Is the republican party trying to rig the presidential election?

[BigRedChief]

Several battleground states have Republican parties firmly in control of the state congress's are deciding, proposing legislation to not award all the EC votes to the winner but by congressional district.

The issues that I see with this new development

• Gerrymandering of districts has made a mockery of fairness in the states.
• Will create a constitutional crisis at some point and violence in the streets.

How would this effect the election? I'll let someone else post all the numbers. But, here's an example from what the Republican senate did in Virgina. Obama won the election in the state, But due to gerrymandering, Romeny would have been given 9 EC votes and Obama 4 EC votes.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

Comparing this to the filibuster is silly.

And I never said I agreed with it. I was just wondering why it seems to be ok when a far red state like Nebraska has this in place and the only ones that can benefit from it are the dems.

Because a far blue state like Maine has this in place as well, and the only ones that can benefit from that are the Republicans.

Edit: Besides, the frustration with losing 1 picked-off EV should not intellectually or viscerally upset a person like potentially handing the election to a guy who lost it by five million votes.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Because a far blue state like Maine has this in place as well, and the only ones that can benefit from that are the Republicans.

Edit: Besides, the frustration with losing 1 picked-off EV should not intellectually or viscerally upset a person like potentially handing the election to a guy who lost it by five million votes.

Relax, I'm not defending it. I support the EC and I think stupid shit like this will lead to it's demise.

Just don't pretend this is something only dreamed up by republicans because I've blown that theory out of the water.

[FD]

This strikes me as a bit extreme. For instance, the plan just passed by Republicans in Virginia, had it been in place last year, would have resulted in 9 electoral votes to Romney and only 4 to Obama. This is in a state Obama won handily. If it were closer to proportional it might be something I could get behind.

[FD]

The other strange thing is, why are the Republicans there giving up on winning Virginia outright? They won it from 1964-2004, now they are so desperate they want to basically make it irrelevant?

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by FD

The other strange thing is, why are the Republicans there giving up on winning Virginia outright? They won it from 1964-2004, now they are so desperate they want to basically make it irrelevant?

No shit.

This is some Virginia-sized cowardice.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

BEP, where ya been? Does mercantilism play into this at all?

Irrelevant. From the master of irrelevance!

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Several battleground states have Republican parties firmly in control of the state congress's are deciding, proposing legislation to not award all the EC votes to the winner but by congressional district.

The issues that I see with this new development

• Gerrymandering of districts has made a mockery of fairness in the states.
• Will create a constitutional crisis at some point and violence in the streets.

How would this effect the election? I'll let someone else post all the numbers. But, here's an example from what the Republican senate did in Virgina. Obama won the election in the state, But due to gerrymandering, Romeny would have been given 9 EC votes and Obama 4 EC votes.

None of this is illegal nor is it rigging anything, which would be illegal.

I think the Democrats, 'er well at least Chicago-style ones, should be dealt a heavy blow where there was voting fraud for Obama due to more votes than registered voters. The Ds love lazy voters who won't put much effort into registering on their own, won't make an effort to vote on election day when they could, and those who want to steal from others. In other words they recruit and aid the criminal demographic.

This is the pot calling the kettle black.

[mlyonsd]

One more thing, republicans are guilty of just as bad behavior for wanting to tweak the EC into their favor as the dems are for wanting to eliminate it.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

One more thing, republicans are guilty of just as bad behavior for wanting to tweak the EC into their favor as the dems are for wanting to eliminate it.

Wrong again. But this one's hilarious.

If you eliminated the electoral college, you change how many elections in American history? And you would change it to fit popular opinion rather than an antiquated system that relies entirely on the good faith of a few hundred elitists.

If you adopted the measures that Virginia and a few other red states want, how many elections do you change in the past century? Almost every one that went against the conservative party, and you change them in ways that would go against what the popular opinion wanted. Oftentimes by millions.

One measure is a tweak on a democratic system. The other is a direct threat to that democratic system.

But yeah -- totally similar. We should be equally outraged. Just like we should with Nebraska and Maine's one electoral vote. It's basically the same scale of problem.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Wrong again. But this one's hilarious.

If you eliminated the electoral college, you change how many elections in American history? And you would change it to fit popular opinion rather than an antiquated system that relies entirely on the good faith of a few hundred elitists.

If you adopted the measures that Virginia and a few other red states want, how many elections do you change in the past century? Almost every one that went against the conservative party, and you change them in ways that would go against what the popular opinion wanted. Oftentimes by millions.

One measure is a tweak on a democratic system. The other is a direct threat to that democratic system.

But yeah -- totally similar. We should be equally outraged. Just like we should with Nebraska and Maine's one electoral vote. It's basically the same scale of problem.

I don't know, you tell me.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

I don't know, you tell me.

Here's a hint: fewer than the fingers on your hand.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Here's a hint: fewer than the fingers on your hand.

And?

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

And?

I don't follow.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I don't follow.

Out of the elections that would have been altered by eliminating the EC give me the numbers, by party, each would have benefited.

[Direckshun]

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/11/05...toral-college/

1876: The conservative Democrat won more votes, but the liberal Republican won the EC.

1888: The conservative Democrat won more votes, but the liberal Republican won the EC.

2000: The liberal Democrat won more votes, but the conservative Republican won the EC.

What point are we making here, exactly? That we're loyally partisan for the pro-Confederacy Democratic Party of the 1800s?