It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Republicans alarmed at the apparent challenges they face in winning the White House are preparing an all-out assault on the Electoral College system in critical states, an initiative that would significantly ease the party's path to the Oval Office.
Senior Republicans say they will try to leverage their party's majorities in Democratic-leaning states in an effort to end the winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes. Instead, bills that will be introduced in several Democratic states would award electoral votes on a proportional basis.
Some Republicans acknowledge that the party would open itself up to charges of political opportunism, but that they would frame the proposal as a chance to make the system more fair.
"With the frustration of the current system—and the fact that almost everyone would agree proportional or CD is more representative and maybe more fair than the current winner-take-all—Republicans have a strong, righteous argument," Anuzis said. "However, the motivation would be viewed as being purely political since it hasn’t been done before."
Originally posted by apokalupsis33vital
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
I can definitely see how this could be a good thing, however, to truly be fair, shouldn't this reform be on a national level instead of just the states of their choosing?
In an effort to get more control over the delegate-selection process in the future, Romney’s people overstepped in a way that infuriated many conventiongoers who are otherwise supporting him. Yesterday, the Republican National Committee proposed a new rule that would allow the party’s nominee to overrule state conventions and choose his or her own delegates. This, many feared, would turn delegate slots into perks for insiders and donors, and further shut activists out of the process. The reaction was livid. In a widely circulated open letter to the Republican National Committee, Thompson wrote, “The audacity of creating a firestorm when there is an opportunity for unity and peace that is needed to win back the Senate and take back the White House is irresponsible and I seriously question the motives of those behind this attempt.”
What do you think of this plan by the GOP?
Originally posted by ararisq
I would agree with this for California which is too large and I would agree with giving rural communities more weight than they have now compared to urban communities. They are just as important to our survival and completely shadowed by the large cities. I guess 'proportional' would work out in that case since most people outside of cities vote Republican and most inside vote Democrat.
It might actually make it possible for a 3rd party run as well. heee heeeedit on 12/17/2012 by ararisq because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I think it's about time and long overdue. It's a change that can ONLY happen now...that is..the dead time between the election and the start of the next campaign season. No one knows who will be next up and this President can't be ...so it's not personal. It's as far as it can ever get.
However, Proportional representation is something I saw MANY Dems pushing hard for here before the election. (ATS has archives that recorded all that for posterity if anyone forgets..lol) It makes sense.
Plans to replace that with a proportional system are under consideration in half a dozen states, including Pennsylvania, Virginia and Michigan.
All were presidential battlegrounds that President Obama carried last fall. But their state governments remain under Republican control, and some GOP lawmakers are pushing changes that would make it harder for Democrats to prevail in future contests.
In Florida, the Republican speaker of the state House of Representatives expressed opposition last week to changing the way the largest swing state allots electoral votes, almost certainly dooming any chance that it will happen there.