Page 26 of 37 FirstFirst ... 16242526272836 ... LastLast
Results 376 to 390 of 545
  1. #376
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,954
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sportsfan24 View Post
    While the Dems are being the goody two shoes party the GOP is stealing the Country.

    “When the US Supreme Court takes up the issue of partisan gerrymandering this year, they will decide not only the fate of popular control in the House of Representatives and many state legislatures, but quite possibly the Presidency as well. If four Republican controlled state governments (Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida) change the way they allocate Electoral College votes, President Trump could be re-elected in 2020, even if he loses the popular vote by 6 percentage points. All the states need do is to allocate Electoral College votes by congressional district (like Nebraska and Maine), instead of giving all of the state’s electors to the statewide winner.

    Of course, this strategy only works to the benefit of the Republicans because the congressional districts in these states are heavily gerrymandered. As we argue in our book Gerrymandering in America, the congressional districts in many states are drawn to advantage the Republican Party. For example, in Pennsylvania in 2012 the Republicans took 13 out of 18 House districts even though the Democrats received more votes. If this partisan gerrymandering were outlawed, then allocating Electoral College votes by congressional district in the four states would actually disadvantage the Republican candidate for President.

    However, if the Supreme Court continues to allow partisan gerrymandering – as it has since its decision Vieth v. Jubelirer in 2004 – then the plan is highly effective and there is nothing that can stop the four states adopting it. Allocating Electors by congressional district is clearly legal – Nebraska and Maine already do it this way. Furthermore, the Republicans control the state legislature in all four states.

    How allocating Electors by congressional districts could benefit the Republican candidate

    Surprisingly, the strategy that is most effective for the Republicans is to change how Presidential Electors are allocated in certain states that voted for Trump in 2016.

    Of course, the Republicans would get an advantage by allocating Electors more proportionally in states that Clinton won. The problem is that this would require the support of Democrats. For example, Republican legislators in Virginia and Minnesota have already proposed such measures, and Stephen Wolf describes this as an attempt to “gerrymander the electoral college”. The problem is that both these states have Democratic governors, who would surely veto such proposals. Similarly Harry Enten at fivethirtyeight.com shows that if all states allocated Electors by Congressional districts, the Republicans could win the Presidency despite a 5 percent popular vote deficit. Again the problem is that this would require Democratic controlled states to agree to such a system.

    However, in Wisconsin, Michigan and Florida, Republicans control both the state legislature and the governorship. They can change how Presidential Electors are allocated in these states. In Pennsylvania, the Republicans control the state legislature, but there is a Democratic Governor who would presumably veto. However, there are gubernatorial elections in 2018 and Governor Tom Wolf appears vulnerable.

    But how would making changes in states that already voted for Trump further benefit him? In 2016 all Pennsylvania’s 20 Electors went to Trump. If Pennsylvania’s allocated its Electors by Congressional districts, Trump would only have received 14 of them. However, a swing of less than 1 percent would have given all 20 Pennsylvania Electors to Clinton. By going to allocation by Congressional district, the Republicans can ensure they receive most of Pennsylvania’s Electors, even if they get fewer votes than the Democrats. This amounts to taking out insurance against a swing to the Democrats.”

    https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/20...a-second-term/


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Of course it will only be done in states that benefit them. But not in states like Texas or Georgia where the Dems would gain.


  2. #377
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Shoreview
    Posts
    13,743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    This is the dumbest generation in history. They are loaded with information about eating habits, pop culture, up to the minute social rankings and have no critical thinking ability and no wisdom.
    This may be true to an extent, but my observation is that they have better hearts than you and a truer sense of decency.

  3. #378
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,444
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bad Gopher View Post
    This may be true to an extent, but my observation is that they have better hearts than you and a truer sense of decency.
    LOL! And when you believe the wrong information to achieve those desires you are a fool. Their lack of facts along with very poor common sense makes them a large detriment to society. beeg, you, and I have all just made the mistake of locking them all into one perspective. The loud and ignorant among them gets the most attention and we tend to think they are all like that. I know a lot of great young people that didn't deserve that.
    Kingdom Warriors

  4. #379

    Default

    The path to hell.....

  5. #380
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Shoreview
    Posts
    13,743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diehard View Post
    LOL! And when you believe the wrong information to achieve those desires you are a fool. Their lack of facts along with very poor common sense makes them a large detriment to society.
    On the contrary, I feel confident handing the world over to my daughters. They're going to get this thing steered out of the ditch you got us into.

