California ammendment could be very bad for us!

Proposal for California's Electoral Vote Could Benefit GOP
By Evan Moore
CNSNews.com Correspondent
August 20, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - A proposed California ballot initiative would change the way the state's electoral votes are allocated, and it could help the Republican presidential candidate in 2008, analysts say.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200708/POL20070820a.html

This move by the Idiots (R) could very well kill us in '08. Even though the GOP is weak these days, the country is still divided 50-50 for the most part. 50% reasonable, compassionate, and thoughtful Patriots and 50% superstitious, racist, sexist, uneducated, and hateful Assholes (R). I think we must do all we can to thwart this initiative. If California does this it could be a collosal defeat. This action would only be fair if EVERY state did the same thing. Then the candidates would have to campaign everywhere and spned A LOT more money. I live in Texas. If Texas did that the Pukes would scream bloody murder and riot in the streets! We Texans aren't all rich, KKK loving Repugs. We are mostly normal peace-loving, hard working, tax-paying wage slaves. Some of us are even well informed and well educated.

I realize my post count is quite low. Please don't hold that against me. I love DU. Been here a long time and intend to stay!

...there's no way in hell the Republicans will relinquish their power in 2008 -- no matter what it takes. Mark my words.

and insisted that the Senate and House would be GOP.

We took the 2006 election from them even though they did their very, very best to steal races across the country (IMHO).

They will do what they will do. And we will do what we have to do.

Despair is not an option.

:hi:

Could you imagine having repetitive 2000 elections where the pop vote winner isn't elected president?

It's unimaginable...

I'll be very disappointed if the CA dems don't massively organize to oppose this ridiculous power grab and defeat the measure.

BTW, I am all for abolishing the electoral college and making the Presidential election a direct one. But it'd be crazy for a state like California to offer itself as a sacrificial lamb on the alter of representational elections.

Lastly--gotta love that Cracker News Service subhead, and I quote:

Boon for Republicans?

...no duh!

is bad ideas will appear on the ballot again and again and again until they finally pass.

If that approach is used in every state there would never be Republican president again.

Cheers
Drifter

I understand your fears, but I don't agree with them. We should be fighting to increase democracy, which is exactly what this kind of measure would do. In the long run, that will only help America.

... there would be no such thing as electors, much less allocating one to each senator, one more to each of 53 congressional districts, and all that ridiculous maneuvering to ensure that CA no longer has a winner-take-all presidential election.

It looks on the surface like a move toward proportional representation. But given California demographics, it's really a move to make, say, sparsely populated rural counties like Lassen and Modoc equal in political clout to San Francisco and Los Angeles counties. Which is like suggesting that, since McDonalds and Glutco Burgers LLC are both in the fast food business, they must be equal in stature.

When you look at who's behind the initiative, the intent is unmistakable. The adage "know them by their friends" is never truer than when assessing the often unforeseen consequences of ballot initiatives.

And on the real side, since the demo candidate has taken the state for the past four general elections, the current system is working out quite well for the non-lunatic contingent. Why voluntarily screw that up? Would the GOP voluntarily give up a proven advantage in the most important state of all? Why not learn from the masters of election racketeering? Ends don't justify the means? What means would you have considered appropriate in 2004 if the end result meant not having to endure four more years of BushCo?

This is what this initiative would have meant in 2004:

<<<In 2004, Democrat John Kerry received all 55 of California's electoral votes after winning the state's popular vote by 54 percent to 44 percent over President Bush. If the proposed initiative had been in place that year, Kerry would have received 33 electoral votes and Bush would have had 22.>>>

Full article here: http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/335794.html

I can handle the results of a national direct popular vote, as long as all other states are playing by the same rules. I can't handle the results that would be achieved from allocating electoral votes based on CA's hideously gerrymandered congressional districts and voluntarily giving away a substantial percentage of those votes to republicans.

But maybe the best reason of all to keep the current system is that it produces whining republicans just like this one:

<<<But Joanne Thornton, a Yuba City Republican who owns a floor-covering business, said she backs the initiative because she feels that her presidential votes often go to waste.

"I just know that in our area, the Yuba-Sutter area, it's mostly Republicans," she said. "It's like our vote doesn't count. It just doesn't seem fair.">>> (From the article linked above.)


wp

you're in texas, what do you mean by "us"?

Republicans who haven't turned complete repuke are against it because the unfairness (and maybe they are afraid they will lose later).
http://www.camajorityreport.com/

There are two interesting articles about this. Scroll down to the bottom.
long snip
Dems Counter GOP Electoral College Initiative with Two New Initiatives
All Reports by Steven Maviglio
August 21, 2007 @ 5:02 PM

Take that!

Just a few days after Republicans filed an initiative to steal California's electoral votes by splitting them by Congressional districts, key Democrats fired back by filing two new initiatives with the Attorney General aimed at presenting Californians with real electoral college reforms.

The initiatives, which would enact a national popular vote system, would represent real and fair reform of the process used to elect the president of the United States, according to their sponsors.

short snip
Rasmussen Contradicts Field on Electoral College Poll
All Reports by Steven Maviglio
August 21, 2007 @ 12:55 PM

Here's an interesting read from the Rasmussen Poll about the Republican effort to steal California's electoral votes. Seems that as soon as voters learn a bit about it, the air quickly goes out of the balloon:

"The proposal being pitched in California would award one Electoral Vote to the winner of each Congressional District along with two Electoral Votes for the statewide winner. In a theoretical sense, 45% of voters nationwide think that’s a good idea. Thirty percent (30%) disagree while 25% are not sure. However, even that tepid level of support dissipates when voters learn that a change in California could significantly increase the number of Republican Electoral Votes. Once that is factored into the equation, support drops to 31% and opposition increases to 43%.

It’s interesting to note that Republican support for the measure barely increases when told of the potential benefit to their own party. That may be due to a sense of fairness or a nagging realization that the same thing could happen in other states where the GOP would lose votes."

... Democrats some $ to ensure. CW says that the GOP's real goal here is to force Dems to spend some money, eating into our huge $ lead over republicans.