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


1 posted on 03/17/2015 6:48:47 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: SeekAndFind

Clinton’s deep résumé...

...or improving state of the economy.

?????????


2 posted on 03/17/2015 6:50:32 AM PDT by Darth Reardon (Is it any wonder I'm not the president?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Apparently the midterm never happened.

Pray America is waking


3 posted on 03/17/2015 6:51:05 AM PDT by bray (Palin/Cruz to the WH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

I’m hoping it will get even harder and give us a fighting chance in Michigan. No more letting Detroit and Flint decide.

House Bill 4310: Pro-rate Michigan’s electoral college presidential votes
Introduced by Rep. Cindy Gamrat (R) on March 5, 2015, to require that at political party conventions one presidential elector from each congressional district and two electors at large be chosen. The elector ultimately chose for each district would the one whose party’s candidate for president won in that congressional district. The at-large candidates elected would be, as now, those who belonged to the political party whose presidential candidate won statewide. This would end the current “winner take all” system.
http://www.michiganvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=168841

Senate Bill 197: Pro-rate Michigan’s electoral college presidential votes
Introduced by Sen. Dave Hildenbrand (R) on March 11, 2015, to end the current winner-take-all system of allocating Michigan’s presidential electors, and instead pro-rate the state’s electoral college votes on the basis of the state’s popular vote totals.
http://www.michiganvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=168894


4 posted on 03/17/2015 6:52:02 AM PDT by cripplecreek ("For by wise guidance you can wage your war")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

What the story doesn’t tell you is voter fatigue with the Democrats - with the unpopular Obama Administration after 8 years in power.

Historically, its tough to win a third term. G.W Bush pulled it off in 1988 both because of President Reagan’s popularity and the Democrats nominated an absolutely unlikable, wooden candidate.

Hillary is closely identified with Obama and she has her share of problems. Her age, lack of a record, and scandals just weigh against her.

On the other side, the GOP has a deep bench of formidable candidates. The Democrats have no one with the name recognition Hillary brings to the table.

If for some reason she can’t run, they face steep odds in retaining the White House in 2016.


7 posted on 03/17/2015 6:56:54 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

There’s most definitely a huge initial EC advantage for the dems. They go into any modern presidential election with a 250+ EV head start. The key is whether the GOP can hold that firewall. If VA-CO or FL fall again, the election goes to the democrat.


9 posted on 03/17/2015 7:04:36 AM PDT by ScottinVA (GOP = Geldings Obama Possesses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Republicans should give up now and not even run a candidate. Her Thighness Medusa is enevitable.


10 posted on 03/17/2015 7:14:56 AM PDT by Ancient Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Would be sweet if a conservative ran in the sheep’s clothing of being a Democrat, then once voted in, would throw off the wool and actually preside as a conservative.

I know,,dreaming.


13 posted on 03/17/2015 8:08:05 AM PDT by austinaero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Yeah - the Dems have opened the borders and let in a flood of illegals.

That gives blue states a higher population (remember the census counts everyone, not just citizens).


16 posted on 03/17/2015 8:19:39 AM PDT by Tzimisce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Don’t count Pennsylvania yet.

After two years of Tom Wolf proposing to raise every tax under the sun, voters here may experience projectile vomiting when you say the word “Democrat”.


17 posted on 03/17/2015 9:06:53 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Somebody had to write a book to explain that Demon Rats begin with an electoral college advantage?

Really?

That can be ‘splained on one sheet of paper, Lucy.


19 posted on 03/17/2015 3:56:48 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind
Consider if the law followed by Maine and Nebraska were in place in 2012 in the rest of the nation.

2012 represented the first time since 1960 that the winner of the election did not win the popular vote in a majority of congressional districts. As President Obama was reelected, the reduction of his overall percentage of the vote from 53.7 in 2008 to 52.0 in 2012 also resulted in a majority of districts voting for Romney. Obama, the Democrat, ‘won’ 209 districts while the Republican, former Governor Romney, ‘won’ 226.

That would put Romney in the lead--though not at a win.

Now, if I recall correctly, in Nebraska and Maine, the OTHER two electoral votes go to the "overall" statewide winner.

Romney won 24 states in 2012, which would have given him 48 more electoral votes if the Nebraska/Maine model were followed.

226+48=274 Electoral votes.

Valerie's man-child was able to seize 26 states plus the DC region. That would net her team 55 EVs.

209+55=264.

Romney would be the one working to rebuild America, instead of Hussein doing Val's bidding in destroying the republic.


20 posted on 03/17/2015 3:58:57 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ 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