  6. #381
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,444
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    We welcome them to the real world with open arms. I don't have any reason not to believe they are smarter than you. How much would that take?
    Kingdom Warriors

  7. #382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diehard View Post
    We welcome them to the real world with open arms. I don't have any reason not to believe they are smarter than you. How much would that take?
    What are you so angry?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    Of course it will only be done in states that benefit them. But not in states like Texas or Georgia where the Dems would gain.
    Sporty’s blog article is two years old. It was an article that was designed to strike fear in Libs. Beside the fact that Michigan and Wisconsin now have Dem governors, it’s unlikely that any states will choose to lose the impact of all of their state’s electoral votes going to the winner of the state’s popular vote winner.

    As you imply, why would a state that is controlled by one party choose to split its electoral votes? I doesn’t make sense. And, states with divided government aren’t likely to pass legislation for splitting the state’s electoral vote that would benefit only one party’s electoral count, whether it’s a Republican or Democrat leaning state.

    Sporty’s blog article was an useless academic exercise of theory about how Republicans could take control of the presidency through gerrymandering. One that is not currently in practice and highly unlikely to occur in the future.

  9. #384
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,954
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KillerGopherFan View Post
    Sporty’s blog article is two years old. It was an article that was designed to strike fear in Libs. Beside the fact that Michigan and Wisconsin now have Dem governors, it’s unlikely that any states will choose to lose the impact of all of their state’s electoral votes going to the winner of the state’s popular vote winner.

    As you imply, why would a state that is controlled by one party choose to split its electoral votes? I doesn’t make sense. And, states with divided government aren’t likely to pass legislation for splitting the state’s electoral vote that would benefit only one party’s electoral count, whether it’s a Republican or Democrat leaning state.

    Sporty’s blog article was an useless academic exercise of theory about how Republicans could take control of the presidency through gerrymandering. One that is not currently in practice and highly unlikely to occur in the future.
    I realize that. But it's a danger in letting states decide this. By doing it unevenly, you could end up rigging the EC even further. Do you think it would be a good thing for the country if the President could lose the popular vote by 6-8% and still win?

  10. #385

    Default

    1. I have no problem with states apportioning electoral votes proportionately.

    2. I have a big problem with tying them to congressional districts. The statewide vote total should determine the count. Pro-rated by state popular vote for congressional E-votes. Winner-take-all for senate E-votes.

    3. A responsible way to pass the law would be to have it take effect sometime "far" into the future - say 10 years.

  11. #386
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,444
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    I realize that. But it's a danger in letting states decide this. By doing it unevenly, you could end up rigging the EC even further. Do you think it would be a good thing for the country if the President could lose the popular vote by 6-8% and still win?
    If that 6-8% vote like you, a very good thing. We would need protections from you if you were of any consequence. Luckily, we are safe.
    Kingdom Warriors

  12. #387
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,954
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diehard View Post
    If that 6-8% vote like you, a very good thing. We would need protections from you if you were of any consequence. Luckily, we are safe.
    You want the protection of old white men over-ruling the majority of the country because you know what's best.

  13. #388
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,954
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GopherJake View Post
    1. I have no problem with states apportioning electoral votes proportionately.

    2. I have a big problem with tying them to congressional districts. The statewide vote total should determine the count. Pro-rated by state popular vote for congressional E-votes. Winner-take-all for senate E-votes.

    3. A responsible way to pass the law would be to have it take effect sometime "far" into the future - say 10 years.
    Even if some states do it and some don't? We need one standard. The reality is there is no good reason in 2019 not to simply go with the popular vote.

  14. #389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    Even if some states do it and some don't?
    Yes. We already have that situation.

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    We need one standard.
    No we don't. States are free to figure out how to distribute their E-votes and how to determine how to do that. I disagree that the Constitution should be amended to change this.

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    The reality is there is no good reason in 2019 not to simply go with the popular vote.
    Totally disagree (again). If you dismantle the E-college, your next move would be to change the legislature to unicameral. They are analogous.

  15. #390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bad Gopher View Post
    This may be true to an extent, but my observation is that they have better hearts than you and a truer sense of decency.
    Then there is the problem you have: that you have no idea who you are talking to. I don't make a judgement of your heart or decency because I don't know you. I'll bet you have plenty of heart. I make commentary on your opinions which have become off the rails dumb. Compassion has to make sense to be effective.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •