Skip to main content

View Diary: Updated: Public Relations and the Electoral College Scam (147 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Maine and Nebraska already do this (0+ / 0-)

    It is perfectly legal and Constitutional.

    As I said above in a comment, when you look at this from the perspective of the voters in non-urban districts, you come away seeing this is a more equitable way to apportion electoral votes.

    I have always thought this way of doing EV is fair - if we are stuck with the Electoral College.

    It just sucks for Democrats at this point in history.

    •  No, it's not fair. Legal, yes; fair, no. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CatM, a2nite, MKinTN

      It's not fair unless all the states do it.  We can't just do it in states that vote for Obama in 2012.

      It's not fair if you change the rules.  Nebraska gave one of its electoral votes to Obama in 2008.  The legislature then rewrote the boundaries of the offending congressional district to ensure that embarrassment didn't happen a second time.  And guess what?  It didn't.

      It's not fair if you win five million more popular votes than your opponent, and you lose.

      Yes, this is legal.  The Constitution says they can do this.  But it also said slavery was okay and allowed for the disenfranchisement of women.  Legal does not mean fair.

      •  I said "If we are stuck with the Electoral College (0+ / 0-)

        and we are.. then apportioning Electors by District is a fair way to do it.

        If we are electing a President by popular vote (which we do not do in this country), then it is not.

        •  But, given that (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          RichM, pamelabrown

          we're stuck with the EC, wouldn't allocating the EVs within a state in proportion to the state's popular vote margin be much fairer than by congressional district? This would avoid the bias introduced by gerrymandering.

          Grew a mustache and a mullet / Got a job at Chick-Fil-A

          by cardinal on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 09:20:46 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes.. I would agree there.. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            cardinal

            or perhaps some hybrid system.

            Some states were talking at one time about a system whereby each district elected an Elector, but the winner of the popular vote in the state gained some extra number of Electoral votes, or guaranteed half.. something like that.. I forget the details.

    •  Fail... (0+ / 0-)

      You do realized that despite Democrats handily winning the Congressional vote in PA, they are still sending more GOP reps to congress, right?  In a state where there is no gerrymandering, this MAY be fair, but that is NOT the case here.

      And the Electoral College is an anarchism.  Do you really think Mitt Romney, despite losing by 4 million votes, would have a legitimate claim to the presidency?

      'Goodwill' between the GOP and the President is as abundant as unicorn farts - Me'

      by RichM on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 09:29:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's silly.. Dems didn't win PA (0+ / 0-)

        You don't vote state-wide for Congress.  You vote in your district.

        Who the heck came up with this cockamamie new thing where you add up the Congressional votes in a state (or nationwide) and declare the results unfair?  Geeebus.. Philly had a phenomenal turnout.. so what?  They can only elect their own Congress people once.

    •  How is it ever fair (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MySobriquet, RichM

      for the votes of fewer people to carry more weight in the presidential election than the votes of many simply because the few have more acreage?

      I don't think that is ever fair.

      We Won't Let Republicans Replace Medicare with GOP Vouchercare!

      by CatM on Fri Jan 25, 2013 at 09:29:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (126)
  • Community (58)
  • 2016 (50)
  • Environment (38)
  • Elections (36)
  • Media (34)
  • Republicans (32)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Law (29)
  • Jeb Bush (28)
  • Culture (27)
  • Barack Obama (26)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (25)
  • Iraq (25)
  • Civil Rights (24)
  • Climate Change (23)
  • Labor (19)
  • Economy (19)
  • LGBT (16)
  • Health Care (15)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site