It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

GOP's Plan to Sway the Electoral College Vote in 2014

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientiaFortisDefendit
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Hey, something has to be done to offset all the illegals voting democrat.


That's pretty much the truth.

Each side has their own tricks to beat the system.




posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:16 PM
link   
Once again the stupidity in this country rears it's head both from the people and from the government.

There is a serious issue here. The issue that a few politicians can swipe their pen a few times and change the power of an individual's vote. People realize this is wrong. People realize they shouldn't have this power.

SO

They attack Republicans.

INSTEAD

Of saying "Electoral college is messed up and should be removed ASAP because it's a flawed system open to abuse"

You see that? You see how quickly and easily it is to distract and divert people's care about a real issue into useless partisan crap that will never go anywhere? JUST like that! Clean, simple, easy, almost invisible.

You see, this happens because democrats are not against corruption, they are against republicans. Just like republicans are not against corruption, they are against democrats.

So when republicans are exposed for being corrupt, the democrats don't attack the system that allows them to be corrupt, they simply attack the republicans. Why? Because when the democrats get into those same positions they want to be able to use that same system. They want to be corrupt too. But they can't be corrupt too if they actually fix the problem. so they divert everyone's attention into "Republicans are evil" instead of "The system is broken"

Do you get it yet?

"The system is broken"

That is the ONLY thing that needs to be said about ANYTHING. Those who get really involved with details only do so to avoid admitting the system is broken so that it's still available for them to use it.

Wake the eff up idiots.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 11:02 PM
link   
The Democrats and Obama's fan club are taking the loss hard and seem to be crying "The sky is falling" every chance they get. While they point fingers at the Republicans for their evil ways, they conveniently over look what the Dems have pulled for the last several years.

edit on 10-11-2014 by DAVID64 because: misspelling



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 11:47 PM
link   
a reply to: DAVID64

And while many of us have seen the BS the Dems have pulled, the Republicans remain blind to their ignorance in the same manner.

Suck up the propaganda, fools.....don't mind me while I laugh at your expense.....morons!

edit on 11/10/2014 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 11:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: DAVID64
The Democrats and Obama's fan club are taking the loss hard and seem to be crying "The sky is falling" every chance they get. While they point fingers at the Republicans for their evil ways, they conveniently over look what the Dems have pulled for the last several years.


No not really, I used to support the republicans, then latter in life I supported the democrats, now I don't support either party. You wanna know why our country is in such a mess just look at our two party system.

Both republicans and democrats support the party ideology and agenda and this has nothing to do with the constitution.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 01:40 AM
link   
Yes, Democrats have a whole website dedicated to their gerrymandering efforts: REDMAP

