Electoral College by Congressional Districts?

[cptjohnstone]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

It is an idea that would broaden the democratic process...............give more representation to the people and get closer to a one man one vote concept.

it is gaining monentum

http://www.christianpost.com/news/go...ge-edge-87014/

http://www.politicspa.com/house-rs-r...ge-plan/44960/

http://www.thonline.com/news/iowa-il...f8fd7b8fc.html

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

it is gaining monentum

Didn't you once ask the same question about Obama's birth certificate?

[JD Barleycorn]

Since this web is still going on I have to take Randy to task (I am sure that being tied up and beaten is not a new experience for him) about his poorly thought out opinions. The Constitution left it to the states how the electoral votes would be determined. Only if you try to change the electoral college does it cause a constitutional issue so you can take you TP attacks put them up your ass.

If a popular vote was used (which is uncontitutional and contrary to the spirit of the founders) very few elections would change including 2000. Is it too hard to see that if we had a popular vote then the campaigns would change and Gore would have still lost. Of the 55 electoral votes generated by California 27 would go to the republican candidate if we went by congressional district. Gore loses again.

I differ that California, Texas, Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, and Florida would be against this. The party would definitely be against it but the state would get a lot of attention if the GOP had a chance to get electoral votes in CA or dems in TX.

[cptjohnstone]

Originally Posted by bigtex

Didn't you once ask the same question about Obama's birth certificate?

I hope you are still on this board when "all" of the questions that surround the mystery man come out and they will come out someday

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

I hope you are still on this board when "all" of the questions that surround the mystery man come out and they will come out someday

I'm not holding my breath!

[cptjohnstone]

Originally Posted by bigtex

I'm not holding my breath!

you and the rest of your donkey friends live here

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

you and the rest of your donkey friends live here

If so, I wouldn't hold my breath there either!

[JD Barleycorn]

I have advocated in print (which is why I must choose my words carefully to remain anonymous) an electoral system of congressional district representation. I have done the math as well to support my arguments. You won't see that here because it would probably give me away so...

The basic premise is to copy what Nebraska and Maine have already done. It is perfectly legal and constitutional for a state to decide on such representation. Take Kansas and Missouri; Kansas has four congressional districts and two senators. Missouri has seven congressional districts and two senators. In Kansas those six electoral votes nearly always go to the GOP and the district around Lawrence nearly always goes democrat. Those voters are always overlooked. In Missouri the areas around Kansas City, St. Louis, and Jefferson City nearly always go democrat and are almost always overlooked during the general election. The two votes for senator would go to the popular winner in each state.

Why would Kansas and Missouri support district voting? The primaries and general election are all about votes. No democrat will campaign in Texas or Kansas because it is a waste of money. Great for the GOP but bad for the state. States want recognition, they want campaign stops, they want money spent and their members wooed by the candidates. No republican is going to campaign in California, New York, or Illinois because it both a waste of time and money. Once again, if the candidate had a chance to take away some votes then they would come, spend money, do photos with the locals, and put those areas on the map.

Taking all this into account and no change in campaign strategy, the only election that would change would be the one in 2012. Romney would win by 7 electoral votes going by congressional election results. Gore would not win in 2000 as much as you wish it.

[cptjohnstone]

I think we will see more states do this, especially the Republican controlled state houses that lose to the Democrats in the popular vote. I have posted those states above

another article

http://www.journaltimes.com/news/loc...a4bcf887a.html