going this route will enable third party candidates to possibly siphon off delegates, by winning a district here and there. Personally I’m all for having more choices.


7 posted on 02/25/2013 6:36:39 PM PST by Galatians513 (this space available for catchy tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cripplecreek

The people have it within their power to rebalance their own government.


12 posted on 02/25/2013 6:48:27 PM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cripplecreek

I read that earlier on mlive, the comments were obviously mostly retards going to U-M.

These same RETARDS all want a national election based on the popular vote - and went on to claim that it is republicans that want to steal elections.

Only one thing to say on saving America:

REPEAL THE 17TH AMENDMENT!

There would be no Fat Stabacow or Karl Marxist Lenin as our senators, other states too.

Unlike the Founder Founders who had designed a republic, libtards always prefer mob rule majorities as they have no understanding of a representative republic.


15 posted on 02/25/2013 8:37:49 PM PST by quantim (Victory is not relative, it is absolute.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cripplecreek
This is a fairer proposition than the one working its way through states - the national popular vote interstate compact. This is a scheme whereby a state promises to allocate its electoral votes to the candidate who wins the most popular votes nationally. Even in the case where a state like California was to have gone overwhelmingly for the libdem, if the republican happened to win a higher number of popular votes nationally, California would pledge its electoral votes for the candidate who lost their state election.
17 posted on 02/25/2013 9:43:44 PM PST by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: cripplecreek

I’m pretty worried about this - it’s playing with fire. People will see this as a blatant electoral vote grab. It might lead to greater popular support for a National Popular Vote.


18 posted on 02/25/2013 11:36:24 PM PST by JerseyanExile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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