What, that's a Republican website? Well, where's the Democrat one? There's not one??? Hmmm.

~~~~~~~

Here's the thing. It seems that the garden-variety Republican seems to believe that just because those pretty maps are all colored in "red" on TV, that means everyone in all those places voted Republican.

Hate to break it to you guys, It doesn't. In fact, if you installed true proportional voting, the House would have gone to the Democrats in 2012:



Hoyer spokeswoman Stephanie Young directed us to a December 2012 analysis by the Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan, Washington, D.C. publication that analyzes and handicaps congressional and gubernatorial races, with the headline "House GOP Won 49 Percent of Votes, 54 Percent of Seats." (The story and corresponding chart are accessible to subscribers only.)

By Cook’s calculations, House Democrats out-earned their Republican counterparts by 1.17 million votes. Read another way, Democrats won 50.59 percent of the two-party vote. Still, they won just 46.21 percent of seats, leaving the Republicans with 234 seats and Democrats with 201.

It was the second time in 70 years that a party won the majority of the vote but didn’t win a majority of the House seats, according to the analysis.


House Democrats Won Majority of Popular Vote

But wait, how could that happen?



Cook’s House editor David Wasserman pointed to two "unprecedented" factors that explain the phenomenon: the thick concentration of Democratic votes in urban areas and the GOP’s wide control of drawing congressional districts in 2010.


So bring on Proportional Voting Reds ... President Gore and Speaker Pelosi will thank you.
edit on 2Tue, 11 Nov 2014 02:00:42 -060014p0220141166 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 05:29 AM
link   
a reply to: sheepslayer247

If you're thinking I'm a Republican, you might want to go read some of my post election comments. Insults are usually the last resort of someone who can't justify their position.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
"GOP may revive plan to influence Electoral College". You have parroted Typical MSNBC (AKA the Obama Network) talking points. Did you see the MAY part? It's total partisan speculation and deflection on the part of MSNBC because their team lost heavily. It's just opinion, speculation, and fear mongering to keep the left wing machine that supports that network coming back for more partisan crap.

Fox does the same thing on the right side. It's a common tactic by the partisan media for their team. Speculative bias-confirmation opinion. MAY MAY MAY.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 06:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jainine
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
"GOP may revive plan to influence Electoral College". You have parroted Typical MSNBC (AKA the Obama Network) talking points. Did you see the MAY part? It's total partisan speculation and deflection on the part of MSNBC because their team lost heavily. It's just opinion, speculation, and fear mongering to keep the left wing machine that supports that network coming back for more partisan crap.

Fox does the same thing on the right side. It's a common tactic by the partisan media for their team. Speculative bias-confirmation opinion. MAY MAY MAY.


And then, sometimes, the facts are just the facts without regard to which "side" one thinks they're on:

Washington Post - How a constitutional quirk could guarantee a GOP win in 2016



Jim Geraghty laid out a plan for untying the knot over the weekend, one that will make Democrats livid: Republicans in the state legislatures in several swing states could change how their states' votes are divvied up in the Electoral College, using their authority under the Constitution.


Jim Geraghty is a conservative blogger and regular contributor to National Review Online and National Review, both noted for their "liberal content."



This isn't a new idea. As Matthew Yglesias notes, this idea has been proposed and rejected by Republican elected officials already in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Perhaps the proposal just seemed too slimy, even though it's constitutional. Perhaps those Republican politicians remembered why so many states adopted the winner-takes-all system in the first place, about 200 years ago: when a state's electors vote as a bloc, they're much more influential.


Now, perhaps you'll explain to us how liberal the Washington Post is as well?



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jainine
Did you see the MAY part? It's total partisan speculation


Yes, I did. You're right, it is speculation. But the plan exists and has been discussed and some states have initiated legislation, before backing out.



Virginia was the first state to move on the plan in 2013, advancing a bill out of a state Senate subcommittee that would apportion its electoral votes by Congressional district rather than the winner-take-all method used in 48 of the 50 states.


Source

This isn't just some "pie in the sky" idea that could never really happen. And I haven't tried to sell it as something that IS happening. I said, "Some states are entertaining the idea..." I don't know how much more honest I can be...



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Somebody should sue somebody over this.




posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

This is why we need to get rid of the electoral college and let the people of the nation as a whole vote the President into office not just a few states.


I just knew there was something we could agree on. The EC is a flawed system at this point regardless of ideology.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: howmuch4another

And I agree with you both. A system that disregards a whole group of people just because they're in the minority, disenfranchises them. Every PERSON'S vote should count. Not every state's and certainly not every gerrymandered congressional district's.

Every person's vote should weigh the same.
edit on 11/11/2014 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 11:07 AM
link   
The Electoral College is Halfway to Being Abolished



... nine states plus the District of Columbia have now signed on, representing 136 electoral votes. That's 50.4 percent of the votes needed for the plan to come into force and for the electoral college to be abolished.

But there's a catch. If you look at the nine states that have passed the plan (not to mention D.C.), all of them did so when both houses of their state legislatures were run by Democrats. All but Hawaii had Democratic governors, and the Hawaii legislature overrode the Republican governor's veto. There's nothing inherent in the proposal that gives Democrats an advantage, and plenty of Republicans — like former Sens. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) and Jake Garn (R-Utah) and former Gov. Jim Edgar (R-Ill.) — support it. But since the electoral college cost Al Gore the presidency in 2000, abolishing it has come to be perceived as a Democratic priority.

As long as that's still the case, the National Popular Vote compact just isn't happening. The numbers aren't there.


The GOP would not win a nationwide popular vote, nor would they win if electoral votes were apportioned by state (which they are now). This is why it's so critical for the GOP to adopt an "allocation by congressional district" approach, to guarantee that they could win in the purple states and take the presidency without a majority of the people's votes counted.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Just remember Heretic, every vote is sacred, every vote counts, we must do everything we can to insure the integrity of our vote ... as long as it's Republican.

Repeat after me.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: howmuch4another

Yes, the electoral college is pretty silly.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic


The GOP would not win a nationwide popular vote, nor would they win if electoral votes were apportioned by state (which they are now). This is why it's so critical for the GOP to adopt an "allocation by congressional district" approach, to guarantee that they could win in the purple states and take the presidency without a majority of the people's votes counted.


I wouldn't be so sure. It always depends on several factors and not just party. In 2012 Obama won by 4% in the popular vote with a 58% voter turnout. The electoral college looked like a slaughter. Romney was severely boycotted by conservatives. Romney still would have most likely lost but the difference in votes was almost the same as the number of voters who stayed home for the GOP.
Also if conservatives in states such as NY and CA think their vote would matter you would see better turnout from that constituency as their current apathy in blue states is huge. My hope is that the elimination of the EC you would actually give a viable third party legs.
edit on 11/11/2014 by howmuch4another because: spelling



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 11:28 AM
link   
This is why I am becoming more and more libertarian.

As a conservative, I believe in state sovereignty and states rights. The electoral college in our federalist system treats each state as an integral entity.

The president (who is supposed to preside over the congress of the states acting in concert) is to be elected by the decision of entire states---permanent legal and political units that are non gerrymandered by victors.

State officials should oppose this, and refuse to count electoral votes this way. For ANY state.

Does a federalist system issue from district rights? when districts are redrawn every 10 years? Hell no. It is states' rights.

Anyone who supports this plan is an Enemy of the Constitution.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: howmuch4another
In 2012 Obama won by 4% in the popular vote with a 58% voter turnout. The electoral college looked like a slaughter. Romney was severely boycotted by conservatives. Romney still would have most likely lost but the difference in votes was almost the same as the number of voters who stayed home for the GOP.


I understand your point about voter turnout and that's a huge problem, but take a look at how 2012 would have been different, had the electoral votes been allocated according to congressional districts.

From the source in the OP:


Consider how that would have played out in 2012. If electoral votes had been allocated according to congressional districts in Republican-controlled states that voted for President Obama, Mitt Romney would have won 70 more EVs than he actually did. He’d have gotten 18 out of 23 in Pennsylvania, 17 out of 29 in Florida, 12 out of 18 in Ohio, 9 out of 14 in Virginia, 9 out of 16 in Michigan, and 5 out of 10 in Wisconsin. Under the current system, he won zero in those states.


Source

It would have been 276 to 262 with Romney winning. Forget the states, forget the popular vote. The Republican districts would have decided the presidency.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

agreed. It would have been tilted and will be if the idea is enacted successfully. Gerrymandering is a huge advantage to the party in control especially at a local level. I mirror Tovnar in my thoughts on it. Give the folks in Texas that are liberal and the folks in NY and CA that are conservative a voice and lets get down to business. I bet a lot of the divisiveness would actually be diminished. Right now the cynicism and apoplexy from both sides are ruining our system.




top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join