NEW California Primary Poll -Hillary 50% Obama 24% JRE- 16%

California's electoral votes should be divided.

Let's hope it doesn't make it to the ballot, because we have many uninformed voters here who do not do their homework.

And lots of slick, weaselly Republics who try to trick the voters.

1) It's unlikely to get on the ballot

2) The measue violates Article ll Section l of the Constitution, ergo:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

3) I assume the Democratic Secretary Of State won't certify the results even if it makes it on the ballot and even if it passes...

4) That will tie it up in the Court for years.

5) If the president was elected through in your face, blatant shenanigans the Congress wouldn't certify the results.

6) The republic would probably come apart...

I hope that you're right about it being unlikely to get on the ballot. However, I don't understand your point about it being unconstitutional. Maine and Nebraska have had divided electoral votes for years.

http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/me_ne.htm

Maine and Nebraska do it... But it was the legislature that decided how Electors would be selected not the people...Technically the legislature could give the Electors to the loser...

Now I see what you're saying.

If the people and not the legislators could determine how Electors are selected why have Electors at all?

At least I think so. Divided electors would be a close approximation of that, but only if it were done all at once. Doing it one state at a time would make things less democratic.

It would make a bad system even worse and undermine the democratic/republican system of representation even more...


It's a dumb initiative...I can see so many roadblocks including the California legislature not certifying the results....

And by a large margin I believe...

we have a very sharp SOS here.

We worked very hard to get her elected in 06, and kicked out the Republican who wasn't doing a damn thing about all of the crooked electronic voting machines.

Then came Debra Bowen, and she changed that in a hurry.


Secretary of state casts doubt on future of electronic voting

John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer

Sunday, December 2, 2007

"Electronic voting systems used throughout California still aren't good enough to be trusted with the state's elections, Secretary of State Debra Bowen said Saturday."

While Bowen has been putting tough restrictions and new security requirements on the use of the touch screen machines, she admitted having doubts as to whether the electronic voting systems will ever meet the standards she believes are needed in California.

"It's a real challenge," she said at a San Francisco airport conference on voting and elections. "I don't rule out the ingenuity of some computer science student now in the eighth grade," but what's available now isn't as transparent or auditable as the paper ballot systems they replaced.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/02/BASRTMOPE.DTL

More to come, believe me...

Nov


Oct


Sept


Obama has lost 3 pts since the Sept survey

Plus the labelling of your chart is patently false, because until today nobody has voted in the Democratic Primary for the 2008 Presidential election.

But nobody here is disputing that Hillary remains the frontrunner in most national polls.

My point is that the Iowa caucuses are still a whole month away, and history tells us that the perceived frontrunner at this stage in the campaign doesn't always win the nomination.

Nice pie!

A poll lead 2 months out is not the same as having the delegates in the bank.

This is the kind of "inevitability" sh!t that bugs the good folks of Iowa and NH.

Californians will pay close attention to what happens between now and February 5th.

It ain't over yet ...

when somebody posts a poll that shows Clinton leading, her detractors bring up that bullshit inevitability argument?

Clinton supporters never say she's inevitable - only her detractors pretend we do.

A poll is what it is - a snapshot of where things stand today.

Maybe the good folks of California are bugged by the fact that their votes should be informed by the voters of homogeneous Iowa and New Hampshire... Those states are no more representative of the rest of the United States of America than Beverly Hills is representative of Greater Los Angeles...

and whining about the label is silly. It doesn't say "voted in the primary"

DSB